Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Everything that's Most Important in Photography I Learned from Classical Music  (Read 11560 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7776



WWW
« Reply #40 on: August 27, 2012, 08:20:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I think we need to pick appropriate analogies however and the one in the article - imo - doesn't come into that category.

I believe that you are missing the meta message here.

The meta message is about the value of analogies as a learning tool.

Classical music helped the author. I don't see any reason to doubt that this is genuine, nor do I see any reason why classical music would not help others... providing they have a sufficient knowledge of classical music.

You may have good enough photographic skills that you don't need additional learning, but for those of us who do, this concrete example of being inspired by another domain we like/know may open up doors in terms of trying to map others things we know onto photography.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
PierreVandevenne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


WWW
« Reply #41 on: August 28, 2012, 07:23:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Leaving aside the (again) over-ambitious title, I loved the pictures and the analogy... for that specific type of picture which does not represent, at least in my mind, "Everything Most Important in Photography".
But I suspect the evidence of the analogy is very dependent on one's tastes: afaic, Steve Reich came immediately to mind. And the connection with painting isn't far, just google contrapuntal painting.
Logged
Dohmnuill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22



« Reply #42 on: August 28, 2012, 08:11:39 AM »
ReplyReply

"I'll start:
Ken Rockwell: Barry Manilow."


Roy: Poor Form


No doubt the KR smart-arse comment is designed to dog-whistle, and curry favour with, the pound-pack. What a pity you think this forum
is such a venue.
Logged
OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


WWW
« Reply #43 on: August 28, 2012, 08:43:02 AM »
ReplyReply

"I'll start:
Ken Rockwell: Barry Manilow."


Roy: Poor Form


No doubt the KR smart-arse comment is designed to dog-whistle, and curry favour with, the pound-pack. What a pity you think this forum
is such a venue.

I'll go further. Not even a terribly funny analogy: whether it's offensive however, depends  bit on whether you think Barry Manilow or KR is the victim. Anyone who puts up for public scrutiny (ie approval) the stuff which KR emits is offering up hostages to fortune, amongst them his own children. So whilst I agree it wasn't particularly appropriate I find it hard to summon up anything as profound as guilt.
How about Ansel Adams: Mahler?
Roy
Logged
ednazarko
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


« Reply #44 on: August 28, 2012, 07:14:11 PM »
ReplyReply


How about Ansel Adams: Mahler?
Roy

Actually, I was thinking Ansel Adams and Sibelius, or Ansel Adams and Dvorak.

Logged
OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 427


WWW
« Reply #45 on: August 29, 2012, 05:32:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Actually, I was thinking Ansel Adams and Sibelius, or Ansel Adams and Dvorak.


You won that one. Must think more before typing...
Roy
I really must.
Dvorak is a bit literal though.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2012, 05:34:07 AM by OldRoy » Logged
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1213


« Reply #46 on: August 29, 2012, 07:16:09 AM »
ReplyReply

...
The meta message is about the value of analogies as a learning tool.
...

Interesting that you say that. For various reasons I've come to abhor the use of analogies - especially by folks on the Internet. This is because there are always subtleties that make it not work.

I find much more value in an explanation of something that doesn't require an analogy even if it means I need to read twice as much text. For me this is because the person that can explain something without using an analogy quite often has a deeper and more thorough understand of someone that does.

However I would not place the use of classical music in this story as an analogy.
Logged
Rajan Parrikar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 779



WWW
« Reply #47 on: August 29, 2012, 11:38:22 AM »
ReplyReply

I, too, have thought about classical music and its correspondence to photography, but it is not the classical music most on this group are accustomed to. Raga, the fundamental idea in Indian classical music, literally means colour, and in the context of music, that which colours the mind. The constituent units of raga are swaras (there is no English equivalent; note is a crude approximation). There are interesting observations to be made between raga and photographic composition.
Logged

NikoJorj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


WWW
« Reply #48 on: September 03, 2012, 10:06:00 AM »
ReplyReply

I have to make another quotation from the notes (as in letters!) of St AA.

To Alfred Steiglitz, El Paso, November 27, 1936 (and to think I didn't even exist at that point!):

"I can see only one thing to do - make the phoptography as clean, as decisive, and as honest as possible. It will find its own level."
I'm quite surprised neither the article nor anyone here brought the counterpoint from St. EW, from approximately the same period :
“Whenever I can feel a Bach fugue in my work I know I have arrived” (Daybooks)

I found the examples discussed in the article quite interesting, with repeating lines in the pictures echoing themes and lines of the music, but feel this "fugue feeling" can also describe the particular imbrication of visions, or emotions, one can encounter in a richly composed photograph - see eg the first illustration (and main theme) of http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html for an example.

A final quote in defense of artistic analogies : http://fleursdumal.org/poem/103
Logged

Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7790



WWW
« Reply #49 on: September 03, 2012, 12:41:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you, Niko, for that wonderful post! The quote from Saint EW is one of my favorites, and the piece from the Oneline Photographer exactly fits my own feelings.

Actually, OldRoy's connecting of Ansel with Mahler is not too far-fetched. Having recently heard excellent orchestral performances of works by Ravel and Mahler, I was struck once again by the clarity and control that Mahler used in his orchestrations, even with a huge orchestra. That clarity and control feel to me very similar that of AA. To my ears, Ravel's big orchestra works sound muddy by comparison, a little like the currently popular selective-focus photographs with lots of blur.

Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #50 on: September 03, 2012, 12:54:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you, Niko, for that wonderful post! The quote from Saint EW is one of my favorites, and the piece from the Oneline Photographer exactly fits my own feelings.

Actually, OldRoy's connecting of Ansel with Mahler is not too far-fetched. Having recently heard excellent orchestral performances of works by Ravel and Mahler, I was struck once again by the clarity and control that Mahler used in his orchestrations, even with a huge orchestra. That clarity and control feel to me very similar that of AA. To my ears, Ravel's big orchestra works sound muddy by comparison, a little like the currently popular selective-focus photographs with lots of blur.



Interesting take, Eric: for me, shallow depth of field does anything but create mud; it focusses the attention very firmly (and crisply?) on the subject and frames it from within the frame of the actual format, giving it context by suggestion. If anything, I think it requires a better eye to do that well than simply to get all that's in the frame in focus.

Rob C
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7790



WWW
« Reply #51 on: September 03, 2012, 04:43:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Rob,

I think that's a metter of personal preference. Selective focus is appropriate, IMHO, for simple photos that have one center of interest. This, of course, includes many portraits, product phots, etc. But it isn't appropriate in most landscapes or other complex images in which one might want to let your eye wander around through various parts of the image, just as you would if you were in the place where the landscape was taken.

Most of the time I tend to prefer pix in which I can wander freely through the image without feeling that my aging eyes are making it hard to see detail.

I will have to admit that I don't recall being bothered by unnecessary blur in any of your photos, either posted on LuLa or on your website.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #52 on: September 04, 2012, 03:08:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Rob,

I think that's a metter of personal preference. Selective focus is appropriate, IMHO, for simple photos that have one center of interest. This, of course, includes many portraits, product phots, etc. But it isn't appropriate in most landscapes or other complex images in which one might want to let your eye wander around through various parts of the image, just as you would if you were in the place where the landscape was taken.

Most of the time I tend to prefer pix in which I can wander freely through the image without feeling that my aging eyes are making it hard to see detail.

I will have to admit that I don't recall being bothered by unnecessary blur in any of your photos, either posted on LuLa or on your website.Eric



That's the trouble with cellpix: everything ends up sharp! In fact, I sometimes spend ages doing Gaussian fakery to remove some background sharpness! Actually, I don't really mind that at all: I do it for fun and to see if I can convince myself that it worked. Sadly, no PS computer around at the moment, and when I left it with the shop, the moment they heard that, apart from other things, the mouse was freezing, other than offer a sock to keep it warm, they began to hum and haw and tell me how expensive replacement parts can be...!

The computer needs a fix; I need a fox fix!

Rob C
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7790



WWW
« Reply #53 on: September 04, 2012, 08:16:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Good luck with the PC.
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8854


« Reply #54 on: September 04, 2012, 08:28:51 PM »
ReplyReply


That's the trouble with cellpix: everything ends up sharp! In fact, I sometimes spend ages doing Gaussian fakery to remove some background sharpness! Actually, I don't really mind that at all: I do it for fun and to see if I can convince myself that it worked. Sadly, no PS computer around at the moment, and when I left it with the shop, the moment they heard that, apart from other things, the mouse was freezing, other than offer a sock to keep it warm, they began to hum and haw and tell me how expensive replacement parts can be...!


Oh, Dear me! Life is such a trial! Spending hours doing Gaussian fakery in order to remove the beautiful, the God-given resolution surrounding a subject.  Grin
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #55 on: September 05, 2012, 03:29:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Oh, Dear me! Life is such a trial! Spending hours doing Gaussian fakery in order to remove the beautiful, the God-given resolution surrounding a subject.  Grin



It'll never replace life in a warm, fuzzy glow, your priorities firmly delineated as to avoid confusion and distress!

Rob C
Logged

Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8854


« Reply #56 on: September 05, 2012, 11:21:26 PM »
ReplyReply



It'll never replace life in a warm, fuzzy glow, your priorities firmly delineated as to avoid confusion and distress!

Rob C

I wasn't drunk, Rob, when I wrote the above, though I may have had a couple of glasses.  Wink
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


« Reply #57 on: September 10, 2012, 06:50:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Having read the entire thread I am surprised that no-one has mentioned the late, great Galen Rowell who clearly saw (heard) the connection between music and the visual arts.
It is also true that he was severely criticized in some quarters for daring to 'connect the dots' as it were.
His comments and writings are just as relevant, and contentious, now as they were when originally penned.

Regards

Tony Jay
Logged
Patricia Sheley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 573


WWW
« Reply #58 on: September 10, 2012, 07:45:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Needed to go back to notes kept in the sixties while trying to sort Nietzsche as he related to my explorations during a time in life when everything was being transfigured before my eyes with no opportunity for to change the paths it seemed. He wrote of tragedy being the representation of pathos and also born from music... for some reason my notes refer to his question of how one is to distinguish between music and tears...in reflective thought especially during long night exposures there are always the distinct presences of all of the above, for me...

I have tried to find what may have informed the question I thought he expressed...possibly just in dream during a turbulent time...all seemed to flow into one stream...but yes, music...always, once past mundane reality.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2012, 09:28:45 PM by Patricia Sheley » Logged

A common woman...

www.patriciasheley.com
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2533


« Reply #59 on: September 11, 2012, 02:49:37 AM »
ReplyReply

If there is indeed a connection between photography and music then does it mean someone should take a walkman with them whilst photographing? Wink
Logged

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad