Is this a photography style ?

BADGER.BRAD

BADGER.BRAD

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,252
Edit My Images
Yes
I sometimes find myself when out and about taking photos of random items which catch my eye, normally bright and colorful do you think they fit into a particular style of photo ? ( apart from crap before someone says it !) ,

here are a few examples
43846978641_87f971e901_z.jpg 43798744622_d75d94bf51_z.jpg 42144394630_28bcd76d58_z.jpg 42754793344_000038ab69_z.jpg 41639211380_8591b7cf2c_z.jpg
 
Besides the horse, I would say still life. If they were paintings that is the category they would fall into. You can of course call them whatever you like. If you were adding them to an album of similar images, what would you name the album or folder? 'Artsy' maybe?
 
Last edited:
i would not say there crap
but s***e comes to mind :exit:
 
Yes, its the Badger Brad style, be interesting to see how it develops.;)
 
Are we not confusing "style" with genre.
Genre these days is much more than the Landscape/portraiture it used to be, but its still defined by subject rather than style.
I always feel that style is a more personal trait, subconscious or developed intentionally its more of a look that binds things together than a subject.
I dunno, genre is defined by rules, a bit of a pigeon hole.
Style is something else, I mean, you could argue that both Irving Penn, Mapplethorpe and Terry Richardson shoot "portraiture", a genre, yet clearly they are poles apart stylistically.
 
1 fire button
2 red containers
3 nope I only see two horses..
4 tug boats
5+ furries
 
joxby said:
Are we not confusing "style" with genre.
Genre these days is much more than the Landscape/portraiture it used to be, but its still defined by subject rather than style.
I always feel that style is a more personal trait, subconscious or developed intentionally its more of a look that binds things together than a subject.
I dunno, genre is defined by rules, a bit of a pigeon hole.
Style is something else, I mean, you could argue that both Irving Penn, Mapplethorpe and Terry Richardson shoot "portraiture", a genre, yet clearly they are poles apart stylistically.
Click to expand...

What he said^
 
joxby said:
Are we not confusing "style" with genre.
Genre these days is much more than the Landscape/portraiture it used to be, but its still defined by subject rather than style.
I always feel that style is a more personal trait, subconscious or developed intentionally its more of a look that binds things together than a subject.
I dunno, genre is defined by rules, a bit of a pigeon hole.
Style is something else, I mean, you could argue that both Irving Penn, Mapplethorpe and Terry Richardson shoot "portraiture", a genre, yet clearly they are poles apart stylistically.
Click to expand...

I think he meant a bit of both tbh, I would still say still life .... bar the horses. Which is just a picture of horses. And I threw in artsy because of the cropping and processing
 
Why even try to put it into a "style"?
 
That is definitely a "style",
you definitely have a style.

My advice would be to find a much much better series of borders which would not detract from your style as the borders on your first three photos do,
however that is my opinion and could be wrong.
Those first three are also faded 1970's a bit too much, when colours are part of your style and should be emphasised.
 
If you can put some meaning behind those images then fine. Why take a lopsided picture of an alarm button? What did that add to taking a picture of it aligned? What did you see in the dirty tea cup to make you want to take a photo of it?

It would be nice for people to add some reasoning behind the images they have taken as it would help people understand them more and help categorise a style to them. Otherwise the style is just "random snaps of things"
 
AshleyC said:
If you can put some meaning behind those images then fine. Why take a lopsided picture of an alarm button? What did that add to taking a picture of it aligned? What did you see in the dirty tea cup to make you want to take a photo of it?

It would be nice for people to add some reasoning behind the images they have taken as it would help people understand them more and help categorise a style to them. Otherwise the style is just "random snaps of things"
Click to expand...

I find this works well. ;)
 
As a group of 5 they don't have much in common other than the fact that they are square.

The processing is similar in some of them. The framing & viewpoint similar in others; the subject matter is similar in others and the lighting in yet others.
 
Found sounds good to me as none of the images were looked for but were just found in my Daily doings! I have no idea why I took them but do find my self pulled to bright things (the horse is sort of the odd one out here !) They were taken just with my phone as it's the camera I have with me most of the time and seems to do well with this sort of photo, the framed ones were taken using the Retro camera App using the Holga setting and the reason I used the Retro camera App rather than the standard camera is when I look back at these images using the standard camera the fire alarm picture for instance just looks like a photo of a fire alarm button (I know thats what it is !), the Retro look for me seems to add to it's interest. I might add that for some reason the photos viewed on TP do not look as bright and colorful as they do when viewed on my PC ! I was wondering what you would call them so that I could look for other peoples.

Thanks all
 
Last edited:
I can see the similarity Simon !
 
ancient_mariner said:
I find this works well. ;)
Click to expand...

Excellent source! I got:

"My work explores the relationship between acquired synesthesia and romance tourism.

With influences as diverse as Derrida and Roy Lichtenstein, new combinations are distilled from both traditional and modern structures.

Ever since I was a teenager I have been fascinated by the unrelenting divergence of the human condition. What starts out as contemplation soon becomes debased into a tragedy of greed, leaving only a sense of chaos and the unlikelihood of a new synthesis.

As momentary replicas become reconfigured through diligent and repetitive practice, the viewer is left with a hymn to the outposts of our world."

Leaving aside the first sentence, that almost might be applicable here!

(Sorry BRAD, I'll leave now... :coat:)
 
AshleyC said:
It would be nice for people to add some reasoning behind the images they have taken as it would help people understand them more and help categorise a style to them.
Click to expand...
I'd say that pictures should be self-sufficient whenever possible.

ChrisR said:
Ever since I was a teenager I have been fascinated by the unrelenting divergence of the human condition.
Click to expand...
Puberty does funny things to people sometimes ...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top