View Full Version : I'm Not A Photographer by merkley????
hoteesgnal
05-15-2008, 01:01
Written by the famous-on-flickr photorapher merkley???. Thought this was rather interesting.
The text is lifted from his website here: http://www.threequestionmarks.com/blog/2007/06/im-not-photographer.html
And you can find his flickr photography stream here (nsfw): http://www.flickr.com/photos/merkley/
"
Photographers carry around big cameras, big lights, big flash contraptions and little meters, they talk about film stock, ISO's, F stops and capturing the perfect light right before dusk.
Photographers creep through neighborhoods of poor people looking for interesting poverty related things to "capture" in black and white or muted color.
Photographers spend lots of time in cramped dark rooms with red lights and chemicals that smell like egg farts.
Photographers get in heated exchanges about the direction Leica is headed or that one camera maker that sounds all german, hasselhoff?
Photographers have lots of lenses that they will tell you about whether you ask them or not, like the one that can see an ass hair on a mosquito or the remarkably "bright" one that can photograph the pope's underwear tag from a tower in hell.
Photographers say "glass" a lot, "Thats a nice piece of glass you got there Danny." which would be funny if it was a joke. No it wouldn't.
Photographers show you shoes hanging on wires, pink boxes in the green weeds, little black girls with blue eyes and nuns sitting under billboards of naked men.
Photographers have all kinds of cameras, most of them are rare and vintage but they love to remind you that their absolute favorite cameras are crappy plastic cameras they found at the thrift store for 25 cents.
Photographers LOVE Polaroid because you can take a picture of absolutely ANYTHING with a Polaroid and it will look like you got your BFA.
Photographers know the names of every other photographer who ever lived and they can tell you exactly who took the first picture of an old barn door or a naked girl on a sofa.
Photographers talk about how little they use photoshop IF AT ALL, and even then it's only to "adjust some curves" or "make the blacks a little more black."
Photographers make use of make up artists, hairdressers, location scouts and stylists which is way way WAY different than photoshopping out zits and wrinkles.
Photographers freeze moments to show the REALITY. They love that word, "reality" also they like to say "RAW" a lot.
Photographers have websites with big black or red sans serif fonts on white backgrounds.
Photographers put their client list at the bottom of the side bar where it looks like they don't really care about it but just in case you didn't like their photographs you can see who did.
Photographers list their accomplishments in a timeline so just in case you didn't like their photographs you can see who did. Wait, did I just say that?
Photographers have strong opinions about Terry Richardson.
Photographers get upset about cropping.
Photographers like the anticipation, surprise, expense, delay, grain, smell, challenge, discipline, texture, and overall unpredictable "magic" of analog, soo opposite of effing digital.
Photographers use the word amateur to describe most other photographers.
Photographers miss the good old days when photography was expensive and out of reach to amateurs.
Photographers blame the lab a lot.
Photographers go to school to study photography because you can't tell if a photo is good just by looking at it.
Photographers whisper cutting edge poetic gems like "digital has no soul."
Photographers only really like 2 or 3 other photographers, the one's whose photographs most resemble their own and they like to keep those books right out on the coffee table where everyone can see them.
Photographers think all commentary about photography and photographers is likely directed at them.
So yeah, I don't give a stumbling poop about any of that stuff.
I'm not a photographer.
"
Well the least he had the good grace to put it on his website and not to post it here………..:rolleyes:
bmattock
05-15-2008, 03:16
I think it's funny and deadly accurate in many cases.
I think it's funny and deadly accurate in many cases.
Yep….spot on mostly
but he will be a photographer just as soon as he finds the AWB switch:D:D
mabelsound
05-15-2008, 03:26
I think that's pretty funny, and I actually like some of his stuff, too. Most of it, no, but a few of those tableaux of women and their sofas are really funny and charming. He has a good eye for personality.
He oughta be a little more adventurous though, in my opinion. Like maybe going outdoors or photographing non-women. ;-)
He oughta be a little more adventurous though, in my opinion. Like maybe going outdoors or photographing non-women. ;-)
There’s time for that when ya get old
:rolleyes:
Spider67
05-15-2008, 03:35
I Like it. It´s funny although if he shortens it just a bit it would be great.
bmattock
05-15-2008, 03:54
I kind of like this from him too. Thanks for pointing the guy out, I never would have found him. Don't like his photos, but he's a hoot.
