c.r._hips

Ben, it is so nice to hear positive ideas for making this site better and self sufficient. The

sooner the talent pool on P.N. is exploited the better. More efficient and specific learning

forms would transform everyones participation here. I hope your idea gets the attention it

deserves by the management.

In film or T.V., the space between the moments ( or between the individual frames in the series of frames) is big business to those wanting to influence by sublimenation. I think ,as Artists, we do the same thing when presenting multiple images. We pretend and allude to the unseen and unknowable ( on the surface) truth or message of the whole, rather than the limited focus of the specific work. An Artists life's work can be viewed as a series with hidden meanings sprinkled throughout. We are always trying to make more out of the less, more or less.

Pico, I like your question. I think it goes to the heart of the photographers process. Although 1/500th of a sec sounds like a moment, it was a moment lost to the photographer. It will be noticed later in the darkroom or computor screen. Visual perception comes from meaningful interaction with what ever is being seen. Painters have the time for their subject to become known to them. Photographers live in actual moments that unfortunately go by too fast to be fully percieved. Thus the overabundance of disconnected shots which show a lack of mental focus . The photographer finds focus by attemting to recreate a long meaningful moment with a lot a short ones. It is rather like putting together a puzzle with hundreds of pieces so that you can understand why 1 or 2 or 3 of the pieces seem to speak to the core of the whole. I have always thought that studio photographers would benefit greatly from spending time and drawing the subject first. Drawing skill is not necessary as it is the seeing that is what its about. You will have an experience with what ever you draw. This is a major difference in painting and photography. The original photojournalists were quick sketch Artists. Whether they were covering a war, fire, baseball game or fashion show or whatever, they were trained to put together the facts of the scene and store the necessary visual and emotional information to create a sigle image from many perceptions.They would create a composition, tell a story , do likenesses etc. etc all very quickly and always under adverse conditions. Finally, Photographers are different from almost all other creative Artists because they must understand their work after the fact and are limited by an imagination which is bound to and as good as the technical gear your have. Painters, sculptors are limited only by our imaginations depth or superficiality and their eye hand skills. One "captures" the moment, as though it was a prisoner locked in time. The other strives for essence , releasing the many moments to be absorbed in a unifing whole. A 'series' gives the photographer the chance to present more pieces to the puzzle, with regard to content, confronting the viewer.

If you are in L.A., try natural settings. If you prefer the indoors go to a local college or make frieds with people in the industry or real estate ( empty warehouses). There is a photo studio in Venice that rents space by the hour. There is an Artist studio complex by the S.M. airport called the Santa Monica Art Studios on Airport Ave. across from Barker Hanger. Talk to Yossi. Good luck.

A powerful documentary can have a momentary effect on the viewer, but it has been proven that what is learned on T.V, does not stick in our brains. It just is not the appropriate medium for lasting emotional memories. It washes over us with all the other moments we immediately forget on T.V.. Its more related to a drug that makes you feel good, but the memory of feeling good won't keep you feeling that way unless you get a fresh fix. Politicians and their marketers know all about how quickly we forget.

I like Kevin's assessment of T.V. If you are trying to feel life, be moved, interact in a

meaningful way , you must go to the venue designed for that purpose. T.V. is designed to

sell commercial advertising space, not fill the space between your ears. Movies have a

better chance of moving us because the venue is designed to to make the viewing

experience as manipulative as possible. Movies can get into our heads and play with our

emotions in ways T.V. never will. But for me, the most moving visual experiences I've had,

other than real life, are in venues where a single image is there to be interpreted. The only

way I am being manipulated is by by own imagination. I believe that the singular image

has more power potential than all the frames in a movie combined. Tell me about life in a

painting, photogragh or sculpture and I will be focused enough to emotionally feel your

message.

"I try to be a fire prevention person rather than a fire fighter by taking care of posts I think

will deteriorate the conversation. Sometimes I'm wrong but many times I know I prevent a

fire. It isn't easy to make judgements. Every once in a while - just to test myself and the

PN community - I leave a comment be that I "think" will cause a problem. 8 times out of 10

- I'm right. Not all the time...but a good percentage. " Mary, with all due

respect, your reponse to our questions is most troubling. You seem to believe you are

addressing a bunch of children. Is that really who you think we are? You are testing us?

Playing games with us ? Hoping we prove to you that we are the idiots you believe us to

be. Mary, who the ---- do you think you are? I don't think I speak only for my self here ( I

hope not} but I take the POW discussions seriously. I think about what I'm going to say ,

before I say it. I believe in what I post. It is my contribution as an individual. I don't need

you to pretend you know some hidden agenda in my words that makes them

unacceptable. I have respect for everyones views as long as they demonstrate a reasonable

knowledge of the subject at hand. I can tell you that often these discussions have much

passion and members do engage eachother. It almost always leads to better

understanding. I value the essence of civilized dialoge thru tolerance of opposing

viewpoints, but it is good on occasion that the rug get shook out to clear the point. There

are some people I hardly ever connect with, but I like their difference and I will always

support their right to express their views. Only those in the discussion have some idea

where it is going, and sometimes we take the long way to get where we are going. Notice I

said where WE are going. I believe WE all get to some understanding, TOGETHER, by the

natural push and pull of the organic nature of the discussion. As I said before, I believe

this is an extremely capable group in the POW presently, soooo PLEASE just let us be.

I don't know what went on before, all I know is what's happening now. I truely believe that the various people who come back each week , looking forward to discussing the POW in a meaningful way, are all very intelligent and thoughtful folks. I don't always agree with everyone but I do respect the different ways of thinking and different approaches to the given image. You are so fortunate to have such a varied, gifted pool of thinking participants who really are quite civilized to eachother most of the time. 'Off topic' is just a phrase that is understood differently by each of us. This group , participating in the POW now, should be left alone to explore all the different roads leading to a better understanding of the image. When it is all said and done, the POW is really just a good think, don't you... think?

It seems to me, as the one most deleted from this weeks POW, that every week we return to the same basic problems as to format on the POW. Each week we have 2 discussions always conflicting each other. One oriented toward aesthetic appreciation and interpretation ( having philosophical reference), and one having to do with technique, related to how the Artist did it or why they did it. Perhaps 2 separate discussions would serve the goal of understanding better. Deletes are censorship ,unless for abusive reasons. There was no abuse on this weeks thread. I hope that management will listen to the voices of concern this time.

Marc, after being deleted 4 out of 5 times on the current POW discussion, I agree that some

kind of change along the lines you suggest would be good. Marc, if you think about it, Pow

discussions are always divided between those wanting to develope their aesthtic appreciation

and those wanting to improve their technical know-how. Perhaps that is how 2 discussions

would work; one about Why and interpretation, the other abou How, where the Artist could

present how the picture was made and open that side up for discussion. That way we won't

see the usual 2 discussions happening on top of each other. What do you think? Or better

yet, what do you think, Brian?

If you want to experience, igrorance and unbridaled harrassment with no moderator controll,

just visit one of my pictures in my NIN folder. Tear Down My Reason. Great reading, for the

terminally and aestheticly lame.

Oh , And the other post was almost entirely a quote by the photographer Michael Kenna, which seemed to make sense in the context of the thread. What was wrong with that?

On one of the posts I started with Yes Kent. I then went on to talk about surrealism and how it related to the picture , in my opinion. Why not just delete the Yes Kent and leave the rest. I thought it made sense and really wasn,t connected to what anyone else was saying. As you know, I have my own views on these things. I only wish you would respect the different ways that the people in the POW think. Deleting should be an extreme reaction in extreme cases, don't you think.

Mary, my examples were positive interpretations of the image. Please explain what I said, specificly that was off topic compared to others who miraculously are still included in the thread.

Mark, I think it would be more interesting to have 2 POW dscussions as well. One for the accepted patter and one for the deleted , dissed variety. Unfortunately , anyway you cut it , the POW is a joke, these days. I just had 3 of my 4 posts this week deleted. I'm sure no one cares.

Yeah Kent, but I think for us living our removed lives pictures become easy to dismiss. Billboards with graphic depictions of war just become more eye candy and clutter along the road. The thought of being drafted goes right to the heart of the matter. If there was a draft, each 18 yr. old would be forced to make a stand on their own lives. Is it worth my life or not? Dissent is a powerful tool when it truly is in the hands of those making that decision. We are even more removed, knowing there are enough kids out there that see the military as their future. They , in effect, take contoll of our democratic decisions because we have given it up to them. I find it to be a scary scenario for our democratic principles. But I must admit there is great subject matter for any photog who wants to tackle it.

Come to think of it , those pictures of our abuse on Iraqi prisoners are a far greater memory and source of war disgust than bombs blowing up unseen victims. Also the butchering of dead Americans by Iraqi"s or heads cut off by insurgent rebels , all are equal in projecting the horrors of war to bed room communities around the world routing for the next winner on the latest reality show.

Stephen, Yes there are kids from other parts of the country. But compared to Vietnam, this is a decidedly white army. Bush's army has a real Crusades feel to it. It's not really a war, anyway. Its a political mission. Maybe that is where the photo's are. Capture the corruption, arrogance and stupidity of our leaders as they go out to change the world in their image. Great stuff for anyone brave enough to go out and expose it.

Hi Ben, All pictures of war will promote war. Its kind of like the show business addage... I don't care what you say, as long as you spell my name right. The only effective anti-war photo would be a super sized , wide angle shot of millions in an anti-war rally. Photos showing dissent can end war. We don't really see too many of those these days do we? The reason is that the U.S. voluntary army has in effect killed dissent. The government doesn.t need to listen to the protesters anymore, they have enough white southern boys who want to do the job. In the 60.s we all hated the draft. Little did we know it was our source of power. No longer do photos of 18 year olds burning draft cards or saying hell no I won't go! have any meaning. Those were the great shots in the 60's. To end a war with photos, dissent must be feared. Thats not the case today, so what does a photographer do today to get that message across? It's a good question.

It seems to me that the ratings game is spiked from top to bottom. Why blame new members

for the problem. The established 'relationships' with older members can be just as deceptive.

Friends help friends, right. Is'nt that why so many members spend soo much time working

the system like politicians hoping for your vote. As Brian knows, the more controversy there

is about ratings... the more interset there is in rating... the more hits on the site..... which is

good for advertising dollars.....which get preferential trreatment over our membership dues.

As you don't know, ratings are meaningless. Your 3/3's only balance out the undeserving 6's and 7's your buddies give you. Keep whining though, it seems appropriate.

Patrick, I think that what makes some people uneasy is that this sponsership must have been in the making for some time now. For many weeks contributors in that forum complained for more substance. There seemed to be something else driving the conservative decisions for POW's. Then e-mails were sent to some of the more regular contributors. They were told to tone it down, stop talking so much about tangent concepts . We were told to be neater and less involved with each other in discussions. A more plain wrap approach was wanted. What was on topic got thiner and thiner. More posts were deleted for supposedly being off topic. Then all of a sudden it is announced that HP was now sponsering the forum and had various requirements that went with it. I really thought that there was something beautiful before in the POW. That has changed now. It is too bad that now I have no desire to take part in something I used to look forward to. I guess it's time to delete this thread, right? Sincerely, Hips

If anyone is 'hurt' by trash ratings, it is because they are given importance. Shift your focus to

what is more important and you will see how silly ratings are.

When you post a photo on this site, I would think , the desired effect is to have it seen. In

that context the amount of views a photo gets should be of more interest than ratings. I

have posted some pictures that have 15000 views each but only maybe 10 ratings. I put

more value in the views. Hopefully I am communicating with 15,000 viewers. I don't really

care how they are affected beyond the fact that they saw the image and probably each

interpreted it in their own way. As Artists we will never know what all viewers think of our

works, We can only put them out their to be seen. Why make the tiny percentage that

actually rate or comment ( sometimes for suspicious reasons) so important. If you want to

be politicians, get into politics and kiss everybody's asses so they will like you. That kind

of behavior is part of the ratings problem. Forinstance, give an honestly felt negative

comment and you will recieve endless trash ratings your way. When creating, do we think

of it like playing 21, where we are trying to beat the system for approval? Are we trying to

find the secret to the elusive 6's? I hope not. We should be responding to our world in our

unique ways. Our primary concern should be sincere personal expression. We are only

communicating with our selves when we are creating. That is true even when we have

models. It is our interpretation to our realities that matters. And it is nothing we should

ever be concious of or give thought to. That all comes later, after the fact.

It amazes me how this worry about ratings never ends. As though some peoples entire

identity is rapped up in them. Who the ____ cares. Doesn't everyone know by now that

ratings are an artificial manipulation on this site? Ratings seem to be given for all the

wrong reasons, often as negative aggression. Why would anyone want to be part of such a

flawed system? If you want critiques, bring your pictures up in critique only. But don't be

surprised if what is in peoples thoughts equals their ratings nature. If we let ourselves be

part of the game then we deserve whatever comes. The best road is to just feel confident

in who you are, with out the requirement of others numerical support for who you are. I

mean, Darrell, you are an excellent photographer. When you take a picture are you actually

concerned with what anyone else might think other than yourself? I hope not! If we

communicate it is after the fact and usually with people we don't know and who's reactions

we are not privy to. This site has great features that as Artists we can all take advantage

of, but lets just not take it all too seriously. I still find it hard to understand why revenue is

so connected to ratings when the site doesn't even require membership dues by users.

Anyway, just have fun and know that in the end the only rater that matters is yourself.