Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39

Thread: Art department

  1. #21

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by Deadpoet
    For the elitist artists who always lamented that people just do not undertand their art, perhaps it's them, they to do not understand the people.

    I create something for me to enjoy, but if I and a few were the only one to enjoy it, how loney, if I and a few were the only one to understand and appreciate it, how sad. I strive to create something that I enjoy, that all my friends enjoy and that everyone can appreciate and understand. An artist for the commoner.

    DP, this is just for discussions only. I speak from my perspectives. Feel free to disagree.

    There are various layers of "art".

    There are art for the masses. No question about it. And it seems to me that from your posts, here and elsewhere, that images that do not cater to the masses are to be lamented. I say this from your choice of words you used

    "if I and a few were the only one (sic) to enjoy..... how lonely"

    "if I and a few were the only one to understand and appreciate... how sad"

    These statements suggest that, to you, the goals of art is to please the masses.

    Is there all that is to art? Just to please the masses?

    If Picasso was to stick to the forms of art that pleased the masses at that time, where is cubism?

    If Moore was to please the masses, where will be his glorius deformed images?

    If Weston was to please the masses, why did he take the picture of Charis in the blast of noon day sun?

    If Duchamp were to please the masses, where will the image of the woman descending on the stairs?

    If Gibson was to please the masses, where will the wonderful substraction imagery be?

    There will be art for the masses.

    But they will be art that pushes boundaries. There will be art that shows us new ways of seeing things. And often, such art will not be to the taste of the masses.

    Do you call this sad? Lonely? Is this form of art elitist? Just because the masses do not recognise it? Just because there are only a few who could recognise it for what it was trying to say? New seeing?

    Or would you not rather call this a celebration of new light? Even though the masses do not like it?
    Last edited by student; 20th April 2006 at 02:48 PM.

  2. #22

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by shinken
    There's room for diverse views here. Individualism versus meeting the taste of a greater mass. Sometimes, individualism ends up catering to the larger mass. If it does, well and good.

    But sometimes it doesn't.

    When it does cater to the tastes of a larger group, we see appreciation by a bigger group of people. When it doesn't, it might still connect with a smaller group of people who seek such works with strong sense of individualism (which doesn't connect to the larger group).

    I suggest, for the sake of healthy growth of a more cordial and accomodating online community, to drop terms such as 'elitism'. Although it's an opinion (brought up by Littlewolf), and that community members are free to voice their opinions, some opinions threaten the fabric of a community more than others. Gilbert's comments may be interpreted as being "elitist", but where he comes from is definitely an expression of his disappointment of this community where there's very little tolerance for diverse style. And yes, the way opinions had been expressed on the referred thread indicates very little tolerance for diverse styles and preferences.
    I think there should be a need to move away from the idea of photography as a technical craft into the idea of photography as an expression of one's vision. And just like getting to know people, understanding a photographer's vision requires patience and a willingness to think and ask questions about the photographer's work to understand it.

    I like pleasing people too once in awhile, but then I think the most powerful works come from creating work that you feel strongly expresses yourself because YOU know YOURSELF the best, and are more likely to create work that is TRUTHFUL to yourself.

    There is nothing elitist about creating work for yourself. I think creating work to please other people comes across as insecure. Are you in photography because you want to please people, or because photography pleases you?

    The great thing about the freedom of information is that if someone's work is boring, the best thing you can do is to ignore it.

  3. #23

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by mattlock
    I think there should be a need to move away from the idea of photography as a technical craft into the idea of photography as an expression of one's vision. And just like getting to know people, understanding a photographer's vision requires patience and a willingness to think and ask questions about the photographer's work to understand it.

    I like pleasing people too once in awhile, but then I think the most powerful works come from creating work that you feel strongly expresses yourself because YOU know YOURSELF the best, and are more likely to create work that is TRUTHFUL to yourself.

    There is nothing elitist about creating work for yourself. I think creating work to please other people comes across as insecure. Are you in photography because you want to please people, or because photography pleases you?

