LightShow wrote:
I just wish I had some popcorn....
A funny thing about an artist, their art and people's opinion about their art,
The artist will create something to express a thought/feeling/etc...
People will then comment on it, but their opinions don't really matter because it is art,
it's the fact you formed an opinion that matters.
Some would say that it is others' opinions of our opinions that matters the most.
In actual fact, only beer matters. The rest of the universe is merely a beer support system. Photography only gives us a way to enjoy cracking open a beer to look at the results, or discuss them online.
S Dilworth wrote:
Sure, I wasn’t being serious. But does anyone know why Eggleston is so often credited with that first show of colour photography at MoMA? Was it just a question of scale, or was it advertised as the first, or what? It’s intriguing!
Sidetrack: " target="_blank" rel="nofollow">William Eggleston in the Real World is unmissable for anyone who likes Eggleston or just photography. You can get the DVD on eBay, but no matter what the seller says, it’s only available as a Region 1 disc (which is difficult to play in Europe).
Not sure about the MoMA thing. I think that, because Eggleston and Co. jump started the color movement, that mistake gets made. I certainly forgot that Haas did a MoMA show.
Eggleston did use dye transfer prints, which was unusual in fine art photography.
Corollaries: not everyone thinks that certain photos are art. Not everyone likes the same art. Not everyone respects the same art. Exhibiting photos does not make one an artist. Being successful does not make one an artist.
Exdsc wrote:
... only a genius photographs a green shower and ends up in MOMA....
A genius at what? He was certainly good at convincing others that his photography was somehow Important, whatever that means. But how would Eggleston's or Moriyama's equipment choice matter to anyone who doesn't want to copy that style?
carstenw wrote:
Corollaries: not everyone thinks that certain photos are art. Not everyone likes the same art. Not everyone respects the same art. Exhibiting photos does not make one an artist. Being successful does not make one an artist.
But to get back to the original post for a second...
Why oh why would one take boring, mindless photos with a point and shoot when they can take equally boring, mindless photos with a full frame dSLR and some lovely old, manual focus lenses?
Example: "Boring as Shit" (but the process was enjoyable and, bonus, it will mean something to most people who have read this thread thoroughly! )
I would think that any "real photographer" (the OP's words, not mine) would truly appreciate the entire process of making a photo. Nice gear makes the experience more pleasurable.
cogitech wrote:
Why oh why would one take boring, mindless photos with a point and shoot when they can take equally boring, mindless photos with a full frame dSLR and some lovely old, manual focus lenses?
Daido Moriyama does apparently have "real" reasons for this --- he genuinely, personally dislikes the SLR shooting experience, interposing a clunky camera between the viewer and the subject, missing the moment fiddling with framing and focus, and drawing unwanted attention from human subjects with imposing gear. These are many of the same reasons that attract photographers to, e.g., Leica rangefinders for street work; only, without additionally worrying that the photos have a high level of technical excellence, a cheap P&S obtains the same goals. The results, of course, still speak for themselves
)