If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 13:39:19 -0500, GavinS
wrote: On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:13:19 -0400, "Bowser" wrote: "Interesting." Shoot a picture of something that the viewer of the pic, not necessarily you, find interesting. Excuse me, but that's the whole point of all photography. Was I supposed to be taking photographs of things that only I'm interested in all my life? How silly of me. If I can't capture an image that others will find interesting then what's the point? I find this theme of yours rather strange I guess. Even stranger is any "photographer" who would think that it is supposed to be some kind of unique category or challenge. It is, indeed, a lame excuse for a mandate. It's essentially an "open" competition because any shot of anything is "interesting" in some aspect. Why it was suggested is beyond me, and why it was accepted blows my mind. The idea of a mandate is to get the photographer to stretch a bit in finding subject matter or composing the image and show some imagination. This mandate doesn't require anything like that...just pick a good photo from the library or the current month's shots and call it "interesting". Yechh. Still, I'll probably enter something because I support the concept of the Shoot-In even if I feel let down by the people who suggested and accepted this mandate. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
"Richard" wrote in message ... "GavinS" wrote in message news On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:13:19 -0400, "Bowser" wrote: "Interesting." Shoot a picture of something that the viewer of the pic, not necessarily you, find interesting. Excuse me, but that's the whole point of all photography. Was I supposed to be taking photographs of things that only I'm interested in all my life? How silly of me. If I can't capture an image that others will find interesting then what's the point? I find this theme of yours rather strange I guess. Even stranger is any "photographer" who would think that it is supposed to be some kind of unique category or challenge. Well, excuse me. I take photos for my own selfish ends. If others find them interesting bothers me not one bit. Sometimes they do mostly they don't, what difference does it make? To take a photo that truly interests everyone else is a pretty tough task. Just my opinion. I find it interesting that most artists I've talked to seem to say the same thing, "I do this because I love it. If others share my pleasure, great. If not, that's too bad, but I don't do it for them; I do it for myself." To me, this is the dividing line between a professional and an artist. The professional does it to put food on the table, so he / she is more interested in the opinion of others, so they subordinate their own taste to the bottom line. The true artist, to his or her own financial detriment, always gives free reign to personal taste. In essence, this challenge is asking for "professional" shots. For me, that will be a challenge, so I may just have to submit something this time. Take Care, Dudley |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
GavinS wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:13:19 -0400, "Bowser" wrote: "Interesting." Shoot a picture of something that the viewer of the pic, not necessarily you, find interesting. Excuse me, but that's the whole point of all photography. Was I supposed to be taking photographs of things that only I'm interested in all my life? How silly of me. If I can't capture an image that others will find interesting then what's the point? I find this theme of yours rather strange I guess. Even stranger is any "photographer" who would think that it is supposed to be some kind of unique category or challenge. Some photos might be just peaceful & pretty. More soothing than stimulating. Much popular art appeals through soothing familiarity and avoids anything that prompts curiosity or uniqueness. Or it could be a physically stimulating image that's pretty & sparkly but offers no intellectual stimulation whatsoever, hence uninteresting. Like most sunset shots. NTTAWWT If you aren't interested in arsty fartsyness, another option is something technically interesting, like Bowser's example of the old airplane with a V8 engine. Not to say Bowser isn't artsy fartsy g just that example. Official transcripts from the Shoot-In advisory board team committee group panel discussion meeting show that there was also the suggestion that folks could submit a pic of a subject showing concerted interest in something like wildlife stalking prey or a person studying something with a raised and furrowed brow. Try a portrait where the face shows curiosity, that's a pretty novel idea. Some faces are just boring beautiful, some faces are fascinating and complex. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
