The unfamiliar, the unusual, breaking the rules

Most members of OPF are professionals, I think. There is a definite "standard," a certain "expectation" of the images posted here. Now...don't misunderstand! A forum's admins can design and run a forum any way they wish. It's their right, after all, and those who object are free to start their own fora. So, the purpose of my musings are to understand our reaction to images, to art in general, and not to complain or "rabble rouse."

The definite standards and expectations of OPF have helped me formulate, get a feel for something I've observed in all forms of art. If something is too far outside of our comfort zone we dislike and reject it. Sometimes, we do this out of hand and never stop to give it time or consideration. Many people know that Sigmund Freud's theory of psychoanalysis was heavily autobiographical. We understand the world by observing ourselves. In this situation, I've played both roles: the rebel who colors outside the lines and she who rejects work that goes outside the lines.

I've been pondering this issue. (Charlotte's work has pushed me on this.) We limit ourselves and the arts by our self-imposed inability to .... searching for the word here.....well, all I can come up with is "go outside our comfort zone."

Any thoughts on this?

Hi Rachel

personally - having a arty background, and working for artits - I don't believe in that comfort-zone/rejection-idea, as a general rule. Therefore, I don't care really a image beeing from a °free° artist vs paid pro, even I'm aware of different rules between these two.

It's the image that matters, and what it sparks or provokes, I like images that hold my breath, so talking about expectations, that would be the point.

A pro not trying to push the border further isn't a real pro. Same for the artist.

BTW: I don't think we' ve more pro's than amateure's, here.

Guess everyone looks like a pro to me! Almost everything posted is really good!

Michael Fontana said:

Hi Rachel

personally - having a arty background, and working for artits - I don't believe in that comfort-zone/rejection-idea, as a general rule. Therefore, I don't care really a image beeing from a °free° artist vs paid pro, even I'm aware of different rules between these two.

It's the image that matters, and what it sparks or provokes, I like images that hold my breath, so talking about expectations, that would be the point.

A pro not trying to push the border further isn't a real pro. Same for the artist.

BTW: I don't think we' ve more pro's than amateure's, here.

Click to expand...

I agree. For example, I remember the first time as a young person when I saw sculptures of Miro or Botero which were -at that time- way outside of my comfort zone. Still, there was immediate attraction and the wish to see and feel more. This pattern has repeated itself everytime I have discovered some other artist along the way. For me, it is indeed the piece of art that really matters, not the comfort zone.

Rachel Foster said:

Guess everyone looks like a pro to me! Almost everything posted is really good!

Click to expand...

Don't forget the fact that most people post only what they think is really good here.

Begs the question..is any artistic work undertaken to please an audience or to satisfy one's desire to
create some work to portray things as one sees them or would like to see them. for self or for others?

I confess that a lot of artistic ( ? ) output leaves me scratching my head. I just do not get it. With
philosophical dissertations abounding re: some artistic ( ? ) creations, I realise thatI do not have it!

On the other hand, is it uncouth to not like something when others are ahhing and woohing about it?

As a case in point, most of the photographic images of the so called masters of light of the 30s,40s,50s etc. would be considered technically unfit and I would press the delete key. The image quality is atrocious to say the least. The subject..well when one has what the masses do not possess any subject would
be met with wonder.

This is not to take away anything from those that created it. just that it is just that..an early attempt.
Just like the early x-rays. It was and is an awesome invention...but would be considered of dubious
value compared to present day quality and problem identification.

I am in the minority ( I guess ) when I find the icons of photography of the early part of this century
are famous because they had access to equipment which the masses did not posses. I am of the opinion that its uniqueness ( in most cases ) and praise owes a lot to the era in which it was created..not necessarily the quality of execution.

Then of course there are works of the past and the present that I enjoy...the Simpsons being one of them!

Guess art truly is in the eyes of the beholder. And there is the highest probability that I personally
am not gifted with the artistic eyes and emotions that others have.

Peace.

Cem_Usakligil said:

Don't forget the fact that most people post only what they think is really good here.

Click to expand...

Cem,
I don't mind it, and don't even want to think about it, OPF becoming a photographer's youtube

Of course, but remember: Some of us don't yet have a handle on what IS "really good." How else are we to learn? Now, I am fully aware that this is not a photography school (I'm at one this very moment!) but unless you want to change the name from Open to Restricted, you're going to have some of those (we) who don't yet know.

Rachel Foster said:

Of course, but remember: Some of us don't yet have a handle on what IS "really good." How else are we to learn? Now, I am fully aware that this is not a photography school (I'm at one this very moment!) but unless you want to change the name from Open to Restricted, you're going to have some of those (we) who don't yet know.

Click to expand...

And exactly for those reasons you've stated, we have created two specific forums. When in doubt, use them:
Entry Digital Photography
Riskit!

Yup, you'll find me there.

