FlyPenFly wrote:
You know what's a fun game at gallery openings? I'll name drop random Japanese and Nordic names combined together and ask people if they've ever heard of him and if they think its a bit derivative of another made up name.
You'd have to be very selective. Even posh posers can tell that Yoshihiro Odegaarde is probably not a "real photographer".
RustyBug wrote:
Persistence in search for his voice (even if not finding it for 50 years) ... now that makes more sense to me than intent of no intent or an intentionally message-less message in his images themselves.
Bifurcator wrote:
The genera as I understand it and as hundreds of others submerged in it have explained; it's not the intent of no intent messagelessly. It's the attempt to communicate stillness in harmony with one's surroundings - the message of non-intension (kinda). This is the zen thing I mentioned before. It's like being in a rapid river as opposed to observing it from the shore. From the shore it looks confused and turbulent, destructive and chaotic. But floating downstream in it things appear calm and fluid. This is a very large and very loud part of Japanese social consciousness and I see it expressed in the indigenous art here a lot. This is one reason why I think his work is so stereo-typical and average. The first time I experienced an awareness of this form of zen myself was about 30 years ago in the underground here in Japan. There were millions of black headed people all orderly going to or from somewhere all wearing essentially the same thing and moving in like manner (like a river) yet there was a unique beauty in whichever direction I looked. Standing still in it was an entirely different feeling than "going with the flow" so to speak like the river example of being on the shore or in it. To capture and share this experience needs a kind of mindlessness. You're not minding the subject nor the camera much just kinda going with the flow of what would otherwise appear chaotic and "sampling" the sights and energies as you go. Yeah, just basically randomly snapping snapshots as you tool around in the flow of things - indeed.
Once back at the computer with your digitized "experience" you sort for the ones which had some interesting composition, contrast, moment, or whatever and try to accentuate that feeling in post, and then publish. If the person is good at recognizing the key attributes during the sort and was competent in timing and direction during the shoot and additionally knowledgable of how to use PS like tools to accentuate then the communication of this conscious mindlessness (or mindless consciousness?) and flow within chaos can be very strong and profound. I dunno, maybe profound isn't the right word but it strikes certain human chords if you get me. Diado's stuff however is weak in all of those departments so to me it comes off as very average and unexceptional. I think it's a legitimate genera but just Diado isn't a very good example of it. And I guess that's why a lot of other people here didn't "get it" either - he's not accomplished at expressing the art of this genera even tho he may have received acclaim for it.
Again just me 2¢. ...Show more → RustyBug wrote:
Thanks Bif ... I get that.
I know that "sea of flow" thing you are referring to. It can come in the form of a flock of birds, a river, the ocean, mass transit, a fog bank, etc. It is kinda like standing on a ridge and letting the wind pass by you, feeling its embrace and considering it's motion that seems to happen effortlessly and in its own harmony unto itself ... as if it is totally unaware and unaffected by your presence, even though it moves about you.
Yup, only in Diado's case (and most others from this genera) he's talking about "The City" and life in the city.
But, I don't think that "mindless" is what generates ones ability to see or connect to that. Rather, (imo) one must be "mindful", yet from a different perspective, one that is rather minimal of being self minded. There is a serenity that accompanies smooth flow ... like watching a whale swim ... and excitement that comes from rapid movement of a breach or tail slap ... or the mesmerizing view of watching the water cascade off the tail during a slow submersion. Seeing things for how they move or interact is different than seeing them for the "thing" that they are.
Maybe that's why we think he fails? I dunno... I never really tried to achieve this kind of photography myself So I dunno what it takes... But I know when it strikes the intended chords.
I can certainly appreciate that ... and while I haven't spent a lifetime in Japan, I've been in the Orient enough to have witnessed what you've presented in the culture as well. I get that, and can appreciate it just fine. But, like you ... I'm not seeing any of that presented in the discussed works presented by the OP.
I'm seeing it presented... just not presented well.
cogitech wrote:
You'd have to be very selective. Even posh posers can tell that Yoshihiro Odegaarde is probably not a "real photographer".
Well, that's exactly why I don't let the opinions of posh posers tell me what "real" photography is --- I've got all of Yo Ode's books, and she's one of my greatest inspirations in the modern photo scene. But obviously some people just don't get art.
Bifurcator wrote:
I'm seeing it presented... just not presented well.
Gotcha ... which is likely why people are having such a difficult time "getting it". As with many things image related, sometimes the viewer needs a bit more help to "see" it than might otherwise be thought necessary.
For those who truly want the viewer to "get it" ... they generally aspire to to help them do so either in the image itself, or as augmentation via explanation. For others, who might not be concerned with whether or not a viewer "gets it" ... they may have a tendency to say things like "you just don't get it" and some even feel Exdsc wrote:
people need to be put on their place
for "not getting it".
I've just been asking the person who has so astutely advocated that he "gets it" to kindly explain it to those of us who haven't gotten it just yet. Yet, this reasonable request has remained absent of an effort from the OP (who "assumedly" sought to advocate Daido by originating the post) to offer such additional assistance that I (et al) might be able to learn something and come to a place where we do "get it."
The reality is that Bif has done more to try and explain Daido (alongside his opinion) to those of us who "don't get it" than the OP ... while the OP has been too busy trying to put us in our place.
I'd still like to hear from Exdsc regarding his explanation of Daido, in such a manner that would help foster others "getting it" a bit better ... thereby helping his fellow FM'ers grow in consideration of, even if not appreciation for, Daido.
redisburning wrote:
I see, so because OP has acted inappropriately it's OK to all of a sudden judge his body of work?
carstenw wrote:
You are doing some very selective reading here.
