« Prejudices #3: Traces of Chaos | Main | Ernie »

Wednesday, 21 November 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

With regard to "kinks and fetishes" etc. we should all remind ourselves that we are looking at photographic art [I use the term loosely] and as with all artistic manifestations there are no rights or wrongs as has been demonstrated over and over in the realm of abstract painting/sculpture, it matters not whether it breaks the rules [who decided the rules anyway] it's there to be enjoyed or detested depending on one's likes or dislikes. Vive le difference.

Mike, I myself struggle to express these ideas. In your last paragraph, you nailed it. Your thinking is clear, and your words flow beautifully.

Thanks Tim.

Mike J.

"By keeping McDorklin in mind I can resist the temptation to—in effect—bellow "WRONG!!!" and steamroll opposing viewpoints."

Thank god for "McDorklin"! If you ever put your prodigious learned mind to work on an opposing viewpoint, it wouldn't be a pretty sight. On the street, we'd call that "owned."

I love the fact that other photographers do things differently from the way I work. I have 3 reasons: 1- a selfish one - my own work has a better chance to stand out; 2- it re-enforces everyone's uniqueness including my own:3- I never run out of learning opportunities. A Jewish sage once said: "Who is wise? He who learns from every man.." (read as "Who is wise? The person who learns from every man, woman and child."

Indeed MIke,

There are loads and loads of photographer's work that I really enjoy that have little or nothing to do with my own.

Many of them are landscapers and Nature photographers. I don't do much of that and in fact when I am in the woods I almost never "see" photographs. I wonder if that would be quite different if I lived in the woods. I hold no views of what or how people should make photos, I just know what I like when I see it. Composition seems to be the thread that ties this all together.

Regarding McDorklin.........affectionately known in my family as the "Screamers". I have watched that show since it's onset. I think you (might) need to watch it more or for years to understand that you have him all WRONG!!

Next time you watch and he McClaughlin, asserts that someone is WRONG please note the smile or smirk on his face. His is just another opinion and when he tells one of his guests they are wrong he is in fact making fun of and satirizing the whole notion of being RIGHT

Happy Holiday

Hi -

The world moves in such mysterious ways... I had to share an experience I had yesterday. It occured a few short hours after I finished reading this article (and many of the great comments that followed).

I have been a lurker on a nature photography website for some time, never posting, and only sometimes commenting on a particular image which someone posted that I found I really liked.

Anyway, yesterday for some unknown reason (planetary alignment, whatever), I decided to upload an image for the enjoyment (hopefully) of others. It was a scan from a 4x5 chrome that I'd taken over 10 years ago. I REALLY liked the image, on many levels, and hoped others would as well.

Lo and behold, when I checked this morning, I was delighted to find that six folks had taken the time to comment on it. However, upon reading the comments, this gist of this article came racing back into my head, as five of the six posters felt the need to tell me how I could "improve" this shot by adding more sky, cropping out some of the foreground, brightening an area, etc. Here, I had been looking at this image for over ten years, feeling that it reflected the scene that I had "previsualized" (thanks, Ansel), but apparently it could be made into an even "better" image, if I adjusted it to look like an image that they'd taken...

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007