Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]ARTHURWG@aol.com11/25/019:25 PM > I've > noticed that many untalented and very boring "art" photograpers manage to > get shows, get reviews and even sell their work because of their academic > contacts. Those folks scratch each other's back. This subject interests me a great deal. But I really tire of the sweeping generalization that "art" photographers manage to succeed without any merit. Let us at least attempt to refer to specific photographers who've managed this, so as to lend credence to the opinions. I have seen the work of many "art" photographers who've created beautiful images, prints, and concepts (work that causes me to think outside the box), which would probably fall outside the definitions of fine "technical" skill, or photo journalism, or other traditional photo categories. Artists who use and stretch photographic materials and/or techniques but may not care to adhere to "traditional" photographic practice or "looks"; but do create and present visualizations which can move me, emotionally, aesthetically, and/or intellectually - and speak of deeper realities and authentic experiences. On the other hand I find the great hord of "stock" photography, which shows great technical perfection, remarkable equipment quality and precision, and solid professionalism - incredibly boring and redundant - and in most cases - false, fake, unreal. George - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html