NOTE: Obscene language - don't click if that squicks you.
http://www.flickr.com/people/merkley/
Funny thing is he talks about how anti all this stuff he is far more than any "photographer" I know has ever talked about any of this stuff (I think he is actually talking largely about gear fondlers anyway).
The whole anti thing is old and boring (don't call me such and such; I just do what I do and hate that stuff), reminds me of the "Lomo" craze, except I actually like more "Lomo" photographs.
Anyway, I'll leave it there before I too start defining myself by ripping someone else down, and start ripping the wrong people down in the process.
Looks like he uses a camera to get women to take off their clothes. Seems to work for him. Never worked for me. Sigh.
Wrong type of camera perhaps?
:)
I always refer to myself as NOT being a photographer. :p
Me too.......;)
williams473
05-15-2008, 06:29
Just one more mo-ron on the internet blathering on in generalities with a sense of authority and feeling very good about how witty and original he is. I could write similar swill on just about any topic if I wanted to be that ultra-cynical long enough to write it.
He doesn't even come close to characterizing most of the photographers I've ever known. His experience with photographers is probably largely limited to his endless reading of message boards, forums, and flickr pages on the internet, which would explain his narrow impression of something that can't be so easily categorized.
mfunnell
05-15-2008, 06:42
His experience with photographers is probably largely limited to his endless reading of message boards, forums, and flickr pages on the internet, which would explain his narrow impression of something that can't be so easily categorized.Well, to that extent, his categorising is vaguely amusing. I, too, spend some time doing that (and I'm, um, guessing you do too.) But, for me, that's a background activity usually conducted when I'm thinking about photography but, for whatever reason, not able to engage in it. When I can take photographs I tend to try to do so.
Does that make me "a photographer"? Perhaps not, but I don't care. Mostly I'm too busy taking (or developing, or scanning or printing) photographs. If that doesn't make me a photographer that's fine. I'll do it with or without the label (for as long as I have a day job to fund myself).
...Mike
funkaoshi
05-15-2008, 06:43
It's a funny little tirade. I'm not sure where all the hate is coming from. (Or maybe it cuts a little too close to home?) I don't think he's taking himself too seriously here, and its clear he has an issue with a particular type of person he has labelled a "photographer".
Also, merkley???'s "skycam" photographs are wonderful.
bmattock
05-15-2008, 06:46
I always refer to myself as NOT being a photographer. :p
If you take photographs, you're a photographer.
What people really mean when they say that, I presume, is that they are not a particular type of photographer. This fellow is a case in point - he takes photographs, so clearly he is a photographer. Furthermore, he displays his photographs and obviously wishes them to be seen and perhaps appreciated - that's the goal of most photographers of the sort he disdains.
But I doubt that the irony is lost on him, he seems an intelligent sort.
And I find his sarcasm amusing.
bmattock
05-15-2008, 06:48
Just one more mo-ron on the internet blathering on in generalities with a sense of authority and feeling very good about how witty and original he is. I could write similar swill on just about any topic if I wanted to be that ultra-cynical long enough to write it.
Jealous.
He doesn't even come close to characterizing most of the photographers I've ever known. His experience with photographers is probably largely limited to his endless reading of message boards, forums, and flickr pages on the internet, which would explain his narrow impression of something that can't be so easily categorized.
You mean, like the people who hang out on RFF and go on at great length about the appropriateness of a late-model Nokton on a early-model M body?
I think it stings because his arrows are sharp and fly true.
Deal with it.
williams473
05-15-2008, 06:52
Yup, Bill's right. That's a MUCH easier (and nicer way to put it) -- taking a photograph by definition makes you a photographer.
Photographer or not; he looks to be having big fun.
williams473
05-15-2008, 07:04
[quote=bmattock;819224]Jealous.
