I'm Not A Photographer by merkley????

[hoteesgnal]

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/bl...tographer.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.
"

[Sparrow]

Well the least he had the good grace to put it on his website and not to post it here………..

[bmattock]

I think it's funny and deadly accurate in many cases.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by bmattock

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

[mabelsound]

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. ;-)

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by mabelsound

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

[Spider67]

I Like it. It´s funny although if he shortens it just a bit it would be great.

[bmattock]

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/

[itf]

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.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by leicasniper

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?

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

I always refer to myself as NOT being a photographer.

Me too.......

[williams473]

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]

Originally Posted by williams473

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]

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]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

I always refer to myself as NOT being a photographer.

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]

Originally Posted by williams473

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]

Yup, Bill's right. That's a MUCH easier (and nicer way to put it) -- taking a photograph by definition makes you a photographer.

[steamer]

Photographer or not; he looks to be having big fun.

[williams473]

[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]

Originally Posted by williams473

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]

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]

Originally Posted by Austerby

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.

[palec]

Originally Posted by Austerby

Categories and classifications are fine, but generalisations have their limitations.

Jokes are full of generalizations, that's why they usually work.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by bmattock

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

[Yammerman]

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.