Art or Incompetence? The con job explored.

[Ian]

Originally posted by Kit

Ok point well taken. However Ian, you only represent a group of photographers(most probably, not even the majority) who would like to be more involved and further pursue their hobby or profession to a higher level.

True, my sentiments are very much in the minority if you take photographers as a whole, however until other professionals bite the bullet and start saying what they believe in public then the standards will continue to drop and more con artists will gain creedence.

Originally posted by Kit

Let's not forget there are those who are just happy and contented with just shooting around. I firmly believe that everybody has the equal rights to access to photography just like you and me. They do not deserve criticism for what they're interested in doing irregardless of results. I hope your comment does not include them.

Indeed it is not aimed at those people who are happy and content to take snapshots, or just shooting around, it's aimed squarely at the amateurs and professional 'artists' who pass off second rate reject bin level work that is flawed by any standard as 'art'.

Also I should point out that experimentation is something most of the pro's and keen amateurs I know indulge in when time and inspiration permit. I still often go out for a fun shoot and wreak havoc upon a subject trying out new ideas. For me this is part of my professional development as a new technique in the arsenal can make a client a happy client.

Originally posted by Kit

As for high level competitions and method of judging, I still have my reserves on whether a competition or a particular panel of judges would hold a judgement that's absolutely foolproof. It shouldn't be, cos it subjective. I study architecture and we all agree, in a competition, the winning scheme is not necessary the best.

I feel it's probably fair to say that many architectural and 'arts' based competitions whether newspaper or institutionally sponsored often pick contravesial winners to generate contraversy in the press and thus gain coverage for their particular subject and raise public awareness.

This is particularly the case with portraiture competitions on canvas using paint as the medium, the 'critic's choice and the peoples choice are often poles apart which again raises the spectre of a con job by artists and their ilk.

A well known Australian architect whom I won't name won the Australian design award a couple of times for buildings that were demonstrably hideous.

Awards like the Nikon Award work at a different level, as the entrant has to submit multiple works in most categories, so the photographer is being judged on a body of work, this helps to eliminate inconsistency in the judging, or so the theory goes.

Originally posted by Kit

I've seen the photojournal works on the Straits Times website and frankly and personally, I don't think its anything to be proud of at all. However, I also believe that there are better and more positive ways to raise the level of "competence" in photography.

Sadly I've seen too much third rate mateiral in the press in recent years. I won't go in to this area here as it's sensitive stuff, and might be deemed highly offensive to some, however if you'd like a frank appraisal I'm more than happy to email you my views on the current state of play in the PJ world.

 

[Shadus]

There are some who tries to be an artist and some who tries to be photographers. To me, both can be distinctly different group of people.

For me, visiting modern arts exhibit can be such a bore!!! I absolutely yawn my way thru the exhibits.

However, whenever I visit classical arts, it can be such a powerful experience. Sad to say, my mind can't make out much of modern art.

Even for photography, sad to say, camera shakes and blurred pictures irritate me no end.

From the forum, I see that Jed & Ian are high profile people

So far, I've seen Jed's shots. They're really fantastic photographic work. I dun think you can pass them off to an art exhibition though.

I've yet to see Ian's work. So care to link me to it?

For people who really tries to be artist & great photographers. I believe that handling criticism, no matter whether its founded or not, is part of the learning process.

 

[Ian]

Originally posted by Jed


I think that unfortunately the same applies to photography. There are people who do seek to cover up their work in the same manner as modern art painters, sculptures... and now with intallation art starting to make it big, the problem's getting worse. I completely fail to appreciate the art in a smelly pile of faeces, or in switching the lights on and off. In either case, take it out of the context of "art", and the former is gross and the latter is commonplace. How does it turn into art? Because somebody with a big name calls it so?

The modern art painters used to justify themselves by saying that they used to have the basics. Hence they could accomplish "mainstream" paintings before they launched into the contemporary. This is indeed good. There are alas photographers who jump straight into the creative without first mastering the basics...

