BS13 (A study of place)

[goldenlight]

Actually looking at this image again. I'm now thinking of the of relationship between the overgrown bush and the pair of enormous pants on the end of the washing line.

Now that is funny!

 

[Hadley]

I don't think Andrew has objected to critisism of his picture, indeed he has encouraged it as part of the debate. However, he has every right to defend his picture if he feels it is appropriate and critics must accept that, just as he must accept the right of critics to be frank. In my not so humble opinion it is the personal attacks on Andrew regarding his status as a student and over the top comments along the lines that he should have his eyes gouged out that are thoroughly out of order and I can see why he would object to that.

I'm not defending the picture, even though I find the concept intriguing and am trying to keep an open mind to understand it. Frankly, it's not my cup of tea for many of the reasons that have been stated but I accept that's just my opinion and I don't have the monopoly of being right, even though I usually am!

Some of the critiques are ad hominem

 

[SarahLee]

Andrew, if you set out to provoke a reaction you've succeeded. And I'm still not entirely sure whether this is genuine or a wind-up . . . I suspect that some of the other posters here have the same dilemma too.

But assuming that this is genuine, onto the photo and your opening question anyway.
I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with your opening premise. A good photograph isn't exclusively about technical elements. Some photographs may be technically perfect, but while I can admire the photographer's skill, if I don't engage with them emotionally then they don't do anything for me. Some photographs may be lacking technically, but if the subject matter is compelling enough then I find myself hardly noticing the flaws. Of course, in an ideal world we would all aspire to technical perfection AND visual impact in a single photograph !!!

But for me this photo has neither the emotional and visual impact nor the technical competence to stand alone as a strong image.

You didn't want technical critique, so on the emotional side :
I'm really not feeling any of the tension that you alluded to in your earlier post. Your reference to the industrial windows just isn't coming across at all - all I see when I look at it are what look like residential buildings (admittedly the windows are a little austere) and some washing on a line.
Nor am I getting the contrast of hard lines and soft washing on the line. When I think of washing "clean" is the word that comes to mind not "soft" - Maybe a better contrast to convey the tension that you wanted would have been clean washing on a line set against a wall covered in graffiti or overflowing rubbish bins etc.

I have tried to read something emotional and thought provoking into it, but even with your explanation this just isn't clicking for me :shrug:

 

[dod]

I blame flickr.

 

[Hacker]

....still waiting.....

 

[zeitghost]

... gets out popcorn ....
so come on tell us - whose sockpuppet is this?

 

[SarahLee]

I blame flickr.

....still waiting.....

Andrew, if you set out to provoke a reaction you've succeeded. And I'm still not entirely sure whether this is genuine or a wind-up . . .

Should I have shut up after the first sentence?

 

[dod]

Should I have shut up after the first sentence?

No because I believe this is a genuine thread.

 

[The Matt]

If this is part of a series perhaps it'd be better viewed in the context of that series. By itself the image says very little to me. You've said what you intended it to be about but it's hard to see it using this image alone. I want to see the rest before I make a decision.

 

[goldenlight]

I've corresponded privately with Andrew and I can assure you it is a genuine thread. As others have indicated it would be helpful if he could post some more from the series to see if they work better as a collection at conveying what he is trying to show us about this location. This should help us move the debate forward, so long as we remember that there are two seperate aspects; the technical and asthetic qualities but also the idea and how well it works.

I sometimes like to build an impression of a place and find it is easier to do as part of a series rather than with just one picture. Even so, I don't always purport to convey an accurate impression, often deliberately biasing my images to show what I want to. I do understand what Andrew is attempting to achieve, although I don't agree that captions should be necessary to give the pictures validity.

An example of a series I put together earlier in the year can be found here if anyone is interested. Note that I did use some commentary to set the scene but the question is, would the set have worked without it?

 

[Splog]

I've corresponded privately with Andrew and I can assure you it is a genuine thread. As others have indicated it would be helpful if he could post some more from the series to see if they work better as a collection at conveying what he is trying to show us about this location. This should help us move the debate forward, so long as we remember that there are two seperate aspects; the technical and asthetic qualities but also the idea and how well it works.

I sometimes like to build an impression of a place and find it is easier to do as part of a series rather than with just one picture. Even so, I don't always purport to convey an accurate impression, often deliberately biasing my images to show what I want to. I do understand what Andrew is attempting to achieve, although I don't agree that captions should be necessary to give the pictures validity.

An example of a series I put together earlier in the year can be found here if anyone is interested. Note that I did use some commentary to set the scene but the question is, would the set have worked without it?

All well and good! but surely each image has to stand on it's own merits :shrug: .... Just looked at your link and each image works on its own as well as part of the series and a very nice series it is too.

 

[goldenlight]

All well and good! but surely each image has to stand on it's own merits :shrug: .... Just looked at your link and each image works on its own as well as part of the series and a very nice series it is too.

