Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Coffee With Mentors > Frank Jackson on Street Photography

Frank Jackson on Street Photography I am happy and excited to announce a new RFF forum on Street Photography mentored by Frank Jackson, one of the best producers of analog B/W prints I have ever seen. His shows include the Open Shutter Gallery, Heriard-Cimino Gallery, and Ogden Museum of Southern Art. His images are in the collections of Smithsonian Ogden Museum of Southern Art, California Afro American Museum and Xavier University New Orleans LA. He has worked for or has been featured with Visa Card, Xerox, UCLA, Eric Owen Moss, Architect, Hasselblad Forum (cover),Gordon Parks, Muhammed Ali, Million Man March Wash. DC, Lionel Hampton, jazz legion photographer , 1995-2002, Stevie Wonder, B+W Magazine (British version) twice, Rangefinder Magazine, Dahon Bicycles, Arelli Wheels, Real Product Design, Automobile Club of Southern California. Frank's online images are at fotographz.500px.com and fotographzfrankjackson.tumblr.com . "While on this diverse photographic journey…I have to say during this whole time my love for fine art black and white photography kept growing. I always found time to shoot in different cities and my own personal work…this has sustained me through some very tough times. As of 2012, with the help of a very good friend I maintain a state-of-the-art dream darkroom. The darkroom helps greatly in the on-going practice of understanding “the light”, being able to process film and print drives me to keep my digital photography “organic”. I’m curious visually and shooting what’s, what on the street feeds this curiosity. Everyday I walk out my front door to “see” the world with a digital camera, a film camera, the “cup” and an open mind (mostly).

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Your photo might be in use without permission.
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #1
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,489
Your photo might be in use without permission.

https://www.diyphotography.net/stree...raphy-killing/

Many street photos, no links, no credits.
I recognize at least one from photog I know.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #2
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,318
Commentary / criticism, so falls under Fair Use.

Credit to photographers would have been nice I guess, but also kind of a call-out in this article. Though, he's kinda right.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #3
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,489
In my culture he is kinda coward.

And bashing of photog who is recognized by Leica Blog and was on exhibition in known gallery is kinda questionable.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #4
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,318
Well that's a personal opinion/judgement you are free to make. Legally, nothing in the article is untoward, in terms of the photo usage - at least from what I can tell. I am not a lawyer though nor do I purport to be one, and Fair Use can only be proven in the court of law.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #5
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 43
Posts: 4,002
I agree with his take on "Street photography", that 99% of it is garbage. Once the masses got access to a cheap means of production and publication, we got millions of photos of banal garbage, maybe some kitsch here and there, a clever double entendre, and a whole ton of borderline voyeurism. Having worked in the construction field, I would rather see images of actual concrete or asphalt streets.
It doesn't matter if someone is prominently featured by Leica because they will publish someone who has purchased tens of thousands of dollars worth of gear, who has a blog or knows someone who talks loudly, before they will feature some poor schlep who is shooting with a beat up film Leica and using it for real news work. That's 'cause money talks now, not talent. Maybe content, if it is scandalous or lewd enough but that has a short shelf life.
As for not crediting a photographer, that's a cardinal sin. This writer is making money off the backs of other people's work, regardless if it is garbage or not. They need to be contacted for permission and credited if given that permission. Just because something is on the internet, doesn't mean it's free for the taking. Even if it is trash.
Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #6
Paul T.
Registered User
 
Paul T.'s Avatar
 
Paul T. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,997
Those would count as criticism and review - as long as he'd criticised (or ridiculed) them in the caption or text. So no need for permission.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #7
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,489
According to the article this photo is garbage.

Robert Frank, Americans.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/776516?...n_tab_contents


Because it is cliche according to the dude. And I'm afraid he was wrongly barking at lady behind bus stop photo. It has something above this expert sensing capabilities.

