Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Flickr standards  (Read 10833 times)
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5650



WWW
« Reply #60 on: February 16, 2011, 11:32:36 AM »
ReplyReply

ouch! I have heard of this..it is death by forum stone throwing.
My apologies to everyone -- I have offended and that was not my intention...

Nah, man... that was just some friendly teasing.. no need for apologies.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5650



WWW
« Reply #61 on: February 16, 2011, 12:07:29 PM »
ReplyReply

... I have also read that one is also not assured 100% honest opinion if you post a photo for critique.
If not Flickr, how do I become a better (practical) photographer?...

Will, to see if this forum is capable of a "100% honest opinion" (and I assume you mean "brutally honest"), you might want to check this thread as an example:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=47500.0

As for "how to become a better photographer" (if not by relying on Flickr feedback): in that thread, on page 3, I posted the following:

"...a lot of members on the forum lived and worked in a pre-digital and pre-Internet era (myself included). It occurred to me that in that era, images like that most likely would have never been displayed publicly (other than to friends and family).

There were only two ways for public access: publishing in a magazine or book, and displaying it at an exhibition (be it of international standing or a local club one). Both ways include some kind of jurying, some kind of triage, filtering before an image reaches public. Images that were poorly composed, out of focus, and overexposed (for no good reason), had very little, if any chance, to be selected. So, when something did reach the public, it already had a certain "seal of approval". Furthermore, it took considerable effort and resources to prepare images for publication and submit them. Unless you wanted to risk your original transparency, you needed to make a decent copy (a problem in itself), pack it well, go to the post office, etc.

So, the effort and resources needed, plus knowing you will be judged seriously, meant for us that we would need to think twice before attempting to go public with our work. The only way to deal with that was to learn beforehand what tools those who would judge our work would use to evaluate it. So we hit the library, attended courses, joined a camera club, and learned about composition, technique, art, perception, etc. For years, sometimes. Consequently, we had to exercise a fair amount of self-restraint, and when we finally submitted something, we did not have to ask the world "what's wrong with my image"... we knew it already (at least the elementary stuff).

Enter the digital/Internet era: after a (shutter) click, with all those wi-fi memory cards, Kodak's Share buttons, various other cameras with direct access to Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, etc., it might take literally seconds and costs absolutely nothing, before an image is displayed to millions. Anyone can post anything to everyone. No triage, filtering, self-restraint... nada. Hence this deluge of crappy, mediocre, or technically correct, but just plain boring images, creating what psychologists call a "visual noise", on a scale never seen before. And no, I am not an Internet Luddite... just pointing out certain unintended consequences..."



Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
William Birmingham
Guest
« Reply #62 on: February 16, 2011, 02:41:36 PM »
ReplyReply

... "...So we hit the library, attended courses,..."

This is the type of response I can respect. Thank you Sir.

(The following is my opinion and I hope it is heard as being sincere.)
In a way I envy the guys from the pre-digital period. If I had the means to it I would want to tour the world and sit at these artists feet or carry the gear to coming close to understanding their knowledge. To my mind the pre-digital photographers are a resource of unmeasurable value.

Don't get me wrong.. I love my digital gear and would not trade it for film. For me it puts me closer to the imagery.

I despise over processed works and find it difficult to shoot 100's of shots of a subject when one or two fits your "vision".

For me it becomes harder to distinguish between the garbage of masses to filter out the true spirit of photography (which includes its techniques).  The few books I have invested in leaves me more with an after-taste of a money making scam than actually being helpful. This brings me closer to the thought that the pre-digital artists are the only ones that stays true to that spirit.

It is however hard to crack through the judgement that post-digital photographers disrespects the pre-digital photographers. There are a few of us that wish to learn and carry over the original spirit to another generation.

But how does someone like me knowing so preciously little know where to put his feet down and earn enough respect to be helped onto the path which sets artists and fame seekers apart? Even this forum is huge and intimidating -- where do we start. 

PS: Thank you "wolfnowl"; a good first step is surely is to know your gear.. even if you have to print it out yourself.

-- Will
Logged
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5650



WWW
« Reply #63 on: February 16, 2011, 03:29:41 PM »
ReplyReply

... The few books I have invested in leaves me more with an after-taste of a money making scam than actually being helpful...

In that case, I have a book to recommend: "Perception and Imaging" by Prof. Richard Zakia, from the Rochester Institute of Technology (for those not familiar, Rochester is the home town of Eastman Kodak).

This is not a book about photographic technique, equipment and pixel peeping. It is however, about psychology and art and science of human perception, applied to imaging. It might be a heavy read, but well worth the effort.

This book also comes with my personal "SB Seal of Approval" Smiley
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
William Birmingham
Guest
« Reply #64 on: February 17, 2011, 10:43:38 AM »
ReplyReply

--- "Perception and Imaging" by Prof. Richard Zakia ---

Thank you, thank you very much. This can surely be of value.
A good friend has told me (in my own words) that if you cannot "see", then you cannot expect good photos.

-- Will
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #65 on: February 17, 2011, 12:47:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you, thank you very much. This can surely be of value.
A good friend has told me (in my own words) that if you cannot "see", then you cannot expect good photos.

-- Will



Your good friend was right.

The difficulty may not be your own - it could be that you just need to see more photography from pre-digital days in order to get a feeling for what it was about.

But where to look? I imagine that there are few if any magazines today that feature the art of film; this in itself (the art using film) is a difficult idea to grasp, because you can't really separate the mind and eye behind the picture from the image - because the same person once used a film camera and then took to the digital ones, all that's changed is his mechancal workshop. In practice, unless he's very careful, all he will do differently with digital is shoot much more, more nor better. The temptation to shoot on the off-chance that something might work is hard to resist.

Anyway, if you want to see great film work, look at this site:

http://www.ernst-haas.com

However, as with most of my own much more modest stuff which was on film, the transition to the electronic page changes the nature of what you are looking at, and even looking at digital printing is not the same as was wet chemistry printing.

Maybe the best thing is to see if you can visit exhibitions of real wet chemical prints - bromides, chloro-bromides, that kind of thing. For what it's worth, forget about the exotic stuff like platinum etc.  because there is a huge amount to be learned from more basic (and far more attractive in my view) 'normal' photographic prints - good ones, of course.

Rob C
Logged

William Birmingham
Guest
« Reply #66 on: February 19, 2011, 03:11:30 AM »
ReplyReply

..you just need to see more photography from pre-digital days in order to get a feeling for what it was about...

Thank you for your valued reply.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad