george_ghio

You must lead a charmed life

Hi Gordon
That is point 3. While I might like an image, it often gives me the Jimmy brits when the artest feels it necessary to tell me what to feel. Still, as I said I like the image, the composition is good (flipped) if not technically perfect (focus). Ah well, the eye of the beholder and all that. I'm going to bed.

Steve
Thank you for your thoughts on artistic works.
This was probably a very generalized and simplified summary on your part, but it brings up a subject that's important to me. The implication in your response is that if a photographer doesn't apply significant processing to a photo, then it's more of a happy snap than an artistic expression. The reason that I take strong exception to that view is the fact that I find many landscapes to be so interesting, so intriguing, so powerful, and so beautiful that they can be jaw-dropping just by seeing and experiencing them. If I can capture powerful scenes with a camera when I see them with my eyes, then I feel I'm a successful photographer, and many who see photos like that are satisfied viewers. It also goes the other direction, and many photographers produce photos in the same manner so that I'm able to view and enjoy them.


Yes, very generalized. Your "strong exception" is valid, to be sure. But a happy snap is a happy snap. There is also the category of "recording" where the picture is a record of an event, wildlife, architecture etc. Still not art, no matter how technically correct the image is.


A lot goes into finding and making these photos, with the main elements of course being great light and a striking assemblage of elements in a great composition. Those are artistic decisions that are being made, and they're really no different than the artistic thought processes that you may go through in the darkroom or on the computer when you are processing a photo. It's just that I and many others choose to do our primary processing through the viewfinder. Those photos often require relatively little processing after the shutter is released other than what's required to transform a raw photo into a tiff or jpeg.


I couldn't agree more. Still, there are certainly many who look at a possible shot with the thought that it doesn't matter if they get the best out of the tablou because they can photoshop the resulting picture. Sad but true. A good eye for composition beats any amount of post processing. My post processing covers a wide range from minimal to alot depending on the photo and its intended use. Try a HDR panorama of 180 degrees without a certain ammount of post processing, on the other hand a portrait correctly lit can be a breeze to process.

Where you concentrate on producing an artistic image, I like to concentrate on finding an artistic image. The added benefit of finding such an image is that I get to have it in front of me, see it with my own eyes, and experience it directly, because it really exists very close to as I've photographed it.

Yes, I do concentrate on producing an artistic image. This process starts with finding an artistic subject. Perhaps your thought here was a bit of a generalization.

Point 1 - Contrived. By far the largest part of the worlds greatest art has been contrived one way or another.

Point 2 - Art vs happy snaps. Mona Lisa vs duck on grass centered in photo.

Point 3 - Artist naming their art. File name is all that is really required so you can find it again out of the thousands you have on one storage medium or another. If you need to explain the meaning of your art then perhaps the art fails to tell a story. An example of art having an impact on the beholder. I showed a poem to my teacher (this was for a dip art, professional writing and editing), she later told me that the poem made her feel suicidal. My work had had a reaction. Yes, I got my dip art with distinction and an award from the Fellowship of Australian Writers. Ascribing a name to your art often spoils the meaning it will have for others.

Point 4 - Post processing photos. As a photographer I, and thousands of others have spent hours in a dark room trying to achieve an effect beyond the simple happy snap (see Point 2). Digital is no different except you get to work with the light on. Art is what artists do, if an artist can produce a photo that makes you feel something, even if it is suicidal, then they have touched your soul. There is no better outcome for an artist.

Point 5 - Yes, the photo is a bit out of focus, may well be contrived, even post processed, but it has produced strong feelings in people. Positive and negative, but strong feelings none the less. And that is the whole point of art. It is not the point of happy snaps taken with the sun behind you and the subject centered in the picture.

Nice picture. Now flip it horizontal. That way it is light in the top left and the eye is drawn down to the subject, and the rule of thirds god is appeased.