Not to mention photo I recognized first. It just great sense of humor in this photo.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #8
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,516
A cliche becomes a cliche when it's overused. Frank's work was groundbreaking at the time so it wouldn't have been considered a cliche. The photos that copied his style became cliches.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #9
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is online now
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
I agree with his take on "Street photography", that 99% of it is garbage. Once the masses got access to a cheap means of production and publication, we got millions of photos of banal garbage, maybe some kitsch here and there, a clever double entendre, and a whole ton of borderline voyeurism. Having worked in the construction field, I would rather see images of actual concrete or asphalt streets.

I agree totally though I suspect your 99% may be a bit conservative ... it is such a heavily diluted genre that it's actually becoming quite hard to define!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #10
wwfloyd
Registered User
 
wwfloyd's Avatar
 
wwfloyd is offline
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 136
I see the writer's point, with regard to 99% of street or arrow signs, and WRT random photos of nothing, for no reason.

Would have to disagree WRT those "easy" juxtapositions... something I've had too few opportunities at (and missed seeing a bunch, I'm sure). Those are just the photographer having a bit of fun, and sharing with others. You see some potential, you work out the setup, wait, wait, shoot, miss, wait, shoot, and maybe finally get what you had in mind. You've made something that came out of your mind; it doesn't matter if it's been done before.

I agree that it would have been nice to provide credit-links to the photographers. But, I think that, in the writer's mind, the photos were so bad that he did not want to hold the photographers up for derision.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #11
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,489
So, we must have brochure where all originals has to be listed.
All of these cliche talks are just as accurate as demanding songs to be performed only by original writer. Blues are just cliche players then.
Blues Brothers are so cliche players.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #12
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,971
I'm not even sure what we're supposed to be shooting any more.
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #13
PRJ
Another Day in Paradise
 
PRJ's Avatar
 
PRJ is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 335
My guess is the photographer that wrote that was a little jaded at the time. He labeled himself as a "war photographer" back in the day and did make some good images in Afganistan, but of the effects of war, not the actual war itself. I can't recall what he did after that. I think he gave up photography a few years ago, which is why I stated he was probably jaded. I believe he had a blog too which means that was probably a repost, so it might not have been faithful to the original.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #14
Yokosuka_Mike
The Beat Goes On
 
Yokosuka_Mike's Avatar
 
Yokosuka_Mike is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Yokosuka, Japan
Age: 64
Posts: 2,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by css9450 View Post
I'm not even sure what we're supposed to be shooting any more.
I hear you.

The way I see it, one should not worry about what one is supposed to shoot.

Have a vision, a desire, capture images that you want to capture and don’t worry about what other people think. No matter what kind of photographs you create if you decide to share them with others there will most likely be someone that likes what you’re doing and very much likely that there will be a lot of people that will think your images are garbage; especially if you share on the internet.

I take the kind of pictures that I like to take and I love to share my images here and on my blog. I’m pretty sure that my style of photography is not everyone's cuppa tea but what would be the point of being a photographer if all I was doing was trying to please everyone else instead of myself. Since I’m not dependent on my photography to earn a living and I do it merely as a form of enjoyment and as a creative outlet it would be foolish to worry too much about what others think.

When I go to an art museum or a photo exhibition I may pause a long time in front of some images and really feel something; maybe even feel something intense. Other images I may briefly look at and then move on quickly to the next. Whatever the case I always enjoy the experience of visiting the museum.

Compliments are nice, constructive criticism is valuable, self fulfilment is important; having fun is the ultimate.

These are just the rambling thoughts of a retiree with a camera and some free time on his hands.

All the best,
Mike
__________________
Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
-- Oddball
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #15
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
 
tunalegs's Avatar
 
tunalegs is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,584
I think the true mark of an amateur is freaking out when somebody reuses a work on a blog or something else inconsequential. When people are selling your works on T-shirts and mugs, etc. is when you know you're a pro.


