Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/03/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] How healthy is street photography?
From: imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:07:53 -0500
References: <6a7544a61003281635s7425cf49o433dd56b93cb5b3e@mail.gmail.com> <419FBA25-669F-4342-9952-16ACAD1378B9@gmail.com> <03C70E75-A424-457E-A420-2B27DE110219@mac.com> <19b6d42d1003301053m71b44244ne853302e842cfa61@mail.gmail.com>

While it may be somewhat like saying "?mediocre art is diluting art."
(and I do believe that is also true)

Some major differences exist.
1) I'm speaking of a specific genre within photography.
2) It takes some significant effort to paint even a mediocre painting;
or sculpt even a mediocre sculpture;
or perform even a mediocre guitar piece.

Snapping "street photographs"
and "publishing" them on the web today
under the guise of being a "street photographer"
takes virtually no effort whatsoever.
(I fully recognize that some continue to do this work
serious diligence - I'm not referring to these)

I totally agree that lack of serious editors and serious criticism
only adds to the ocean of mediocrity.

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist

On Mar 30, 2010, at 12:53 PM, Vince Passaro wrote:

> George that's like saying mediocre art is diluting art. But there's  
> always
> been mediocre art and plenty of it. What's unusual about our own  
> time is the
> coincidence of two developments: the end of real criticism; and the  
> opening
> of venues with no 'gatekeepers' -- editors, curators, etc -- who  
> are the
> arbiters, for good or ill, of what qualifies as first rate at any  
> given
> time.
>
> Without both these things the mediocre stands there mutely but somehow
> relentlessly declaring itself fine; and with no one to winnow out the
> mediocre (through criticism or outright exclusion)  the fine is lost.
>
> Vince
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:43 PM, George Lottermoser  
> <imagist3 at mac.com>wrote:
>
>> For me the "best" street photography goes beyond
>> simply photographing anything and everything
>> which happens in the streets.
>>
>> It seems to me that "street photography"
>> has become diluted with hundreds of thousands snapshots
>> which do not "go beyond."
>>
>> Regards,
>> George Lottermoser
>> george at imagist.com
>> http://www.imagist.com
>> http://www.imagist.com/blog
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>>
>>
>> On Mar 28, 2010, at 6:52 PM, Jeffery Smith wrote:
>>
>>  I sense that there are fewer fans of street photography, but I  
>> cannot say
>>> why. The Street Photography forum seemed to go from B&W film to  
>>> color
>>> digital about 7-8 years ago (when digital became completely  
>>> usable), and the
>>> division between street photography and other genres seems to  
>>> have become
>>> fuzzy as a result. Lluis's photos seem to still be squarely in  
>>> the genre of
>>> street photography. And I see less of this every day. Some of the  
>>> street
>>> photography adherents on the LUG seem to have drifted away, and  
>>> some have
>>> died. Steve LeHuray really lived and breathed street photography  
>>> with a
>>> Leica M that made Garry Winogrand's M4 seem "minty" (ebay term) by
>>> comparison. Maybe the SPers are a dying breed. After last week's  
>>> heated
>>> discussion of about 100 posts on SP, I hope nobody was scared off.
>>>
>>> I want to get back into Lluis mode soon.
>>>
>>> Jeffery
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 28, 2010, at 6:35 PM, Lawrence Zeitlin wrote:
>>>
>>>  Is street photography dying? I just returned from a major NY  
>>> area photo
>>>> show
>>>> in a community rife with advertising, commercial and TV  
>>>> photographers.
>>>> There
>>>> were 60 exhibitors, many of them successful photo professionals.  
>>>> Only one
>>>> offered what could be called a street photo. There were just three
>>>> pictures
>>>> of people, one in the street photo and the other two reasonably  
>>>> formal
>>>> portraits. The rest were carefully arranged landscapes, flowers,  
>>>> and
>>>>  travel
>>>> scenes with studied attention to the rules of composition. There  
>>>> was
>>>> little
>>>> spontaneity and no apparent joy. It looked like the final exam  
>>>> in a photo
>>>> school composition class. Everyone was trying to be an ARTIST.  
>>>> How boring
>>>> compared to the LUG. Fortunately the wine and cheese were good.
>>>>
>>>> Larry Z
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Leica Users Group.
>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more  
>>>> information
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] How healthy is street photography?)
In reply to: Message from lrzeitlin at gmail.com (Lawrence Zeitlin) ([Leica] How healthy is street photography?)
Message from jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] How healthy is street photography?)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] How healthy is street photography?)
Message from passaro.vince at gmail.com (Vince Passaro) ([Leica] How healthy is street photography?)