Thanks Steve. I must admit my own images are rather safer and more conventional than Andrew's, at least the one we have seen so far. Near the start of this thread I made a stab at interpreting one of the "issues" there might be in the area that Andrew was attempting to convey. OK, it was partly tongue-in-cheek and I was way off course but the picture did at least capture my attention long enough to make me think and arrive at a possible conclusion. If it can do that maybe it's not a bad picture, although that doesn't mean it's a good picture either. I don't like it, that's true, but the point is that Andrew didn't intend it to be liked, only to make the viewer think. In that respect I think it is at least partially successful and I would like to view more of the set to see if together they make a stronger case for what Andrew is trying to convey.

It's nice to hear that each of my images works on its own but what I was trying to convey is surely reinforced by the set as a whole. Likewise, a set of Andrew's images may well clarify what he wishes to convey about the area. Having said that, I set myself a relaively simple brief of depicting a particular element of the place. Andrew has given himself a far harder task by attempting to portray the feelings of the residents and tensions of the community through pictures of the place alone, which may be too much to hope for. To accomplish this with just one picture would be virtually impossible, much more so than with a single image in relation to my brief. Even with a well planned set Andrew's task would be difficult, particularly without images of the people themselves. Whether or not we like his work, surely we should appreciate the effort of what he is trying to achieve and the bravery of his approach, compared to me operating well within my comfort zone?

 

[Jayst84]

Andrew, I think you need to get off your high horse and step back for a bit.

Yes there are a lot of people who can't see past boring things like clipped highlights, but that's not the problem here.

Your image is not a strong one, some 'art' photography needs captioning or artists' statements to fully explain it and allow the viewer to engage properly with it. But all the artistic rhetoric in the world can't justify a bad image and that, to be blunt, is what you've got here.

Mouthing off at people to 'go read a book' isn't a good look, and to counter I would suggest that you get your head out of the books and into a gallery. Go look at some good art photography and figure out why it's good, and why it works where yours fails.

To get you started, look up some work by Harry Nankin (www.harrynankin.com) or Samantha Everton (www.samanthaeverton.com) that's just using examples of artists I know personally.

Look at some of the stuff Harry has done in particular (some of it world firsts in photography) for ideas on "pushing the medium forward". Then note how it is technically excellent, culturally relevant and tied to the land, the people, the animals, etc that he is commenting on in both the work's execution and in the final pieces (in addition to the artist's statements). It is certainly far more than justifying very weak photography with pseudo-intellectual nonsense, something that far too many people get away with these days.

PS. as somebody pointed out earlier, if you are going to play the intellectual card, then repeating the same grammatical errors across your posts isn't going to help your cause.

 

[goldenlight]

Andrew, I think you need to get off your high horse and step back for a bit.

Yes there are a lot of people who can't see past boring things like clipped highlights, but that's not the problem here.

Your image is not a strong one, some 'art' photography needs captioning or artists' statements to fully explain it and allow the viewer to engage properly with it. But all the artistic rhetoric in the world can't justify a bad image and that, to be blunt, is what you've got here.

Mouthing off at people to 'go read a book' isn't a good look, and to counter I would suggest that you get your head out of the books and into a gallery. Go look at some good art photography and figure out why it's good, and why it works where yours fails.

To get you started, look up some work by Harry Nankin (www.harrynankin.com) or Samantha Everton (www.samanthaeverton.com) that's just using examples of artists I know personally.

Look at some of the stuff Harry has done in particular (some of it world firsts in photography) for ideas on "pushing the medium forward". Then note how it is technically excellent, culturally relevant and tied to the land, the people, the animals, etc that he is commenting on in both the work's execution and in the final pieces (in addition to the artist's statements). It is certainly far more than justifying very weak photography with pseudo-intellectual nonsense, something that far too many people get away with these days.

PS. as somebody pointed out earlier, if you are going to play the intellectual card, then repeating the same grammatical errors across your posts isn't going to help your cause.

Thanks for linking these two photographers, James. It's getting late and I need to take a proper look when I have more time, but a cursory glance at each site reveals that some of their work I like very much and some I don't care for at all. I guess that's because they don't develop a successfull formula and sit on it but remain inventive and versatile. I might have a different opinion after taking more time to study the pictures.

 

[SamuelHearn]

I'm afraid that I am not getting anything from this image either. When creating an image, it may be good to think about what your audience may see in it rather than just what you see in it, otherwise you will get stuck in a hole.. If you showed this to any non photographer, with or without the caption I don't think they would really "get it". For me it does not achieve what you were aiming for.

Keep going and keep us posted, but maybe try to be a bit less provocative next time

 

[SarahLee]

No because I believe this is a genuine thread.

I've corresponded privately with Andrew and I can assure you it is a genuine thread.

In which case I apologise for doubting your motives Andrew.
And for misinterpreting the comments from the mods as waiting for some "big reveal".

I hope you do step back in with the rest of the set . . . and if I still don't get it after that, then at least my reasons for not getting it may be helpful.

 

[Lynton]

well, all i can offer , is I showed the pic to my better half who has no interest / understanding of photography etc.......... literally put it on the screen and said.... "what do you think"

Here reply was "what a load of (mens dangly bits!)"