Nice collection of artsits there. Thier shots while stylised still seem a little more mainstream and easier to understand and interpret. I guess I havent learnt to appreciate photos of higher artistic value yet.
I'll admit that while I have not learnt to see with my heart, I do know that when I shoot the animals at the shelter its not always with my head. Maybe its due to the passion I feel towards this one area of photography that makes me like that type of photos more than others.
I find it interesting that in the Erica Lai thread and now starting in this one that a correlation is being drawn between understanding and appreciation.
First let me set the base for my argument - all photography is art! The art can be good, it can be bad, it can be meaningful or meaningless, it can be evocative it can be dull, just like all other forms of more traditional (and some not traditional) art, e.g. painting, music, etc - all these things are subjective anyway. Even holiday snapshots (please let's not go here again) I would consider art, albeit usually not very sophisticated, but art none the less - the images, put together form a series, a series tells a story, story telling is an art!
Regarding the Erica Lai images, personally they didn't work for me. Artistically and technically the images for the most part were fine. The problem I have is that I believe her intent was to tell a story with the various series of images. Any series of images automatically IMO is attempting tell a story (individual images can do this too, but multiple images lend themselves more to being interpreted as a story). In this regard I feel that Erica did not succeed, at least not for me. Whether she deserved to win the award or not I can't say because I didn't see the competition - maybe hers was certainly deserving compared to rest.
OK, just because I don't understand what she was trying to convey with her images, does not mean that I can not appreciate them.
Personal attacks (on the artist) aside, anyone who has a negative view of her work or an opinion of whether she should have received the award or not seems to be shouted down for not-understanding or apreciating her art - this is IMHO the height of hypocrisy - why is your view any more inspired or insighful then anyone elses, including the detractors.
If her artwork was designed to be emotive then I feel she has succeeded 110% - just look at the passion of the positive and negative arguments in the both these threads! If her artwork was designed to tell a story, then I feel she has failed. In all likelyhood she probably falls somewhere in between the two extremes.
regarding Art Department, the photographers they represent tend to be quite straightforward with their work. I find it abit too straightforward....
Let's talk about photographers with feeling. These two agencies below represent photographers who convey a certain sensation and strangeness in their work. They make ordinary things seem abit unsettling.
I think what alot of people would overlook in Erica's work is how she makes the everyday and ordinary abit strange, and sometimes beautiful too.
and of course the legendary Art+Commerce
Look especially at Elinor Carruci's work, which really burst out on the scene just a few years ago. Her work is of everyday mundane things (her family and life basically) but the pictures she captures are full of sensitivity.
I don't think that I will get involved in this particular discussion/argument except to say that from what I have seen, great art leaves almost any viewer/listener with the impression that there is "something" about the work that is special, even if they don't particularly like it or have the background to fully appreciate it.
well , all i can say is its never a easy job to please everyone . For example some people think that image blur not sharp means not idea while some people do appricate it , this is one very common technical aspect in photography alot people is concern about ... Sometime i believe a certain work style is use to please and go with the mass and certain work style will just definitely turn off those who cant accept new ideas or changes or simply too fix to their own view point .
From my view point at the end of the day u achieve yr desire effect and able to project to the desire viewers consider very successful liao . We are always seeking for perfection and try to please just as anybody who might be looking at our photos but there is a fact that it is just impossible to 100% please everyone .
Expectation and culture from the viewers and effectiveness of the photos ....
Since she is so successful i think one must learn the reason behind the viewfinder and see from her point on whats she is trying to express and respect the fact that she is recognise for all her efforts . Most of the time we just tend to look at photos with lots of technical thinking in mind and trying to fault each other expression rather to use our heart to feel the expression the photog is trying to express . Artistic or not is up to individual value of vision and culture .
anyway just my 2 cent worth , just feel like voice out my opinion .
thanks for the links, pretty nice pictures. Steve Mcurry gave us all such a memoriable portraiture shot, that I think has "undermined" his other shots somewhat.. haha... nonetheless, i like how he chooses to work in central asia mainly and the pics that he has produced from CA.
checked out the erica thread earlier. Well, i like her series on angles in a hdb flat, it made me feel a sense of sadness somehow at all these empty angles, kind of an abandoned feeling. Perhaps it's because of the lack of human activity traces in her shots. But i like the concept which i feel can be refined further. Just like her wild and urban series, which i may not have chosen to shoot the way she did with such a literal side by side cut of crop comparison, a lil too raw imo. but ya, I like the direction she's heading.
Any good photographers to recommend? I'm still searching for my style and wish to take a look at more photographers... *thinks*if only i can tear out every photo i like, mk a scrap book and voila, my style could possibly be hidden amongst that ecclectic mix of images. haha...
If photography is an elitist art, how sad, how tragic. An elitist artist catering for the elitist folks, all that supposed talent but so few to appreciate and even fewer to understand, such a waste of supposed tallent.
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.
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.