Sparrow
Mentor
When did the Provoke aesthetic start looking ordinary? ... these days everywhere one looks it's wall to wall are, bure, or boke and its just not provocative like it was in the seventies ...
I can recall a time when the inclusion of Seiryu Inoue, Shomei Tomatsu and the inevitable Daido Moriyama's photos in a magazine really stood out, but now with Provoke in its forties is the style just too ordinary these days? I'm not sure the general public ever saw then as anything but 'badly made photos' and in the main they relied on being photographers' photographers for their popularity from the outset
Its a bit like old copies of playboy being better than the modern ones, once we'd seen everything taken to the limits we lost interest, it becomes tacky and clichéd.
I can recall a time when the inclusion of Seiryu Inoue, Shomei Tomatsu and the inevitable Daido Moriyama's photos in a magazine really stood out, but now with Provoke in its forties is the style just too ordinary these days? I'm not sure the general public ever saw then as anything but 'badly made photos' and in the main they relied on being photographers' photographers for their popularity from the outset
Its a bit like old copies of playboy being better than the modern ones, once we'd seen everything taken to the limits we lost interest, it becomes tacky and clichéd.
Black
Photographer.
I am a big fan of the Provoke aesthetic (as we have recently discussed, Stewart) and although, I would agree that more and more people are catching on to it and this will inevitably dilute its impact, I still think it has value.
There are a few photographers who shoot gritty images with the lovely, inky blacks that still drive to concentrate just as much on their content. Jacob Aue Sobol & Anders Petersen especially, but it is obviously a bit much to expect hobbyists to always achieve the same quality of content as the afore mentioned.
I think that there are far too many "bandwagons" in photography - its almost unavoidable to create an original niche.
I don't necessarily think its a bad thing. I've not grown tired of it, yet. There are plenty of other things that I have grown tired of though - so I guess its a case of horses for courses and we're lucky that there are so many other options to choose from if we do ever grow tired of one or the other.
There are a few photographers who shoot gritty images with the lovely, inky blacks that still drive to concentrate just as much on their content. Jacob Aue Sobol & Anders Petersen especially, but it is obviously a bit much to expect hobbyists to always achieve the same quality of content as the afore mentioned.
I think that there are far too many "bandwagons" in photography - its almost unavoidable to create an original niche.
I don't necessarily think its a bad thing. I've not grown tired of it, yet. There are plenty of other things that I have grown tired of though - so I guess its a case of horses for courses and we're lucky that there are so many other options to choose from if we do ever grow tired of one or the other.
Sparrow
Mentor
... you don't draw a distinction between the intrinsic ... say a polaroid loaded with that improbable project film ... and the contrived, a shot distressed in photoshop with a faux artsy black outline stuck on it ...
... don't you find one more of a conceit than the other?
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
To butt in, does it matter? If it is a concious choice on the photographer's part to do something to gain a desired effect, then how can either approach be more conceited than the other?
To the original post, I would say that there have been movements in photography recently which in some superficial ways may resemble this aesthetic, but I don't think the Provoke aesthetic itself is particularly common, especially in the west. It doesn't really look "ordinary" nor do I think many would understand it if one even tried to explain the ideas behind it.
Archlich
Well-known
People love it like they love HCB. Throughout time they successfully tamed what intended to be provocative with aestheticization by calling it classic. It was of the '70s, but now timeless. No longer a movement, but now an aesthetic. Used to be despised of, but now available in our wardrobes. Beautiful (maybe), pleasing (to some), safe or at least tolerable on the museum's wall, with a price tag to seal its value.
Young Japanese photographers are definitely growing out of it, but they don't use Leicas that much so we don't hear about them often.
Young Japanese photographers are definitely growing out of it, but they don't use Leicas that much so we don't hear about them often.
Sparrow
Mentor
To butt in, does it matter? If it is a concious choice on the photographer's part to do something to gain a desired effect, then how can either approach be more conceited than the other?
To the original post, I would say that there have been movements in photography recently which in some superficial ways may resemble this aesthetic, but I don't think the Provoke aesthetic itself is particularly common, especially in the west. It doesn't really look "ordinary" nor do I think many would understand it if one even tried to explain the ideas behind it.
... em, well yes ... it's easier and cheeper to fake it these days ...
... why file out a neg-carrier when one can stick a black outline on an image in photoshop in a few seconds? ... or pop it on instagrm and it will fake it automatically
f16sunshine
Moderator
Including this link for a bit of background.
I was not clear on the origin of this "style".
Maybe others will also find this useful.
http://japan-photo.info/blog/2013/0...ng-a-short-history-of-the-provoke-era-part-2/
I was not clear on the origin of this "style".
Maybe others will also find this useful.
http://japan-photo.info/blog/2013/0...ng-a-short-history-of-the-provoke-era-part-2/
Sparrow
Mentor
... sorry I had assumed common knowledge ... a Japanese photo magazine that started life in the late 1960s that I discovered through Zoom sometime in the seventies ... are, bure, and boke ... are photos that are, dark, rough and blurred.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
Is the process more important than the result? (to me it is, but to others obviously it isn't - and there is no objective answer).
VTHokiEE
Well-known
Thanks for the link, I wasn't aware of the style
Sparrow
Mentor
No, I don't believe it is ... but then, is faking an error a reasonable objective? ... I'm not sure about that are you?
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
Hey you do anything for 40 years and it all starts to blend together, I would think.
f16sunshine
Moderator
I think this is an excellent point.
To use furniture as an example.
The elements of the "Stickley" style show up in many pieces that are not purely from the "craftsman" genre.
Those elements become another selection from the design "palette".
Another color or brush style as another way to say it.
Time releases new opportunities from old disciplines yet the diciplines can remain intact.