Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Rangefinder Forum > Philosophy of Photography

Philosophy of Photography Taking pics is one thing, but understanding why we take them, what they mean, what they are best used for, how they effect our reality -- all of these and more are important issues of the Philosophy of Photography. One of the best authors on the subject is Susan Sontag in her book "On Photography."

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 07-26-2011   #51
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulfish4570 View Post
this is sterile stuff, a crafty gimmick at best, done by a fellow too lazy to get out and chase light for himself.
Perhaps it isn't about chasing light...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appropriation_(art)

Last edited by jsrockit : 07-26-2011 at 13:10.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2011   #52
jan normandale
Film is the other way
 
jan normandale's Avatar
 
jan normandale is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: on Location
Posts: 3,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by PKR View Post
We have Leveraged Bond Funds, Leveraged Corn Futures, Leveraged Buy Outs and the concept has caught on in the gallery world. So, we now have a lot of Leveraged art.

So.. the next big thing is going to be "Art Futures"? Funny ... I like it. ;- )
__________________
RFF Gallery
flickr
Blog

it's all about light
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2011   #53
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,097
Did the gallery publish that ArtSpeak manifeto detailing the artist's working methods? Are they nuts, or just plain stupid? You don't want to ever do that, not for this guy or anyone else unless you're detailing classic approaches. That's like detailing how someone made a mixed media piece. Who cares?, and why even put up question marks in the buyer's minds?

They must rely on art grants from the government to survive.

The image you posted there looks really good.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-04-2011   #54
jan normandale
Film is the other way
 
jan normandale's Avatar
 
jan normandale is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: on Location
Posts: 3,911
MoMA : New Photographers: "...The artists in New Photography 2011 approach image-making from very different perspectives, making for a truly dynamic combination."

I think the critical point in the group show "New Photography" is the quiet substitution of the phrase "image making" for photograph. This change allows the use of anything in any way to be used to create an image. Photographs are just one of the possible components to the "image making" process.

This used to be called "decoupage"... LINK 1 and LINK 2
__________________
RFF Gallery
flickr
Blog

it's all about light

Last edited by jan normandale : 10-04-2011 at 23:15. Reason: update
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-04-2011   #55
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers View Post
Ray,
I have similiar feelings about this work. I find the images striking and they remain in my brain.

Is it art? Silly to try answering that question, since there's an infinite number of definitions. Is it interesting? Definitely.

I think the most profound thing about this work is that it throws down a gauntlet (intentionally or not) of "Don't get too comfortable with the status quo, photographers." This is the same kind of challenge that Daguerre and others threw into the culture of Only-Painting/Sculpture-Is-Art.

To me, Google Street View images are just data sitting there waiting to be used by anyone. And should Google get a cut? Not in my opinion... unless they want to pass it along to we who've had our privacy yet again infringed upon. Buy, hey, that's the new world.
Great post. And to those who have been slagging Rickard as some dude sitting around in his underpants, he (1) is a damned decent street photographer in the more conventional sense; (2) is working solidly within an established tradition; and (3) runs what might be the best photo-crit web site on the whole internet (it's certainly in the top 5). I'll assume that you all know about it already and that if you don't, you know how to find it.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/

Last edited by semilog : 10-04-2011 at 19:34.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-04-2011   #56
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by porktaco View Post
it might be art. it's not photography.
Your comment might be nonsense.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-04-2011   #57
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzardkid View Post
So, let me get this straight: if I go to the gallery, take pictures of this 'photographers' work and put them up for sale for USD 6,000 thats okay I reckon?

It's not that I am doing anything that he didn't do himself, and Google should be coming after him in the first place, not me, right?

Guess I'm off to snap some snaps then!
If you used miniscule fractions of the photos, comparable to the miniscule fraction of the absolutely vast Google Maps database mined by Sultan, that would likely be (or at least, should be) fair use. Just as Sultan's use of those images should be.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-04-2011   #58
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by gns View Post
I have no problem thinking of these simply as photography. How different is this really from taking your camera down to the Greyhound depot and getting on the 12:00 to the next town, and making all your photos from the window of that bus?

These pictures got me thinking of the many previous photo projects made from cars, from Robert Frank's bus pictures to Friedlander's, America By Car. And in between, Meyerowitz, Winogrand, Wessel and probably many I don't know about.
Bingo. Photography is about editing, choice, selection, inclusion, exclusion, description, composition, perspective, light. All of those elements are present in Rickard's project. I find it interesting how tightly circumscribed the views of many forumites here are, how vast the terrain that would be excluded from art in general, and photography in particular. It is somewhat dispiriting.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/

Last edited by semilog : 10-04-2011 at 19:43.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-11-2011   #59
celluloidprop
Registered User
 
celluloidprop is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by PKR View Post
What this guy has done is no different than having him go through your or my stock images, picking the ones he likes best and claiming them as his art.. as it was his taste that picked them. Most curators draw the line in any art with "human intent" in the creation.
This is quite different from sorting through already-curated 'art' (a set of stock images) - he combs through Street View and essentially composes the 'photographs' himself. That's the conceptual basis and defining element of the work.

Is $2500-6000 for a print, in my opinion, obscene? Yeah, but that's the way of the art world. "The bourgeoisie have, after all, made it a scam."
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2011   #60
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
 
RayPA's Avatar
 
RayPA is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The GOLDEN State
Posts: 4,581
Another example of sourcing Google Street View.




/
__________________
Ray, SF Bay Area
My Blurb Books.
RFF Gallery
I'm ~quinine~ on Flickr
blogged
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-01-2012   #61
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,712
Thanks, GNS. I'm about halfway through this talk and it's just terrific.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-01-2012   #62
lcpr
Registered User
 
lcpr is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London
Posts: 162
It's like street photography from the comfort of your own home. Come to think of it, Google should be classed as one of the great street photographers in history - I can't think of any other 'body of work' that has encompassed such a broad range of locales.
__________________
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-01-2012   #63
andersju
Registered User
 
andersju is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Age: 29
Posts: 412
This is interesting stuff, but (based on only having seen Doug Rickard's web site) I have to say that I find Jon Rafman's Nine Eyes of Google Street View to be much better; one of the most fascinating collections of photos I've seen in the past few years.
__________________
minorshadows.net | 2038.cc
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-02-2012   #64
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,712
^-- I did read your whole post. It in no way negates what you wrote in the last sentence, and that last sentence does not do you any credit.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-03-2012   #65
jan normandale
Film is the other way
 
jan normandale's Avatar
 
jan normandale is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: on Location
Posts: 3,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by andersju View Post
This is interesting stuff, but (based on only having seen Doug Rickard's web site) I have to say that I find Jon Rafman's Nine Eyes of Google Street View to be much better; one of the most fascinating collections of photos I've seen in the past few years.
I've seen / followed Jon's blog and posted about it elsewhere on the net. Interestingly he's a Canadian / Montréalais and his work (not just the curated google work) is very good
__________________
RFF Gallery
flickr
Blog

it's all about light

Last edited by jan normandale : 04-03-2012 at 22:57. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #66
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
Great post. And to those who have been slagging Rickard as some dude sitting around in his underpants, he (1) is a damned decent street photographer in the more conventional sense; (2) is working solidly within an established tradition; and (3) runs what might be the best photo-crit web site on the whole internet (it's certainly in the top 5). I'll assume that you all know about it already and that if you don't, you know how to find it.

Credentials don't make something "good" or "correct" ipso facto: Doctors in the turn of the 19th/20th century recommended smoking due to its "soothing" qualities and "proven good" effects on health.

Somebody may be the best tailor in the world, but once they start selling clothes out of cloth that cannot be seen by "those unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent", one cannot help but point out that the Emperor is indeed in a birth-suit.
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).



My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #67
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel M.A. View Post
Credentials don't make something "good" or "correct".
Who said anything about credentials? You quote my post but your response is orthogonal to it. In any case Rickard's previous work with cameras that he actually operated blunts criticisms that he has not gotten out and "chased" the light -- and the useful resources that he's assembled on the web demolish the claims that he doesn't know about photography in general or street photography in particular or the proper role of appropriation in art.

You don't have to agree with him, and you don't have to like his work. But to say or imply he's going into this project blind, or that he doesn't know what the relevant intellectual threads are or that he can't handle a camera (as several posters on this thread have done) -- these are not evidence-based positions.
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #68
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by semilog View Post
Who said anything about credentials? You quote my post but your response is orthogonal to it.

In that case, "is a damned decent street photographer in the more conventional sense" is a straw dodecagon.
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).



My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #69
v_roma
Registered User
 
v_roma is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 545
I'm sorry but there seems to be a lot of close-mindedness about this. The man came up with an idea, went ahead and executed it (no small thing; I suggest that you browse through Street View and see what you come up with), and produced something interesting.

This discussion in a not so distant past:

Person 1: I just heard about this guy who used his thingamajig to take "photographs" and he's trying to pass these "photographs" as art!

Person 2: What?!? How can it be art if he didn't actually sit down and paint it?? He just clicked a button?? Ridiculous, I say.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #70
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by v_roma View Post
This discussion in a not so distant past:
One of my problems in this discussion is using a circular concept (define the concept with the concept itself, and use it as its own defense). That in itself says nothing.

Quote:
noonameg: n something that has been noonamegged.
Ah! Of course. Evolution of the English language etc etc etc, how dare you question the organic nature of the English tongue etc etc.


::sigh::



One can grab a cat and call it a dog all you want, but a cat it remains. If it makes for a MoMA exhibit, that's great for the misunderstood genius behind it --nevermind that Magritte already flew that one. But please, calling it "thus a study in Veterinary Psychiatry" (because, you know, there's an nonhuman identity crisis there) is an insult to art, vets and psychiatry. Not to mention the viewer.
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).



My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #71
julianphotoart
No likey digital-phooey
 
julianphotoart's Avatar
 
julianphotoart is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 2,567 miles from Toronto
Posts: 630
The same exact type of exhibition (perhaps by the same "artist") was showing at the Santa Barbara Museum of Art 2 week-ends ago. I have a parallel Thread going entitled "Google Streetview 'Art'".

The guy has no life. He sits at home staring at Google all day. He takes straight, as-is Google Streetview screenshots, doesn't do anything to them, blows them up huge, puts them in a nice frame, and charges a fortune. Oh, and then he gets a gullible art gallery administrator to get someone to write a pretentious, artsy description to legitimize the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #72
River Dog
Always looking
 
River Dog's Avatar
 
River Dog is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Bath, England
Posts: 630
I photographed the tv screen once. This guy had a conspiracy view of things and was being interviewed just after the JFK assassination. I just couldn't get his face out of my head.

__________________
If I can find it, buy it and lift it, I'll shoot it

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #73
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by julianphotoart View Post
The same exact type of exhibition (perhaps by the same "artist") was showing at the Santa Barbara Museum of Art 2 week-ends ago. I have a parallel Thread going entitled "Google Streetview 'Art'".

The guy has no life. He sits at home staring at Google all day. He takes straight, as-is Google Streetview screenshots, doesn't do anything to them, blows them up huge, puts them in a nice frame, and charges a fortune. Oh, and then he gets a gullible art gallery administrator to get someone to write a pretentious, artsy description to legitimize the whole thing.
Wish my life was so bad. I'm sure he doesn't spend every waking hour on google.

You could say, about any photographer, the same thing...

He simply points his camera and shoots something, doesn't do anything to them, blows them up huge, puts them in a nice frame, and charges a fortune. Oh, and then he gets a gullible art gallery administrator to get someone to write a pretentious, artsy description to legitimize the whole thing.

Sure, it's not that simple. However, he didn't force people to do anything for him. They bought into it because they liked his concept and figured they could make money off of him.

I have no issue with this work. Appropriation and the conceptual have always been a part of the art world. Sure, I don't care to look at it, but he (and a few others) found their gimmick and ran with it. I'm not going to hate.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-04-2012   #74
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
 
semilog's Avatar
 
semilog is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 3,712
Seems to me that you can't really even start to talk about the question of appropriation in modern photography without talking about Larry Sultan and Mike Mandel's book, Evidence. Rickard was obviously aware of this work and it clearly influenced his thinking.

Here's a good 5-minute video on Sultan and Evidence.

Evidence is widely acknowledged as one of the more important and influential books in contemporary photography. How is the work under discussion different from Evidence? If it is worse, why is it worse?
__________________
There are two kinds of photographers:
those who are interested in what a particular camera can't do,
and those who are interested in what it can do.

semilog.smugmug.com | flickr.com/photos/semilog/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-17-2012   #75
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,883
These people here thought Brian was one of the most important and influential people in contemporary spirituality.

Who is to question what a group of people think about what is "important"?

I believe the equation of P * (concept) = Irrefutable, where P = (# of people), is always held as an Axiom if one is invested in P.
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).



My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:54.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.