Bill,
Jealous? Of what? His writing prowess? Hardly- just bored at work.
and
I've never owned nor care about a friggin Nokton - don't even know what one is...
and
Those aren't arrows he's shooting- he's on the internet like you and me - means absolutely nothing... If you knew the people I know who use cameras, you'd understand...
bmattock
05-15-2008, 07:11
Jealous? Of what? His writing prowess? Hardly- just bored at work.
I've found that people who say "Pfft, I could do that," usually could not do that, for any value of 'that'.
I've never owned nor care about a friggin Nokton - don't even know what one is...
There are many here that do, and will spend weeks discussing the brand of grease used to lubricate the frammistat bearing on one, versus the same lens made 2 weeks later by a guy who had salami for lunch.
I laugh because he is so close to the mark. He might even have been here at one time or another.
Those aren't arrows he's shooting- he's on the internet like you and me - means absolutely nothing... If you knew the people I know who use cameras, you'd understand...
Zeno didn't shoot 'real' arrows either. But when words cut deeply, you can call them what you will, the effect is the same.
Austerby
05-15-2008, 07:16
It's a brilliant, perceptive list. It's funny because it's accurate but limited because it's generalised. Remind me again who it is who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
I'm only a photographer when I'm taking photographs. I'm only a sailor when I'm sailing my yacht. I'm only a cyclist when on my bike. I'm only a driver when driving my car.
Categories and classifications are fine, but generalisations have their limitations.
bmattock
05-15-2008, 07:21
I'm only a photographer when I'm taking photographs. I'm only a sailor when I'm sailing my yacht. I'm only a cyclist when on my bike. I'm only a driver when driving my car.
Categories and classifications are fine, but generalisations have their limitations.
But it seems that many of us know exactly whom he is referring to - not a generic class of 'all' photographers, but 'those' photographers. Some of us claim not to know any like that - I say if you post on RFF, you swim with them daily.
Categories and classifications are fine, but generalisations have their limitations.
Jokes are full of generalizations, that's why they usually work.
But it seems that many of us know exactly whom he is referring to - not a generic class of 'all' photographers, but 'those' photographers. Some of us claim not to know any like that - I say if you post on RFF, you swim with them daily.
Oh……….. I see……… those with little Nookys
:):angel:
Yammerman
05-15-2008, 07:34
Seems like a photographer to me. The text is amusing and the photo's are good and boring at the same time. I'll be glad when the smart rude thing has had its day its just too easy. It made me think I ought to study Gibbons Decline and Fall a bit more to see where we're headed.
Enjoyable diversion though.:D
I think some of his photos could be better if cropped differently.
;-)
Interesting life-style and odd collection of friends/models. Different strokes but I like his attitude.
Chris101
05-15-2008, 10:07
There’s time for that when ya get old
:rolleyes:Nah. It's about the only thing that keeps me behind the cameraonce I got old.
Chris101
05-15-2008, 10:17
I just looked through Merkley's Flickr. He's a pretty good photographer, he has his own style and all, and is heavily borrowed from others like Lachapelle. Sorry that I know the name of who he's copying, I guess being aware of stuff like that is bad on his list.
It looks like he wants to put down traditions and pretend like he's invented it all. Oh well.
Fred-San,
I do understand your point. (I think...)
Now.. I'm not an artist.. neither a photographer it seems... oh boy.. I'm lost!
Sorry, but I could only read about 1/5th of that before losing interest. I must have ADD.
jfretless
05-15-2008, 11:46
..you heard it from me first...
EMO- photography.
mabelsound
05-15-2008, 12:03
nikonhswebmaster, that is really cool.
bmattock
05-15-2008, 12:16
No I mean I am not a photographer. Not really up for debate, you either understand my position or you don't. Agreement is not required, but optional. :p
Of course it is up for debate, because the definition resides in the way people use language, not in what you choose to call yourself. A cook may choose to call himself a potted plant, but if he makes my dinner, he is a cook.
Unless you actually do not make photographs, I would continue to believe that you are indeed a photographer, whether you wish to be known as one or not. And if you actually do not make photographs, are you lost? WTF, over?
I'm sick of this ironic, round-about way of bashing the "other side". It just perpetuates the us-versus-them mindset which gets everyone nowhere.
bmattock
05-15-2008, 12:26
I'm sick of this ironic, round-about way of bashing the "other side". It just perpetuates the us-versus-them mindset which gets everyone nowhere.
Yeah, but it's entertaining to see the nose-in-the-air crowd getting short-sheeted for a change. Hehehe. Nobody calls a halt when the elect start going on about the smelly hoi polloi and their awful point-n-shoot digitals. I say roll with it.
Amusing and iroinic. Even if I have been at it some 35 yerars,I admit we all ned a kick in the sitting equipment once in a while.
mabelsound
05-15-2008, 16:03
Put it this way: it's a perfect internet manifesto. Nobody wants it chiseled in stone and leaned up against the Washington Monument. It's a small, reactionary outburst having its cultural moment, and as such, is a lot of fun. As are his photos, by and large.
Witty or not, this flickrite is simply one of thousands of copycat image makers who are using this 3rd-party social-networking platform to promote himself and ratings. As Chris pointed out earlier, the real artist is someone else.
I love it !
It's obviously a bit of fun - and there are some ''ouch '' moments for me in there !
Luckily I do not aspire to be anything other than a '' considered snapshooter ...
I wish I could come up with something similar about us Interior Designers [ Inferior Desecrators ]
dee
Anybody have a link to his "I am not a Martyr" piece?
Honestly, it's not that I don't like his work. I think it's kind of cool, even if he does get in a bit of a rut with things. But it's garish. I mean, yeah, sure, most people would figure a shot of a girl in a bathtub is good enough, but no - Mr Merkley has flying toast, a diso-ball helmet, a steering wheel, etc. etc., as well as a title describing it all in case you missed it or are on dial-up. He has effectively one-upped every other "girl-in-bathtub" picture out there. Kudos, I say. Even if somebody already took a photo of Dali with flying cats, which pretty much trumps flying toast without even trying.
But it's definitely garish. That's something he's got nobody can take away :) I do like what he does.
It's cool if he doesn't consider himself a photographer. I don't care what his reasons are. But it's not like he doesn't live in a glass house himself, you know? Anyone who scans uses photoshop for the same reasons as anyone who shoots digital or prints wet. And everybody has a different method and goal. How boring would it be if that wasn't the case? I don't feel he is talking about me, but it's clear he holds the term "photographer" in contempt for some reason. Despite the fact that he takes pictures. If I'm going to tell someone about his work, I'm going to say, "check out this photographer."
People are funny.
mfunnell
05-18-2008, 05:19
But it's garish. I mean, yeah, sure, most people would figure a shot of a girl in a bathtub is good enough, but no - Mr Merkley has flying toast, a diso-ball helmet, a steering wheel, etc. etc., as well as a title describing it all in case you missed it or are on dial-up.I haven't checked the link to his stuff - and now I'm not going to. That description is enough for me. It put me in mind of a very old (and, by contemporary standards, I'd guess rather tame) Playboy cartoon which had a scene with all varieties of paraphenalia, a decked-out girl and a guy on a diving board with (at minimum, and not much else) a crash helmet, water-wings and a water-balloon. And the whole thing had a caption that just said "Ready?".
With your great write-up and a no-doubt-enhanced-by-hindsight memory, I don't think his actual photos could live up (or down) to my expectations. So I'm not going there...
...Mike
merkley???
05-27-2008, 22:42
Just one more mo-ron on the internet blathering on in generalities with a sense of authority...
williams473, I guess me and you makes TWO.
But perhaps you typoed. I'm morMON, it's different, more polygamy.
Hi range finders! Wait, I don't see any deer or antelope around here.
OOPS... KEEP LOOKIN! You'll find it, maybe use a rover. Just sayin.
amateriat
05-27-2008, 23:16
"This is not a pipe?"
- Barrett
its just a rant! its a joke! its the result of frustration! who cares! the point is that when we all read it, images of photogs we know pop up at each sentence (many of myself he he). So he is not too far off the truth here.
In the end, take it as you may, it did have a whole bunch of "real-photographers-who-are-not-like-that-and-know-of-no one-like-that" discussing it for what, 40 posts now? that is effect! ...and its because it strikes closer to home than some may admit!
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.