Is this your way of showing humility?
redisburning wrote:
FWIW I do not consider myself to be part of that [highly talented people at FM] subset.
I do seem to have a better understanding....
...fits in with people's demonstrated pretentiousness regarding their own photographs.
An attempt at irony perhaps? Why is my bullshit meter pegged? <shrug>
And why is it that every 3 to 5 months a thread comes along in which people voluntarily display some sort of emotional breakdown in public? <shrug> <shrug>
It's funny to watch. That's for sure. Too bad this thread started in with hyper-examining each other instead of examining Diado and his work. Because Diado is acclaimed it's more interesting to tear him up than each other - at least for me. <shrug> <shrug> <shrug>
there is little payoff to explaining things to people who don't get it.
for example, no one would be able to explain country music in a way to me that would make me get it.
but, where I would simply admit that I have no interest in getting country music, people here have used the opportunity to voice their opinions, which as best I can tell come from looking at a handful of images on the guy's website, as if it were the word of God Himself.
maybe this thread will get locked. then we can go back to circle jerking each other over landscapes fitting the hyperfocally focused one subject in foreground leading into pretty background formula.
what is most disappointing isn't that people don't like Daido. like I said, I don't personally like his modern work very much myself. but people's actions make this place look more like a collection of drunk monkeys than photography enthusiasts looking to better ourselves and our craft/hobby/passion.
redisburning wrote:
there is little payoff to explaining things to people who don't get it.
That is the equivalent of saying that people are incapable of learning and growing. This is a vastly different thing from those of us who are merely ignorant and are asking to be afforded an opportunity to advance our understanding.
I don't mind being told I'm ignorant of something that I don't know about. That is merely a current state of my present understanding. But to suggest that it is a waste of effort to try and educate me, is suggestive that I might be a cretin incapable of learning. I'd like to think that I am capable of learning ... which is why I repeatedly asked for explanation.
RustyBug wrote: That is the equivalent of saying that people are incapable of learning and growing. This is a vastly different thing from those of us who are merely ignorant and are asking to be afforded an opportunity to advance our understanding.
Nobody here made any sort of effort to actually learn.
Man, I have to stop letting myself get dragged into these spats. It just leads nowhere.
My new rule for myself: if someone seriously ticks me off and I can't recall having seen any photos which I liked from that person, or any seriously helpful actions towards others in the past, I click "Hide Me" on that person.
Bifurcator wrote:
That's what you want us to do? That's how you see your time spent here?
that is what people here DO do. it certainly wasn't a compliment or in any way reflective of my desires. personally I don't spend much time here looking at landscapes unless someone posts one in the film thread. like I said, there is a small subset here that produces good work and that makes it worth wading through the muck.
Bifurcator wrote:
Maybe go out and find a different place? I'm an uber-grumpy bastard and even I don't see things in this poor a light.
I meant this thread, specifically. I mentioned already that FM is a mostly cordial gear discussion. I have no complaints for that part of it. But when it actually comes time to discuss photographs themselves it degenerates pretty quickly.
carstenw wrote:
Man, I have to stop letting myself get dragged into these spats. It just leads nowhere.
However ... if the OP would have simply offered to us his explanation of Daido (which he has been repeatedly asked for) rather than feeling the need to put us in our place ... it may have led to advancing our understanding of Daido. It could still lead there ...
This isn't the first thread we've had to "wrangle through" in order to get where things began to take meritable traction, and likely won't be the last ... but I do still hold out hope that the OP can (willing & capable) provide his fellow FM'ers with contribution to our growth of understanding about Daido. Granted, some of us may never "get it" ... but some of us (don't forget about the lurkers) will grow from it.
Personally, I'm inclined to think I'm both willing and capable of such growth (as are most FM'ers) when combined with a willingness and capability from others fostering it ... but hey, I'm biased like that.
redisburning wrote:
maybe this thread will get locked. then we can go back to circle jerking each other over landscapes fitting the hyperfocally focused one subject in foreground leading into pretty background formula.
what is most disappointing isn't that people don't like Daido. like I said, I don't personally like his modern work very much myself. but people's actions make this place look more like a collection of drunk monkeys than photography enthusiasts looking to better ourselves and our craft/hobby/passion.
RustyBug wrote:
However ... if the OP would have simply offered to us his explanation of Daido (which he has been repeatedly asked for) rather than feeling the need to put us in our place ... it may have led to advancing our understanding of Daido. It could still lead there ...
I don't think any such explanation will be forthcoming.
I am not sure that it is possible to truly understand Moriyama anyway. One might like his work, and I like at least some of it, but how do I explain why I like it? The grittiness, the thereness?
It appears to me as if Moriyama has entered the post-success phase of his career, where the heights of his previous work contributes to completely separating him from the type of drive people have who really want to make it. In the linked movie he did say a couple of times that he just pursues whatever momentary passions he feels. I guess that is his current direction. Follow your little whims, regardless of how "uninteresting" the photo, and see where that goes. Experimental, but not terribly driven. He sees two girls with nice legs standing at a light, and photographs it like a sophomore. And so on. Not my cuppa, but I don't see it as being an invalid approach.
+1 @ phase, drive, direction, whim, etc. ... that's kinda what I got from the video as well.
Still, before I settle on that opinion, I wanted to give the OP a fair shake at the opportunity to share his perspective that might be more meaningful than the video may have overlooked at helping me to "get it" beyond what "I got" from it.
That thing about he'd rather drink sake and go to bed ... not exactly the most photographically inspiring thing for me. But, given the popularity, etc. ... it leaves me thinking "there must be something I'm missing here" ... thus my earnest inquiry of the OP.