I'm in agreeance with you.

However I'm going to go a bit further if I may

It can be argued that the 'great unwashed' that is the general public actually are treated quite cynically by the art establishment as a whole, having to pay via public funding for the sort of crud passing for art that you've mentioned surely rasies the question as to whether the public gets good value for it's art dollars?

 

[Jed]

Originally posted by Shadus
For me, visiting modern arts exhibit can be such a bore!!! I absolutely yawn my way thru the exhibits.

However, whenever I visit classical arts, it can be such a powerful experience. Sad to say, my mind can't make out much of modern art.

My point exactly. Works the same way with some of the stuff that's getting passed as photographic art these days. Blurred shots. Out of focus shots. Etc.

rom the forum, I see that Jed & Ian are high profile people

Hmm... what do you mean high profile? Huh? Huh?

So far, I've seen Jed's shots. They're really fantastic photographic work. I dun think you can pass them off to an art exhibition though.

Oi... me not happy now :bsmilie: ;( :bsmilie: I'd like to think that maybe's it's because you haven't seen my "arty" stuff yet. But seriously... you think they can make a photographic exhibition? From the above classification of (modern) art, I'm not bothered if my stuff cannot make it in! But it's interesting how you say that they are good photographic work but won't make an art exhibition. Is photography not an art form? So why not? Maybe because we need to see blur stuff... out of focus stuff in an art exhibition? Should I be apologising because I don't?

Who knows? (BTW, I'm not unhappy at all, just playing around)

 

[Shadus]

ah.... finally someone makes a point

BTW, I really haven't seen any photographic works in an art exhibition ever...serious! Nor the other way round. So to me, both have to be different things

(PS, where's your arty farty shots? Love to see some can?)

 

[Jed]

Oi you haven't answered my question... how come I become high profile one?

Well I've had one photographic exhibition to my name, in SG, in B&W. Not very arty farty... but street type journalism shots.

I'll show you my arty farty shots when I next take any. I usually get several out of focus and blur shots everytime I go out... in fact I have some from this weekend!

 

[Shadus]

Originally posted by Jed
Oi you haven't answered my question... how come I become high profile one?
I'll show you my arty farty shots when I next take any. I usually get several out of focus and blur shots everytime I go out... in fact I have some from this weekend!

:bsmilie: How I know how come? :bsmilie: Well, you come into this forum and everyone goes :what: ..... kekekeke

Blur blur people like me run into a tiger also dunno...heh hheh

 

[sbs99]

Finally all the pros come out to chat liaoz. haha


Ian,
Wat you said rather true...but somehow, no matter how much i put effort in my works, or shots being used on magazine covers. I still unsatisfied especially when works dun even command a minor comment or critique. Juz simply uncomfortable.
Maybe juz a feeling of "duno where u stand?"
It's juz me?

I dun think there are many of those "juz point and shoot and see how" photographers here. I do see some serious stuff like works. Have to give them credit too. Each man got his own meat and poison. Like certain photography catergory, i would rather not touch. For example Bluestrike, he's into portrait, im into abstract. I find difficulty immersing myself in portraiture shots...often coming up with nonsense or weak shots. But for him on the other hand, he finds much pleasure in coming up with good shots one after another. Sigh...

Come on u professionals!! Speak uup!!
Haaa

Eh u all dun bully Ian hor...he speaks with a creditable pressence. I can vouch tat he's no gullible newbie, neither is he juz out to flame people.

Hor Ian?
Hee

 

[Jed]

Originally posted by Shadus


:bsmilie: How I know how come? :bsmilie: Well, you come into this forum and everyone goes :what: ..... kekekeke

Wah very stress leh... you mean I frighten all the people away? Then maybe I better go!

 

[Flare]

Originally posted by Ian
Flare:
Hate to say this but 99% of professional photo editors I know would can that shot of yours and ask for a reshoot. The only exception being a couple weekend magazine (newspaper insert) editors who could find a use for that shot as a 'column filler' in an article.
second rate work as being first quality work. [/B]

Hee Hee... Actually I know how bad that shot is... Was just trying to be humorous... But well, Reshoot are sometimes not possible...