Good morning, Rachel

"what IS really good"
A difficult question, implying personal questions as well as cultural ones.
I'm not here to draw the line, as the future will tell it anyway; similar to art, with today's huge production - but only a small amount will survive - be recognized as really good.

Something really good puts the border fuhrter, sometimes in little, nearly unvisible steps, sometimes having a big run.

"How else are we to learn?"
By practising, which leads to a constant debate with yourself about images, its power - not only your own ones. This debate, or visual training will off course change the way you look at picture's and become °natural° - doing it when walking down the street, and seeing some adds.

Images have - unlike words, literature, etc - no fixed grammar, there's no letter A beeing for everbody a A. So there's alwith a unutered thing in a image.

The word image has its roots in the latin "imago", which is closed to the magician.
And yes, I like images to be magick, not in a tecnical sense, but a visual one, kinda get the smell of a picture.

Obviuosly, not everbody becomes a magician - that's life - and no every shot from a magician-photographer is magick. But I want to see - in the pictures themself- not in words - someone trying hard to become a magician, smelling the images taste....hearing its sound (that one would be in a discussion with George) feeling its space....

Off course, some time and passion is required to get there.

I hope my metaphor is understandable...

Well said, Michael!

I am learning, slowly but surely. It does take a great deal of work and passion and that, I think, is what has me hooked. When I look back on images I produced some months back I can CLEARLY see the difference. The learning process -- for me -- has occurred in response to producing an image first; then, reproducing it til the missing elements get "fixed." It seems that I "get" what's wrong when I finally see it done right.

Another factor in my learning process is that I'm willing to open myself up to criticism at any level. That can be tricky for the newbie because not everyone's criticism is consistent with the photographer's vision, and not all critique/advice will be universally agreed upon by those "in the know." So, the new shooter has to be open but able to stay true to her/his "arc of intent."

Back to the original point, though: When we see "rule-breaking" images our tendency is, quite often, to reject. It's like a new haircut. Often we have to get used to it before we like it. Related to the "posting best images" element, I only wanted to point out that recognizing what our best is will be a laborious learning process for some of us. I look at some things I shot last autumn and think "UGH!" Then I look at others and think "How did I miss THIS one?"

So, tying up the loose ends: How to tell when an image is good, lousy, good-but-boundary-pushing, or..........?

Rachel Foster said:

So, tying up the loose ends: How to tell when an image is good, lousy, good-but-boundary-pushing, or..........?

Click to expand...

Helas, ma chére

you' ve got to found that out yourself!

(Nobody can speak your words)

"How did I miss THIS one?""
That's human - and parth of the passion-track, as you revisite the picts.

It's probably also human to long for a guru to whisper the secret in our ear, I suppose. In the meantiim, I'll keep working at it!

We have to risk being wrong!

Rachel Foster said:

It's probably also human to long for a guru to whisper the secret in our ear, I suppose. In the meantiim, I'll keep working at it!

Click to expand...

Hi Rachel,

Gurus have their limited purpose for initial teaching and focus. That's easily over-exploited in marketing aids such as workshops, books and instructional DVD's to help us gain professional and artistic competence. I have mixed feelings about this. That's why I prefer we eschew such titles. With rare exceptions gurus fail to meet the standards marketed.

Here we just have to struggle* realizing that many times we have to go back to the beginning and reevaluate our own work and opinions on everything. It's that openness above all that has allowed creativity of man.

Asher

*Most here will not dislike a portrait because it's centered or a pole is behind the head or the face is blue and purple. We will however, retain some cynicism as we try to distinguish between worthless fiddling with filters on average snapshots from rarer work that provides us something compelling that we'd want to revisit.

Yes, all too true.

I have to remind myself that unless *I* come to the answer myself I'll not be convinced. Hard-headed, I suppose, but that's me.

Thanks.

walks in the door unsuspecting and finds her name in Rachel's beautfiful thought inspiring thread

my father was head engineer for one of Houston's biggest oil firms- my inspiration for life he was-
he told me to always think out of the box" reach for the always world where you can find something new" never ever settle for less than your passion"
so I guess this shows in high trump around the forum* he was the most genuine man I have ever known" but being southern I was a daddy's girl"

art for me is a stimulation of "what could be"
not what is"
I continue to learn from all aspects of the arts that I participate in today and believe me it is ever changing and such a rush-
art is a big soul with the devil's laugh" ( just my own observation) - love/hate thing
push-pull- come here-go there
a horrible fate at best
but we are that
we are the colors that blend and stretch, that swim and drown that come back up for air
that count down and pull our hair out
but we produce what humanity loves to see- gives them a glimpse of who we are-who they are
the world!

Charlotte

You do challenge me, Charlotte, and others as well. I suspect some find that (and me!) frustrating. I value being made to examine my biases and preconceived notions. Thank you.

Just an aside....whether any one thinks I'm good enough or not, I am semi pro. I do have a studio and I have sold pieces.

