I don't know David was pretty dismissive of the work from Joe Cornish and co on about three threads - but i don't recall seeing any great landscape photography from him.
You only ever interact with me in threads like this, that's why. I've probably posted images I've taken in all genres Pete. I don't take much landscape, no, because it's rare that you can take anything that makes a point, but you can't say I haven't posted any. I've just done a quick search for anything landscape related I've taken recently and found these... and this wasn't by even looking that hard for them.
So you can't say I never post any landscape.
Where are yours?
I also don't recall saying my work was better than tellers - as i said i don't do studio photography ... however are you really claiming that badly exposed shots with harsh shadows are exemplars of good studio photography.
You're missing the point.
Do you seriously believe it is difficult to b****r up exposure whilst using the pop up flash ? a quick look at flickr or facebook would show otherwise... the only difficult thing is getting people to believe that its art
Same old tired stuff. You're just angry because he's got something you want, and you can't see why he deserves it when you've spent all your life following the rules, and he hasn't. Every thread about anything art based, there you are... saying the same old s**t over and over again. We understand Pete.. you don't like stuff like this, and you don't get it. Sure. The difference is Pete, that I, or Byker, or Dave or anyone else who actually has anything different to say about Photography only discuss it in threads where it's appropriate and such conversation is invited, but you will actually also go into other people's threads to slag off their work as well, hence you wading in to the Merfolk thread to start banging on about how my work is not in focus just because some other guy thought he could actually tell from a 800 pixel JPEG. It wasn't crit... it was you're usual anti-anything that's not mainstream rant.... You still love having a go to this day... in the Landscape thread you STILL refer to the work as as out of focus and technically flawed, yet it's all been printed at A2 or above Pete, and it's flawless. The fact is, that work has been invited to exhibition twice now, and was also linked to on Lens Culture, and got some column space in Foam. There's clearly something about it people find engaging. But hey.... you wouldn't want to hang in on a wall, so it's crap. And before you object to that, it's exactly what you're saying Pete. Even in here, without any provocation from me whatsoever, you're still banging on about me, or what I've said in other threads. This is why people are getting annoyed that you are always so critical, yet seem to actually never take any images. It's not that you NEED to... but you've raised your anti-art profile to the extent, that people now just want to see the stuff this person creates, as surely, it must be the very stuff we're all dying to see in order to understand your viewpoint.
theres also a very odd double standard where its okay to dismiss the work of people like Cornish, Noton, Waite etc, and do repeatedly post the same "generic drivel" about them across two or three threads, but its not okay to challenge the idea that anyone like Teller is anything other than a creative genius (like its fine to dismis peter lik, but not gurtzky and so on)
I've not once said anything about Waite, or Noton. I've said Landscape is tired as a genre and is starting to all look the same.
You just LOVE to have a go... yet post nothing of your own.... ever. You keep saying you take thousands of images every year... apparently. You'd think at least some of them, sometimes, would be seen wouldn't you? Apparently not.
You're just embittered and clearly have a huge chip on your shoulder.
Teller's work is divisive, clearly.... but you're missing so much in your rush to talk about composition, and his choice of aesthetic because that's all you're interested in. Look at what he does with people... Could YOU meet some of these high profile, often self-important people and make them behave like that? I doubt it... you're blatant reverence for people just because they're a known name leads me to believe you'd spend the session in forelock tugging deference, and just produce a stock portrait that says **** all.
Before you say something idiotic like "What's that got to do with photographic skill", stop and think. He's a portrait photographer as much as anything else... and that's EXACTLY what makes a great portrait photographer. I don't LIKE his work, no... not one bit, but I have to admit he has a facility to create interesting, engaging and often very insightful portraits of people that cut through the defences they often put up. It's INTERESTING Pete.... HE'S interesting. Syrupy shots of slow exposure surf lapping at a beach while an over-saturated sunset plays out in the background are not... it's an over-done trope everyone is sick of. It has nothing to say any more.
Now shut up and post something.