 

[Kit]

Ian, can I have your e-mail address? Thanks.

 

[Ian]

Originally posted by Shadus
ah.... finally someone makes a point

BTW, I really haven't seen any photographic works in an art exhibition ever...serious! Nor the other way round. So to me, both have to be different things

(PS, where's your arty farty shots? Love to see some can?)

There was a major international tour of photographic works by David Malin a couple of years back, it was exhibited at quite a few major galleries including the Aust National Gallery and I think the Tate in London (could be wrong) as an "Art" Exhibition as opposed to a photographic exhibition. All of the photographs were astronomy subjects such as nebulae, galaxies etc.

 

[Ian]

Originally posted by sbs99
Finally all the pros come out to chat liaoz. haha


Ian,
Wat you said rather true...but somehow, no matter how much i put effort in my works, or shots being used on magazine covers. I still unsatisfied especially when works dun even command a minor comment or critique. Juz simply uncomfortable.
Maybe juz a feeling of "duno where u stand?"
It's juz me?

Yep, I know how it feels, but it's part of life.

Originally posted by sbs99

Eh u all dun bully Ian hor...he speaks with a creditable pressence. I can vouch tat he's no gullible newbie, neither is he juz out to flame people.

sbs you know me, am always wearing my flameproof suit. :devil:

 

[Ian]

Originally posted by Ninja
Quality Control : The Art Of Bad Photography (where bad photography disguise as art)

http://www.geocities.com/badphotography2001/home.html

... reaches for the big bottle of tranquilizers pops half a dozen and considers this abomination upon the intelligence of mankind and repeats slowly "I did not see that s*ite, it was a figment of my worst nightmare", I did not see that sh......."

 

[StreetShooter]

Makes your point much better than you could have, eh?

In much fewer words besides.

 

[quackaroo]

my two cents worth...

in generic terms...
define photography.
define design
define art

you can put a little design and art into photography, cos after all photography IS subjective. (what i believe). to frame the shot, that in itself is coming from a artist's point of view, to conceptualise the shot, that takes abit from the design point of view, to be able to know what the camera/lens can do (technical), that's bringing in photography technical techniques. so after all if you combine all three. viola (not violett), u are suppose to get a great picture!

that aside..
im trying to take the example of the web site ninja quoted and the respond from ian to that website... if a photographer claims his work to be art, yet put emphasis on his photographic skills that it is wonderful and all. then tts total *bull* poo.

 

[StreetShooter]

Oooh, oooh, Ian! Here's another one!

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=183461

 

[sbs99]

Lets all be happy people....enough of the flaming and temptations to attract flaming. All have skills in various styles...its juz tat sometimes one man's meat is another's poison.

Some of the shots i dun really know how to appreciate (or dun appreciate) ...i tend to avoid saying anything. Unless i dun like tat person. LoL.

So lets all look at all these in a lighter mood...lets be happy people.

Keep the shots coming guys!!! (keep the flame thrower at home...enuff of bbq... )

 

[insomia]

Originally posted by Ian
Contentious Topic :rbounce: Warning:

Maybe I'm going senile in my old age but it seems to me that a lot of young and frankly callow photographers are starting to pass of second and third rate photography as 'art'.

This "art" often takes the guise of images that are blurred, out of focus and in most cases suffers from a serious lack of what could be called normal compositional skill or ability. In this respect it is similar to much 'installation' art that is little more than a con job on the public by some fast talking alleged artist.

So am I missing something here, or is it really as I suspect a con job by the incompetent?

Hey old timer for the young any thing they produce is art !! It takes time to realise the difference between young art and art that bring tears to your eyes..... ahhh onions too work well for that.


Could this be that it takes time to fine tune the ability to press the button for my camera to achieve focus ? Again that compositon is boring and old fashion that young blood need to try to show their own style despite the fact that it's actual probably been done uncountable times by many generations of other photgs ?

Is installation art actually art - gee I always thought it was some perverted attempt at humour. and poking at the Establishment ? A sort of visual "UP Yours Mate !!!" Bugger me people actually get paid to do that - hey I could do with extra cash too !!!

Con job seems like a harsh term. It implies a guilble party(ies) are you also saying that there are a lot of fools in the public ? Or that young photogs are some what wet behind the ears ? That could be chalked up to inexperience.

Seen some works that at first glance look like blurred shit but when you look at the 16 x20 at 12 feet - stone me it's actually 3 dimensional since there is one in focus point in the whole thing and the blurred bits add to the illusion of shape. Grin imitates could miss the point of the whole exercise and have every ##### bit blurred.

If your natting about the "FIne Art" then well that market is a hype and con insitution with some talent thrown in - at least the modern art section of it. Look at all the imitators of Rodin's work grin there is enough material there to keep you on the floor lauging for years.

 

[Ian]

Originally posted by insomia


Hey old timer for the young any thing they produce is art !! It takes time to realise the difference between young art and art that bring tears to your eyes..... ahhh onions too work well for that.

ROFL - True and for the young and impressionable out there Art ain't Art just like Oils ain't Oils.

Originally posted by insomia

Could this be that it takes time to fine tune the ability to press the button for my camera to achieve focus ? Again that compositon is boring and old fashion that young blood need to try to show their own style despite the fact that it's actual probably been done uncountable times by many generations of other photgs ?

Nah, if it was that basic it would just be laughed out of existence by us old timers, it's a more fundamental malaise than trying stuff that's been done and passed in before. If anything it's more a case of dumbing down despite the increases in technology.

Originally posted by insomia

Is installation art actually art - gee I always thought it was some perverted attempt at humour. and poking at the Establishment ? A sort of visual "UP Yours Mate !!!" Bugger me people actually get paid to do that - hey I could do with extra cash too !!!

Actually Installation art is the darling of the Arts Councils in Europe and gets the lions share of Arts Grants. Which in itself speaks volumes for the lack of integrity of the comissions. The sad part is that the tax payer foots the bill for this bilge passing off as art.

Originally posted by insomia

Con job seems like a harsh term. It implies a guilble party(ies) are you also saying that there are a lot of fools in the public ? Or that young photogs are some what wet behind the ears ? That could be chalked up to inexperience.

I stand by the my comment that it's a con job. Actually I'm saying that it's not the public who are fools as they are the ones who tend to know what they like, be it base or noble in content. The gulliable ones are often the punters who fancy themselves as art savvy types and who attend exhibitions mouthing platitudes and pseudo intellectual quatsch about the value of the reeking pile of turds or the light switch flicking on and off masquerading as art. (see Jed's thread for more examples).

Originally posted by insomia

Seen some works that at first glance look like blurred shit but when you look at the 16 x20 at 12 feet - stone me it's actually 3 dimensional since there is one in focus point in the whole thing and the blurred bits add to the illusion of shape. Grin imitates could miss the point of the whole exercise and have every ##### bit blurred.

LOL that's an old technique, most of us went through that at some point.

Originally posted by insomia

If your natting about the "FIne Art" then well that market is a hype and con insitution with some talent thrown in - at least the modern art section of it. Look at all the imitators of Rodin's work grin there is enough material there to keep you on the floor lauging for years.

Exactly! Many years ago while attending an art course it was stressed that the story about the work was often more important than the work itself. I ruffled a few feathers (ie: the lecturer chucked a hissy fit and went off in tears) when I pointed out that any work that couldn't stand on it's own visual or tactile merits was a crock of crap and should be treated with as much contempt as a poltician caught with his/her/it's fingers in the public purse.

This doesn't mean I don't appreciate modern art, a lot of it really is first rate stuff, but an almost equally large amount is drivel produced by the talentless. It can be argued that a good indicator of talent is if an artist can survive without massive subsidies from the taxpayer.