"Dudley Hanks" wrote in message news:tl0dm.39083$PH1.26387@edtnps82... "Richard" wrote in message ... "GavinS" wrote in message news On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:13:19 -0400, "Bowser" wrote: "Interesting." Shoot a picture of something that the viewer of the pic, not necessarily you, find interesting. Excuse me, but that's the whole point of all photography. Was I supposed to be taking photographs of things that only I'm interested in all my life? How silly of me. If I can't capture an image that others will find interesting then what's the point? I find this theme of yours rather strange I guess. Even stranger is any "photographer" who would think that it is supposed to be some kind of unique category or challenge. Well, excuse me. I take photos for my own selfish ends. If others find them interesting bothers me not one bit. Sometimes they do mostly they don't, what difference does it make? To take a photo that truly interests everyone else is a pretty tough task. Just my opinion. I find it interesting that most artists I've talked to seem to say the same thing, "I do this because I love it. If others share my pleasure, great. If not, that's too bad, but I don't do it for them; I do it for myself." To me, this is the dividing line between a professional and an artist. The professional does it to put food on the table, so he / she is more interested in the opinion of others, so they subordinate their own taste to the bottom line. The true artist, to his or her own financial detriment, always gives free reign to personal taste. In essence, this challenge is asking for "professional" shots. For me, that will be a challenge, so I may just have to submit something this time. Take Care, Dudley Errrm no. I see not the mandate for "professional" shots. But, anyway hypothetically, are you attacking this one from your professional side or your artistic side? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
"Richard" wrote in message ... "Dudley Hanks" wrote in message news:tl0dm.39083$PH1.26387@edtnps82... "Richard" wrote in message ... "GavinS" wrote in message news On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:13:19 -0400, "Bowser" wrote: "Interesting." Shoot a picture of something that the viewer of the pic, not necessarily you, find interesting. Excuse me, but that's the whole point of all photography. Was I supposed to be taking photographs of things that only I'm interested in all my life? How silly of me. If I can't capture an image that others will find interesting then what's the point? I find this theme of yours rather strange I guess. Even stranger is any "photographer" who would think that it is supposed to be some kind of unique category or challenge. Well, excuse me. I take photos for my own selfish ends. If others find them interesting bothers me not one bit. Sometimes they do mostly they don't, what difference does it make? To take a photo that truly interests everyone else is a pretty tough task. Just my opinion. I find it interesting that most artists I've talked to seem to say the same thing, "I do this because I love it. If others share my pleasure, great. If not, that's too bad, but I don't do it for them; I do it for myself." To me, this is the dividing line between a professional and an artist. The professional does it to put food on the table, so he / she is more interested in the opinion of others, so they subordinate their own taste to the bottom line. The true artist, to his or her own financial detriment, always gives free reign to personal taste. In essence, this challenge is asking for "professional" shots. For me, that will be a challenge, so I may just have to submit something this time. Take Care, Dudley Errrm no. I see not the mandate for "professional" shots. But, anyway hypothetically, are you attacking this one from your professional side or your artistic side? There's a shot I'd LOVE to do, but I know I'd be attacked for trying to get points by using the "freak show" angle to my advantage. While I can pretty much guarranttee EVERYONE would find the shot INTERESTING, I doubt I'll take it, although I may chat with the fellow and see how he feels about it. That shot could be done either artistically or professionally -- I'd probably go pro on it since the more artistic it got, the louder the howls of outrage would be. For me, the real challenge is to come up with a professional shot, indistinguishable from something you might see from a sighted pro in a newspaper or magazine, something that is interesting purely from it's content, composition subject and traditional technical merit, so that's the route I'm favouring -- at the moment. But, that other shot is so darn tempting ... Take Care, Dudley |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
Dudley Hanks wrote:
Richard wrote Dudley Hanks wrote I find it interesting that most artists I've talked to seem to say the same thing, "I do this because I love it. If others share my pleasure, great. If not, that's too bad, but I don't do it for them; I do it for myself." To me, this is the dividing line between a professional and an artist. The professional does it to put food on the table, so he / she is more interested in the opinion of others, so they subordinate their own taste to the bottom line. The true artist, to his or her own financial detriment, always gives free reign to personal taste. In essence, this challenge is asking for "professional" shots. For me, that will be a challenge, so I may just have to submit something this time. Errrm no. I see not the mandate for "professional" shots. But, anyway hypothetically, are you attacking this one from your professional side or your artistic side? There's a shot I'd LOVE to do, but I know I'd be attacked for trying to get points by using the "freak show" angle to my advantage. While I can pretty much guarranttee EVERYONE would find the shot INTERESTING, I doubt I'll take it, although I may chat with the fellow and see how he feels about it. That shot could be done either artistically or professionally -- I'd probably go pro on it since the more artistic it got, the louder the howls of outrage would be. For me, the real challenge is to come up with a professional shot, indistinguishable from something you might see from a sighted pro in a newspaper or magazine, something that is interesting purely from it's content, composition subject and traditional technical merit, so that's the route I'm favouring -- at the moment. But, that other shot is so darn tempting ... Freak shows can be interesting but according to the 'is it art' definition of interesting, pure shock value might not be interesting if it's too blatant. Commercial work is often not interesting, like advertising it may be just appealing to a predictable response in the public. Some TV commercials are genuinely interesting though, and as long as it isn't a lie, that's legit. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
"Paul Furman" wrote in message ... Dudley Hanks wrote: Richard wrote Dudley Hanks wrote I find it interesting that most artists I've talked to seem to say the same thing, "I do this because I love it. If others share my pleasure, great. If not, that's too bad, but I don't do it for them; I do it for myself." To me, this is the dividing line between a professional and an artist. The professional does it to put food on the table, so he / she is more interested in the opinion of others, so they subordinate their own taste to the bottom line. The true artist, to his or her own financial detriment, always gives free reign to personal taste. In essence, this challenge is asking for "professional" shots. For me, that will be a challenge, so I may just have to submit something this time. Errrm no. I see not the mandate for "professional" shots. But, anyway hypothetically, are you attacking this one from your professional side or your artistic side? There's a shot I'd LOVE to do, but I know I'd be attacked for trying to get points by using the "freak show" angle to my advantage. While I can pretty much guarranttee EVERYONE would find the shot INTERESTING, I doubt I'll take it, although I may chat with the fellow and see how he feels about it. That shot could be done either artistically or professionally -- I'd probably go pro on it since the more artistic it got, the louder the howls of outrage would be. For me, the real challenge is to come up with a professional shot, indistinguishable from something you might see from a sighted pro in a newspaper or magazine, something that is interesting purely from it's content, composition subject and traditional technical merit, so that's the route I'm favouring -- at the moment. But, that other shot is so darn tempting ... Freak shows can be interesting but according to the 'is it art' definition of interesting, pure shock value might not be interesting if it's too blatant. Commercial work is often not interesting, like advertising it may be just appealing to a predictable response in the public. Some TV commercials are genuinely interesting though, and as long as it isn't a lie, that's legit. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam That's what makes this one so tough. The fellow is a long-time, dearly beloved friend of mine. Like me, he has RP, but he has taken his talents in a different direction: he does fabulous carpentry work. In addition to the RP, he has a physical mutation which isn't really shocking, just interesting; it's possibly a preview of where the human race could be heading. Unfortunately, though, like myself, once noticed, the mutation invariably attracts unwanted attention from others, and has caused him a rather lot of ugly encounters. The reason why I don't disregard the idea outright is because I know him, and I think he'd like an opportunity to explain that he is just another human being, and that while he is unable to "fit" into society in a "normal" sense, there is really no reason why it is impossible. Take Care, Dudley |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
On Sun, 02 Aug 2009 04:43:17 +1000, The pixel Bandit wrote:
: Bowser wrote: : : "Robert Coe" wrote in message : ... : On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:57:09 -0700 (PDT), Noons : wrote: : : On Jul 31, 11:33 am, Robert Coe wrote: : : : : which we all have to get along, or it ceases to be fun. : : : : Bob : : : : I'm truly amazed you're still here, if you're after "fun". : : Touché, I guess. But then what's your excuse (for staying)? Your campaign : against people posting to aus.photo seems to have largely petered out. : : Why don't you send something to the Shoot-In next time? Or do you, : under a : different name? I never figured you for a sock, but you never know. : : First rule of the shoot-in: trolls have endless hours to complain about : it but no time at all to shoot and submit. : : So someone who once upon a time could have been correctly : described as a prolific poster to shootin ...who thinks this : management is stuffing it up even worse than the last and : decides to protest about the dismal decline in submissions : they lamely tried to cover up by taking three pics instead of : one as submissions... FWIW, the "previous management" also accepted three pictures. I think it's A Good Thing, and you're the only one I've seen complain about it. : And straight away they are a troll? If the shoe fits, ... : Get a life Bowser. And for God's sake stop re-posting this : crap all over Usenet will you? It's a thankless task. And I guess some claim that your administration wasn't very well regarded. Bob |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 11:20:11 -0700, Paul Furman wrote:
: Robert Coe wrote: : On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 09:51:51 +1200, Eric Stevens : wrote: : : On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 06:29:36 -0400, "Bowser" wrote: : : : : See the rulez page for more info: : : : : http://www.pbase.com/shootin/rulzpage : : : : Oops. I didn't know that. : : : : I've sent in a submission which doesn't follow your file naming : : convention. Should I do it again with a corrected file name? : : You've already submitted an entry that isn't due until August 5?? : : September 5 Doh! Obviously. Sorry. But it was a typo, not a misunderstanding. The point stands. ;^) Bob |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
[SI] New Mandate: Interesting (see description)
On Sat, 01 Aug 2009 19:25:30 GMT, "Dudley Hanks"
wrote: : : "Richard" wrote in message : ... : : "Dudley Hanks" wrote in message : news:tl0dm.39083$PH1.26387@edtnps82... : : "Richard" wrote in message : ... : : "GavinS" wrote in message : news : On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:13:19 -0400, "Bowser" wrote: : : "Interesting." Shoot a picture of something that the viewer of the pic, : not : necessarily you, find interesting. : : Excuse me, but that's the whole point of all photography. Was I : supposed to : be taking photographs of things that only I'm interested in all my : life? : How silly of me. If I can't capture an image that others will find : interesting then what's the point? I find this theme of yours rather : strange I guess. Even stranger is any "photographer" who would think : that : it is supposed to be some kind of unique category or challenge. : : Well, excuse me. I take photos for my own selfish ends. If others find : them interesting bothers me not one bit. Sometimes they do mostly they : don't, what difference does it make? : To take a photo that truly interests everyone else is a pretty tough : task. : Just my opinion. : : : : I find it interesting that most artists I've talked to seem to say the : same thing, "I do this because I love it. If others share my pleasure, : great. If not, that's too bad, but I don't do it for them; I do it for : myself." : : To me, this is the dividing line between a professional and an artist. : The professional does it to put food on the table, so he / she is more : interested in the opinion of others, so they subordinate their own taste : to the bottom line. The true artist, to his or her own financial : detriment, always gives free reign to personal taste. : : In essence, this challenge is asking for "professional" shots. For me, : that will be a challenge, so I may just have to submit something this : time. : : Take Care, : Dudley : : Errrm no. I see not the mandate for "professional" shots. But, anyway : hypothetically, are you attacking this one from your professional side or : your artistic side? : : : : There's a shot I'd LOVE to do, but I know I'd be attacked for trying to get : points by using the "freak show" angle to my advantage. While I can pretty : much guarranttee EVERYONE would find the shot INTERESTING, I doubt I'll take : it, although I may chat with the fellow and see how he feels about it. : : That shot could be done either artistically or professionally -- I'd : probably go pro on it since the more artistic it got, the louder the howls : of outrage would be. : : For me, the real challenge is to come up with a professional shot, : indistinguishable from something you might see from a sighted pro in a : newspaper or magazine, something that is interesting purely from it's : content, composition subject and traditional technical merit, so that's the : route I'm favouring -- at the moment. : : But, that other shot is so darn tempting ... Well, you get to submit three ... Bob |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[SI] Shootin Reminders: Mandate: Tubes & Special Mandate PanoMosaicsDUE 2008.10.26 | Alan Browne | 35mm Photo Equipment | 2 | October 25th 08 04:05 PM |
[SI] Shootin Reminders: Mandate: Tubes & Special Mandate PanoMosaicsDUE 2008.10.26 | Alan Browne | Digital Photography | 0 | October 16th 08 09:55 PM |
[SI] Shootin Reminders: Mandate: Tubes & Special Mandate PanoMosaicsDUE 2008.10.26 | Alan Browne | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | October 16th 08 09:55 PM |
[SI] Shootin Reminders: Mandate: Tubes & Special Mandate PanoMosaicsDUE 2008.10.26 | Alan Browne | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | October 16th 08 09:54 PM |