    The great thing about the freedom of information is that if someone's work is boring, the best thing you can do is to ignore it.

    you spoken the words from my mind. Ever thought why did you even pick up photography? Want to make some images for yourself right? So if your images and mine's the same, why bother? I really dun understand sometimes, we all do things to please ourselves, to shoot how we deem fit, so if i need not belate others when i dun think their way. Same for myself, i dun expect people to come shouting at me when they dun share the same thoughts, just ignore my work.

  4. #24
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Art department

    I was just wondering, if you create a photograph just to please yourself, is there still a need to share them with anyone or post them for critic, or to publish them, or exhibit them etc etc, after all, the aim is just to please yourself and no one else.

  5. #25

    Default Re: Art department

    Yes, I would still publish them, even if I make them to please myself. In hope that someone else can have a connection with me/my works.

  6. #26

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    I was just wondering, if you create a photograph just to please yourself, is there still a need to share them with anyone or post them for critic, or to publish them, or exhibit them etc etc, after all, the aim is just to please yourself and no one else.

    I was wondering the same thing, until somone else enjoys my photography by discovering me, then more people, than more....

    A photograph can relate feelings, that is a powerful tool, i can choose to share or not its my own business. If my photograph can relate to you, hell cool, if not, too bad, so why can't i show it off?

    why do people write blogs, to share their feeling/thoughts with others, if you can't relate, i cannot force you, if you do i can click with you right?

    that is why we have friends, to share, that is why we have love ones, to share ourselves with them
    Last edited by Belle&Sebastain; 20th April 2006 at 06:36 PM.

  7. #27
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Art department

    Just based on your elaboration of your POV, I don't think you can split the process into either "please yourself" or "please others" - you are now bringing in the ability to relate to others as well, which in my view, falls more under please others than please yourself, or at the very least, a combination of both.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belle&Sebastain
    I was wondering the same thing, until somone else enjoys my photography by discovering me, then more people, than more....

    A photograph can relate feelings, that is a powerful tool, i can choose to share or not its my own business. If my photograph can relate to you, hell cool, if not, too bad, so why can't i show it off?

    why do people write blogs, to share their feeling/thoughts with others, if you can't relate, i cannot force you, if you do i can click with you right?

    that is why we have friends, to share, that is why we have love ones, to share ourselves with them

  8. #28

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    Just based on your elaboration of your POV, I don't think you can split the process into either "please yourself" or "please others" - you are now bringing in the ability to relate to others as well, which in my view, falls more under please others than please yourself, or at the very least, a combination of both.
    The fundamental difference is, during the process of creation, what was the end in mind?

    If I want to create something that the masses would like, say photography, say in Clubsnap, I would:

    1) Shoot scantily-clad sexy ladies
    2) Shoot raw, so that I can adjust any exposure errors or WB. So that the forumers can see the body clearly.

    If I want to create something that I would like... I'm at a loss here, coz I have no individualism in photography - I'll probably be like Dr Chong.

    The process of creation is just different. Arguments can be made based on superficial substantiation, and blur the lines of difference. Fundamentally, the difference is clear.

    I write. And I love writing. If I want to appeal to the masses, I would write erotic literature. I would write action and suspense. But if I want to please myself, I would write poetry. Even though I write poetry to please myself, I would still publish it. Because if there's someone who likes my poetry, this person would be viewing the world through the same eyes as I do. And even if I never meet this person, I would publish, thinking that such a person exist. Imagining it.

    I can't connect with my own wife through poetry. But when I find an audience could relate to me, imagine the exhiliration!

    But did I write poetry so that I find this audience? Sounds like it, the way you argued. But no, I wrote poetry to please myself. I publish it, in hope that there are people who connect with me, and that's still to please myself. But I would not write in such a way that appeals to others just to find these people.

    Would you be able to see the underlying difference?
    Last edited by shinken; 20th April 2006 at 09:49 PM.

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,095

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by mattlock
    There is nothing elitist about creating work for yourself.
    Of course not. What I consider elitist is the attitude that having a different taste than others means being one of the few who "can recognize talents", whereas people who have a different opinion are "commoners".

    (edit: corrected typo/mangled syntax)
    Last edited by LittleWolf; 20th April 2006 at 08:14 PM.