I didn't bother reading the whole article. I'm well aware of Sturgeon's Law. We should by now, all know that most photographs are junk. Just pointless, inane reproduction - and now pointless, inane reproduction is easier to accomplish than at any point in the past.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #16
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 44
Posts: 9,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by tunalegs View Post
I think the true mark of an amateur is freaking out when somebody reuses a work on a blog or something else inconsequential. When people are selling your works on T-shirts and mugs, etc. is when you know you're a pro.
I disagree. As someone who does make his living from photography, I aggressively work to stop unauthorized use of my photos. Letting people use them for 'inconsequential' things makes the photos appear free and makes it harder to collect from commercial users who steal them.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #17
Archiver
Registered User
 
Archiver is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,372
Much of his general critique of street photography has validity, as long as you view the photos through the lens of 'is this image giving a unique message'. There is a lot of dreck out there, with people posting endless random images of people on the street. This gets very repetitive, and he's right that there should be a lot more editing and culling of posted work.


Having said that, does he credit the people who took the images? I'm not seeing that, and that's a no no, in my eyes. If you're going to use publicly posted images in your article, the least you can do is reference the sources.
__________________
~Loving Every Image Captured Always~
Archiver on flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #18
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
 
tunalegs's Avatar
 
tunalegs is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriscrawfordphoto View Post
I disagree. As someone who does make his living from photography, I aggressively work to stop unauthorized use of my photos. Letting people use them for 'inconsequential' things makes the photos appear free and makes it harder to collect from commercial users who steal them.

Fair use only makes work look "free" to people who are too stupid to understand or respect fair use in the first place - meaning it makes no practical difference. I can't think of an equivalent in photography, but in comic publishing, there is a problem with rather a lot of sites that will repost most of, if not an entire work (we're talking hundreds, sometimes thousands of pages - of multiple titles) to rake in advertising money. They don't give a sh!t if somebody used a panel or a page on their dumb blog - that's not what gives them the idea. To be fair, this is apples and oranges (few photographers produce books, postcards, shirts, or other miscellaneous merch. so the nature of competitive reproduction is admittedly markedly different), but either way reproduction for the sake of critique isn't inspiring anybody to steal images for T shirts.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #19
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 43
Posts: 4,002
But reproduction of an image without attribution, on a page or site that relies upon clicks and may have sponsorship is absolutely making money off another's work. It's not selling the work overtly, but it is the thing which draws consumers of the media to the site, earning the owner more advertising clicks and those pennies add up. Anyone uses my work without notifying me and I find out, they get an immediate cease and desist letter from me with an unveiled threat of legal action. I've had to bring an attorney to bear only twice and in both instances the offender was not selling my work but using it to further their business without notifying me and without attribution.
Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #20
Chris101
summicronia
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by tunalegs View Post
Fair use only makes work look "free" to people who are too stupid to understand or respect fair use in the first place ...
Fair use is generally taken to be no more than 10% of a given work. This was the standard we worked with in college education material production. It was usually less than one percent. With a photograph though, severe crops are usually worse than not showing anything at all. So in this case, the standard was no more than 10% of a body of work. For example two pictures of a 20 picture exhibition.

Our district lawyers left us with the (unconfirmed) understanding that this would be defensible in court if it ever came to that. To my knowledge it never has.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #21
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto's Avatar
 
Chriscrawfordphoto is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Age: 44
Posts: 9,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris101 View Post
Fair use is generally taken to be no more than 10% of a given work. This was the standard we worked with in college education material production. It was usually less than one percent. With a photograph though, severe crops are usually worse than not showing anything at all. So in this case, the standard was no more than 10% of a body of work. For example two pictures of a 20 picture exhibition.

Our district lawyers left us with the (unconfirmed) understanding that this would be defensible in court if it ever came to that. To my knowledge it never has.



Also, for fair use you clearly attribute the creator of the work. The article being discussed here did not do that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #22
George Mann
Registered User
 
George Mann is offline
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by css9450 View Post
I'm not even sure what we're supposed to be shooting any more.
Bresson and Maier may help to jog your memory.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #23
:: Mark
Registered User
 
:: Mark is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 215
Robert Frank’s photographs are remarkable for a number of reasons. At the time they were one of the first serious attempts to explore gritty real life scenes, giving them originally a novelty and today an historical context and value. But pick any one image, and you can be fairly sure that somewhere hidden in the nightmare flood of online images there will be a contemporary shot that expresses the same idea with far greater clarity - it is just a numbers game.

Stanworth’s problem is not “street photography” per say, but photography without any purpose beyond the instant gratification of a like. Good photography is still characterised by having a clear vision and idea to express, and the determination and drive to get in front of subjects to realise that. Robert Frank’s body of work in The Americans embodies this, and is rightly celebrated for that depth in a way that is largely impossible for images embedded in the attention-span-deficit environment that is contemporary social media.
__________________
Mark
PhotoBlog
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #24
CharlesDAMorgan
Registered User
 
CharlesDAMorgan is offline
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: South East UK
Posts: 1,040
The amount of good photography in this world is tiny. I make no pretence to being anything other than someone who can work out an exposure and employ some compositional capability. Rather sadly I have had my photographs published without permission or attribution and one friend even passed off one as his own on social media. I was neither flattered nor pleased - now an ex-friend.

Fair dealing is the UK equivalent and in this case the failure to attribute the photos would be a black mark as to the fairness of the use. However, as Sir James Matthew quipped a century ago, justice, like the Ritz Hotel, is open to all. You just need the substantial means to afford it.

When it comes to criticism I subscribe to the Wagnerian notion (I have no evidence to disprove it) that no one erects a statue to a critic. Studying the works of other photographers is to me far more valuable than hearing the thoughts of those simply knocking. Social media is full of dross, including numerous rants. It gets clicks, purpose achieved.
__________________
Film amateur with a few rangefinders - Leica III, M2/M3, Werra 3 and Zeiss Super Ikonta 534/16 medium format.

Apart from that have a Rolleiflex 3.5F, the odd Minolta XD7, Hasselblad 500cm, a Topcon Super D and an Intrepid 5x4 large format (not the half of it but I am clearing them out, honest).

I do all my own black and white developing at home.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #25
Paul T.
Registered User
 
Paul T.'s Avatar
 
Paul T. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by tunalegs View Post
I think the true mark of an amateur is freaking out when somebody reuses a work on a blog or something else inconsequential. When people are selling your works on T-shirts and mugs, etc. is when you know you're a pro.
that's unequivocally wrong. It's professionals who are losing their livelihood when works are reproduced illegally and it's therefore professionals who are most zealous about protecting their work. Lots of amateurs, including on here, think it's a compliment when someone steals it.

I've made my living via creative works for 30 years and no one steals my work. Lots of people have tried.

Although, as mentioned by many, this use is acceptable as it falls under criticism and review.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #26
helenhill
Mod chasing Shadows Light
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,627
Yes Ko
I too recognized a photo...

https://s23527.pcdn.co/wp-content/up...g-itself-4.png

look at the link above
Fourth row down , 5 th picture across, bingo
That photograph is from Allan aka ‘airfrogusmc’,
one of the talented members here on Rff


As for the Article
A few valid points... but I got bored.
__________________
Flickr.

________________________
To the question "what are you after"
I responded: The Moment...The Memory of what Once was... The Contrast between Light & Shadows.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #27
leicapixie
Registered User
 
leicapixie is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto.Canada
Posts: 1,608
These so called "teaching" blogs are pathetic and useless..
Best watch youtube interviews and look and see photographs.
Go to galleries, books, libraries and meet other photographers.
Analyze and question "how" a image made..
Personally "critic" or comment, theft is theft..
I post all images in very small format..max 1200x1600,
usually 640x480.
I have deleted many images from internet and have had mail from FB and google, saying i shouldn't..
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #28
MJ Buckpitt
Registered User
 
MJ Buckpitt is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 111
I haven't seen a better example of Betteridge's law for a long time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better...w_of_headlines
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #29
Fjäll
Registered User
 
Fjäll's Avatar
 
Fjäll is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Age: 29
Posts: 262
Most people seem to just enjoy photography. Well aware that their photography is garbage. Painters and writers etc alike.

The main thing often lacking is originality IMO
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #30
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Mann View Post
Bresson and Maier may help to jog your memory.

Probably not; I only clicked on this thread because I thought it was mostly about image theft. Its mostly not.
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, F3, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #31
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 5,500
Quote:
Betteridge's law
OK, it's not about using pictures without permission or credit. This said, I have enjoyed reading about this law learning something new.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #32
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,004
If you like a genre, you’ll seek out the good. If you don’t like it, you have many examples to support it being bad. It’s like music... But we are suppose to listen to this guy why? He has some credentials but not in street photography. He clearly doesn’t like it so he makes a lazy attempt at making an article to disparage it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #33
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,489
Couldn’t care less about who are these image thefts.
Just want to have one of them exposed to image owners.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #34
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,715
The original blog post is long gone. 99% of all photography is crap. Always has been. The question shouldn't be ripping and trying to clean up others backyards but instead clean up ones own first and when that is perfect then tell others how to clean up theirs.

Everything has been done. With more photos taken in the last 5 years than in the entire history of 2 dimensional work before digital 2000 + years. EVERYTHING has been done. The question then becomes how does one take all of this mix it all up and in some way, make it their own?

What also needs to be taken into account is how does the piece fit into a larger body of work and/or does that piece look like something that photographer would produce? All of that was lost and not taken into consideration by the writer of the original blog.

Some of my thoughts on street photography from a couple of years back from a piece Leica did on my work.
https://www.leica-camera.blog/2016/1...relationships/

Thanks Ko and I did post comments to the original blog which also are long gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #35
olifaunt
Registered User
 
olifaunt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 269
Those who can create create.

Those who can't create criticize.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #36
:: Mark
Registered User
 
:: Mark is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by olifaunt View Post
Those who can create create.

Those who can't create criticize.
Actually, Thomas Stanworth is an excellent and well renowned photographer, with a significant body of work shot in Afghanistan. Very few people on this site will have anything close to a comparable photographic portfolio.
__________________
Mark
PhotoBlog
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #37
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,715
Love this quote by Adams:
"No man has the right to dictate what other men should perceive, create or produce, but all should be encouraged to reveal themselves, their perceptions and emotions, and to build confidence in the creative spirit." -Ansel Adams
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #38
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 5,500
Quote:
Actually, Thomas Stanworth is an excellent and well renowned photographer, with a significant body of work shot in Afghanistan. Very few people on this site will have anything close to a comparable photographic portfolio.
Instead of talking about it, show it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #39
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by :: Mark View Post
Actually, Thomas Stanworth is an excellent and well renowned photographer, with a significant body of work shot in Afghanistan. Very few people on this site will have anything close to a comparable photographic portfolio.
He has some interesting work but is it right to point out one type of photography that he clearly has a bias against? I made the point on his original blog which is no longer up that his title could be said of all photography. Including one area that he had a lot of work his on his blog of his posted, landscape.

I made a point that someone could say if they saw one more landscape, with rocks in the foreground taken at a long exposure with water rushing around them and because of the long exposure a lot of ghosting was happening, they would pull their eyes out. He had at least one of those of his on the blog.

I don't think his work is any more or less cliche than any other work. I said this a few posts ago in this thread. It is all been done. The real hard question is how do you take it all in and make it your own? I say worry about your own work and less about what others are producing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #40
airfrogusmc
Registered User
 
airfrogusmc is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Out to Lunch View Post
Instead of talking about it, show it.
You probably wont see his work. I just found this on DP Review
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62592594
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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 On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:13.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.