Just goes to show....don't assume.

Rachel

I have been challenged by the very best in my writing- I cannot tell you how hard it was then- but today- something beautiful- I understand what challenge is in art-
I am not even close to a professional in photography and whatever that is
means nothing to me- what means to me is who I am in expressing my art* the art that I am
the world that I belong to as a respectable human being in that art-
art is all
we have some talent to capture and show-we are blessed to do that..truly so..
a gift!
in my poetry I give to charity on some basis-
I care for art first-then comes the reward
if you care about reward first then you shall never find a voice in art--- and I am in No way talking about you
but what I feel as an artist-ME

I havent picked up a camera in a long time-been doing this for maybe less than a year
just goes to show you where you might find another avenue -

Charlotte

No two photographers are the same.

The contents of everyone else's creative spirit are more or less unfamiliar.

The rules by which we photograph distill down to the principle that we tend to make pictures that are reminiscent of the ones that we have seen that we like. Very few photographers, professionals aside, can prosper by making pictures they hate.

Goodness in art, artistic integrity if you like, rests solidly on the basis that the pictures you make turn out exactly as you want. Not surprisingly much visual art has been construed on the opposite basis; what ever comes out is good because the artist cannot in principle be wrong. Any art predicated upon the idea that success really means successful deception of the self or others merits no respect.

Complete command of the photograph making process is essential. This is too hard for beginners, experimenters, and dilettantes, but is easy enough for anyone who is sufficiently serious. Once the technical skills are in place your photographs celebrate what you see, think, and feel. They are in effect mind-maps and as good an art as has ever been made.

Photographs you make today won't match the ones you make next year because you, the photographer, will be different too. Provided creative integrity prevails there is no good or bad in this; nothing to apologise for.

If financial gain or the imprimatur of art-culture is the prize then art photography becomes a clever device. Things unfamiliar, unusual, and transgressive become powerful tools in this game because they draw attention to themselves. Success, for what is worth, is assured if you can consistently startle the bourgeoisie.

Maris, I agree with much of what you've said, but have not found this to be my experience: "but is easy enough for anyone who is sufficiently serious." I'm very serious but have put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into my progress. Perhaps it's a case of wanting too much too fast, but at times it's been hard...very hard.

Welcome to OPF! I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts!

Photography is easy, well, compared to flying a helicopter or playing flamenco guitar and there are lots of people who achieve those things.

At a basic philosophical level the phrase "difficulties with photography" is code for "the pictures don't come out the way I want". It's my possibly biassed experience over the last four decades or so that most people are unable to conceptualise a photograph in sufficient detail to actually "want" something definite. Instead they hope something will turn out that looks nice or clever. Folks who do only camera-work or camera-play have no input into the connection between "click" and "pic" and are at the mercy of those who make their photographs for them. And they have no legitimate basis for complaint.

If you want more then you need to use photographic systems that provide a direct connection between what you do and what you get. This means no auto anything. This means conducting the entire photographic process, from the earliest picture idea to the final hardcopy, by yourself. When you control everything, conceptualisation, subject management, image management, exposure management, processing work-flow, picture production, and final presentation you have a strong learning feed-back loop. Very soon your pictures come out right virtually 100% of the time. That's the easy part.

The hard part comes next. That's where I get stuck a lot of the time. Even though my photographs come out the way I want, too often the wanting itself is short of excellence. The cure is simply more talent, imagination, vision, and energy; quantities in limited supply here but perhaps more abundant in your corner of OPF!

Conceptualization in Photography!

Maris Rusis said:

Photography is easy, well, compared to flying a helicopter or playing flamenco guitar and there are lots of people who achieve those things. ............

If you want more then you need to use photographic systems that provide a direct connection between what you do and what you get. This means no auto anything. This means conducting the entire photographic process, from the earliest picture idea to the final hardcopy, by yourself. When you control everything, conceptualisation, subject management, image management, exposure management, processing work-flow, picture production, and final presentation you have a strong learning feed-back loop. Very soon your pictures come out right virtually 100% of the time. That's the easy part.

The hard part comes next. That's where I get stuck a lot of the time. Even though my photographs come out the way I want, too often the wanting itself is short of excellence. The cure is simply more talent, imagination, vision, and energy; quantities in limited supply here but perhaps more abundant in your corner of OPF!

Click to expand...

Maris,

I like your writings.

Conceptualization is perhaps the hardest thing. Being made to obey rules, sitting in a seat and not staring out the window during class in school 40 minutes at a time, day after day, for years on end, suppresses much of that.

We then see tasks and goals as requiring just an ordered use of tricks and tools. For photography, that works, but that is not necessarily of value or art. For the latter, we have to breathe life back into the nostrils of the phoenix, otherwise all our tools will fail us in putting some worthwhile fingerprint on our work!

Asher