  10. #30

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by vince123123
    Just based on your elaboration of your POV, I don't think you can split the process into either "please yourself" or "please others" - you are now bringing in the ability to relate to others as well, which in my view, falls more under please others than please yourself, or at the very least, a combination of both.

    how i shoot, i shoot to please my art, myself. I say, this is the kind of images i want to take.

    when someone likes the way i shoot, they hire me to shoot based on how i shoot.

    have you taken any commision jobs when people hire you based on the way you shoot and not that you shoot for free or your fees are cheap or that the hirer knows you?
    Last edited by Belle&Sebastain; 20th April 2006 at 09:36 PM.

  11. #31

    Default Re: Art department

    A true artist has something to say. A true artist is a communicator. The artist may develop a unique style and techique which is at odds with the artistic norms of the day. Yet the style and technique must have an understandable basis which, when explained, allows somone who bothers to take the time, to appreciate and interpret most (if not all) of that artist's works.

    If somone truly only wanted to create something only for himself, then why bother to use images or words, which are tools of communication? Why not just sit and meditate and enjoy the creations in the ideal environment of the isolated mind?

    Which is harder and simultaneously more meaningful - to create a unique piece of art that also conveys one's thoughts to as many people as possible or something that can only have meaning to to the creator?

    It is true that shooting a sexy nude would probably appeal to many. The challenge for an artist then is to shoot a sexy nude that stands out from all others and is remembered when all the rest are forgotten.

  12. #32

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by Verywierd

    If somone truly only wanted to create something only for himself, then why bother to use images or words, which are tools of communication? Why not just sit and meditate and enjoy the creations in the ideal environment of the isolated mind?

    Which is harder and simultaneously more meaningful - to create a unique piece of art that also conveys one's thoughts to as many people as possible or something that can only have meaning to to the creator?
    So what do you suggest that one creates with? We have our 5 senses. Some people create music. some people create visual things. some people have sex. Some people talk alot. Some people cook food. Some people do cross-stitch. Some people buy things.
    All are forms of expression. All forms of expression can be done for the sake of yourself only.
    There's a difference between creation and imagination. Imagination is passive, creating is active.

    and regaridng what Belle&Sebastian said regarding shoots,
    if you go on to higher paying jobs you learn that people are looking for a unique point of view for the photos they want and are willing to pay good money for that uniqueness.
    Sometimes people don't know what kind of photos they like. It's alot about how much exposure a certain style gets. When you are exposed to enough of a certain style you get used to it and after awhile learn to appreciate the aesthetics of a style.

    It's abit like fashion, there's always a period of shock where something seems very outrageous, but after enough exposure people learn to appreciate and differentiate what is good and bad within a style itself. And that style doesn't seem very shocking anymore.

    I think most of us create for ourselves. Every person who goes on one of those organised shoots involving women in bikinis are creating images for themselves too. But that doesn't mean that everyone is creating unique work. what I find really really great about photography is that everyone can create an image for themselves easily.

    But if you come across someone's work that doesn't agree with your taste, I think it's important to question why it doesn't appeal to you and why the creator of the work actually like the work.

    As photographers I think we have a sort of duty to our own circles to try to be more insightful with regards to photographs than non-photographers

  13. #33

    Default Re: Art department

    I do agree that the divide between making images for oneself and making images for the masses is not clear cut.

    I must also admit that I have never met a photographer who kept his images only for his eyes to see, although I think such eccentricities would not be unthinkable. I have met only one photographer who WILL NOT promote his work, although his images are clearly stunning, to say the least. But he did show his wonderful photographs now and then.

    I think the "divide" is an issue of attitude.

    To give an illustration. Now this is open, and I see no problem using this illustration.

    DP and I both take images of people. DP's position is that his images must (or should) have the approval of the models. My position is that I do not care if the models like my images or not. For me, the models' opinion is irrelevant to my imagery.

    Now it does not mean that I will not be delighted if the models or masses like my images. I will be happy if they did. But I will continue to make images my way even if the models or masses do not like them.

    But if I were to chose bewteen the approval of the masses versus the approval of a select few friends whose opinion I value, I have no doubt whose approval I would treasure.

    And continuing my previous post (#21) which DP chose not to reply, the path of people who chose to do things for themselves may be a less travelled one. But sometimes this path can lead to wonderful discoveries that more well-travelled roads may not lead to.

    I do not presume that I can make new discoveries. In fact, I doubt that I could. I only lament that I discovered photography much too late. Sometimes it takes a lot of travelling in unchartered paths to chance upon these discoveries. But I wll start travelling anyway.
    Last edited by student; 21st April 2006 at 03:20 PM.

  14. #34

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by student
    <snip>

    DP and I both take images of people. DP's position is that his images must (or should) have the approval of the models. My position is that I do not care if the models like my images or not. For me, the models' opinion is irrelevant to my imagery. <snip>
    Actually I have worked with a number of professional models who actually hated looking at their own photos ( and I am talking about portrait / glamour shots, not nudes).

  15. #35

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by student
    <snip> Now it does not mean that I will not be delighted if the models or masses like my images. I will be happy if they did. But I will continue to make images my way even if the models or masses do not like them.

    But if I were to chose bewteen the approval of the masses versus the approval of a select few friends whose opinion I value, I have no doubt whose approval I would treasure. <snip>
    Sorry about the chopped up replies, but the thought came to me on second reading of your post.

    I think that part of the "divide" is semantics. I agree that an artist should not need the approval of the "masses" in order to validate his art. Equally, the opposite extreme is also invalid. An audience composed of "a select few friends" is not the same as no audience at all.

    Reaching out is not the same as pandering.

    Addressing the crowd in a language that they can comprehend does not invalidate the truth of the message.

  16. #36

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by Verywierd
    Sorry about the chopped up replies, but the thought came to me on second reading of your post.

    I think that part of the "divide" is semantics. I agree that an artist should not need the approval of the "masses" in order to validate his art. Equally, the opposite extreme is also invalid. An audience composed of "a select few friends" is not the same as no audience at all.

    Reaching out is not the same as pandering.

    Addressing the crowd in a language that they can comprehend does not invalidate the truth of the message.

    While I agree that differences often arise because of semantics, I think here the issue is more that of attitude than semantics.

    I have no problem with your choice of words and semantics. They are clear, but I think there are different ways of looking at what you wrote.

    There are those who do not attempt to reach out, let alone pander to the masses. I am sure you know of such artists.

    There are those artists whose language is not ripe for the time. And only with time, the artists' language becomes comprehensible to the masses. Even today, how many understand cubism? Show these types of work to the masses, and see what responses you get.

  17. #37

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by student
    While I agree that differences often arise because of semantics, I think here the issue is more that of attitude than semantics.

    I have no problem with your choice of words and semantics. They are clear, but I think there are different ways of looking at what you wrote.

    There are those who do not attempt to reach out, let alone pander to the masses. I am sure you know of such artists.

    There are those artists whose language is not ripe for the time. And only with time, the artists' language becomes comprehensible to the masses. Even today, how many understand cubism? Show these types of work to the masses, and see what responses you get.
    I agree that acceptance is often a function of time. Most things are. However, Cubism was an attempt to show people the world in a different light through the use of a carefully developed concept. This concept was agreed and actively promoted by a group of like minded artists who did want to be understood by the world. Basically it was still an attempt (successful or otherwise) at communication, only using a new (at the time) medium or style. This is totally different from someone who says "I have done this thing for myself alone. If you happen to understand, good for you, but your appreciation and understanding does not matter to me."

    And, as a point of interest, the very first cubist painting "Les Demoiselles d'Avignon" was a nude study

  18. #38

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by Verywierd
    And, as a point of interest, the very first cubist painting "Les Demoiselles d'Avignon" was a nude study

    And quite a grotesque one at that! But I love it! Even though I did not, and still do not, understand it!

  19. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    東京 Tokyo
    Posts
    10,916

    Default Re: Art department

    Quote Originally Posted by Verywierd
    And, as a point of interest, the very first cubist painting "Les Demoiselles d'Avignon" was a nude study
    it was a cultural study on exoticism at the same time also

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •