Up-and-coming photographers (BBC)

thanks for the link

but i hate this sort of photography which allways has to be justified by meaniningless twaddle.

reminds me of the photo expo i went to in london with out of focus flat printed and dust all over them prints.which were extremly boring.

but apperently according to the text showed urban decay.
pics woudnt stand up on there own.

just my view of course :bonk:
 
well I agree to be honest - they are great photos and you shouldnt have to have someone else telling you what its about, kinda defeats the point really.

But its still good to get inspiration.
 
ditchdigger said:
thanks for the link

but i hate this sort of photography which allways has to be justified by meaniningless twaddle.

reminds me of the photo expo i went to in london with out of focus flat printed and dust all over them prints.which were extremly boring.

but apperently according to the text showed urban decay.
pics woudnt stand up on there own.

just my view of course :bonk:
Click to expand...

Maybe a wee bit harsh IMO, some of them aren't bad at all, but I know exactly what you mean. :D Some of it's pretentious keich.
 
the short slideshow shows a split picture as the last one.. its a person in grey top blurred in a kitchen..

Can someone explain why that isnt in the bin ?
 
KIPAX said:
Can someone explain why that isnt in the bin ?
Click to expand...

There was a discussion on Radio 5 yesterday which was discussing art. Basically the artists were saying "Art is whatever you decide it is". Have to admit it sounded like an excuse to be either untalented or self indulgent to me.
 
jamiestone said:
So you dont like ANY of the pictures in there?
Click to expand...

Looking at them again I'd tend to agree with Kipax, first is pretty good, also quite like the portrait in 9. 8 would have been better if there wasn't the attempt to relate a dark portrait with a multi coloured puddle.
 
Tony (kipax) is correct IMO,the blurred one is utter garbage,the rest are all, pretty much, ordinary garbage.

The ribbon on the tree,out of focus and utterly pointless,could somebody explain it to me please?

On a third viewing,the oriental lady is quite good.
 
I quite like a couple. From the explanation given they all seem to be single shots taken from different sets. e.g. picture 4 is taken from a series that tells a fictional story. Now I can't tell if that story is any good by looking at 1 picture from it.
 
Reminds me of my visit to the Tate.

I think I'll stick to exhibitions of genuinely talented and inspired photographers, rather than people who have potentially great ideas but no idea how to implement them/stupid ideas, implemented perfectly (image 3).
 
Ok, after looking again myself they are not all great. But are you all really saying if I posted this picture you would tell me to bin it?

bbc-pic.bmp
 
jamiestone said:
Ok, after looking again myself they are not all great. But are you all really saying if I posted this picture you would tell me to bin it?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't, that's definitely one of the better ones :)
 
No,that one is quite good,as stated previously.......:)
 
foodpoison said:
and I get the connection between the two images, but god the execution is terrible.
Click to expand...

Would you get it if the explanation wasn't there though?
 
jamiestone said:
Phew - I was getting worried then! All these sweeping 'all for the bin' statements!
Click to expand...

I think only one.. or maybe 2 poeple said bin them all.. I wondered why the last one wasnt in the bin.. but to be honest... yeagh "most" would be in bin :)

Jamie.. your interest? you seem very defensive.. any yours or know the photographer?
 
No No, I just thought there were some good shots in there and it was a good link, but seemed to get alot of negative comments thats all.

I agree that some shots are useless - the ribbon and last one i just dont get.

But everyone is entitled to their own opinion! Just fuel for disscussion really.
 
jamiestone said:
Ok, after looking again myself they are not all great. But are you all really saying if I posted this picture you would tell me to bin it?

bbc-pic.bmp
Click to expand...

No, i wouldn't tell you to bin it, that would be rude but although it's the best of the bunch i still don't think it's worth keeping & for this shot to be put forward it must have been the best shot of a few of this subject.
 
corbystock said:
No, i wouldn't tell you to bin it, that would be rude but although it's the best of the bunch i still don't think it's worth keeping & for this shot to be put forward it must have been the best shot of a few of this subject.
Click to expand...

I think it's a keeper. I think it's a bloody good shot. A few minor things (slightly covering the eye with the fan - either completely cover or don't cover would be better) but apart from that, to say it's 'not a keeper' is a bit sour imo.
 
jamiestone said:
No No, I just thought there were some good shots in there and it was a good link, but seemed to get alot of negative comments thats all.

I agree that some shots are useless - the ribbon and last one i just dont get.

But everyone is entitled to their own opinion! Just fuel for disscussion really.
Click to expand...

hope i didnt put you off jamie just my oppinion [which may be worthless]

i have a downer on nonsense like the coiled rope in an exhibition i went to which ment
something deep apparently,no mate its a coiled rope :bang:

a picture should stand on its own merit without text unless its a reportage pic
ie.marines yomp across the falklands on the way to stanley etc. etc.

as far as i know there is now text under the mona lisa or any of van goughs work?

but youve started a good debate :thinking:
 
No you didnt put me off - its good to get everyones opinions!

I agree with some - like a photograph should stand up on its own as you say. But I also see where you might need an explanation to get across a point you are making, then the viewer can make up their own mind and thoughts about it etc.

Thanks for your input! :)
 
I think there are a couple of decent shots on there.
I quite like the ideas behind some of them, but can't stand the pretentious claptrap that goes with them.

Strangely, I find most of them inspiring - in a "I COULD DO BETTER THAN THAT" sort of way.

I think it was a line from a 10CC song that said "the only art is pretending it's art".
 
I find the link and images intresting, but I also think it is difficult to make a statement of "bin it" when only one mage is present. If they are a body of work, or part of set then seeing them all in context may give more insite into the photographer or what they are trying to achieve.

Also interesting is peoples comments on them, :D. Do we all have to have the same techincal proficiency, does everything have to be sharp, well exposed for it to be accepted by people on here?

I think the students have explored photography and from it linked stories and meaning which I think is great, maybe they should "stand up in there own right with out a explanation" but I also don't think they should all be consigned to the bin.
 
ditchdigger said:
hope i didnt put you off jamie just my oppinion [which may be worthless]

i have a downer on nonsense like the coiled rope in an exhibition i went to which ment
something deep apparently,no mate its a coiled rope :bang:

a picture should stand on its own merit without text unless its a reportage pic
ie.marines yomp across the falklands on the way to stanley etc. etc.

as far as i know there is now text under the mona lisa or any of van goughs work?

but youve started a good debate :thinking:
Click to expand...

There in no right and wrong when it comes to art. You can't say there is a way something 'should' be done. Just what you like and dislike.

I've personally seen plenty of works of art (photographs included) that only really make an impact when you understand more about them than is immediately apparent.
 
knikki we can only comment on how they are presented to us.,. not on how they are presented to others in the original concept... I really cant see how some of them could look better amongst other shots.. but in this case they are presented as they are.
 
KIPAX said:
knikki we can only comment on how they are presented to us.,. not on how they are presented to others in the original concept....
Click to expand...

True, and I don't get num 3 either :suspect:, but is it not worth just thinking around the concept of they are trying to achieve, instead of instantly throwing them in the bin?

I suppose on this site, and other like it, it is the single image that is the one that counts (unless a crash or funny sequence) as we all present that one image for C&C and rarely a linked series or sequence of shots.
Even amoungst the motor sport threads, it is nearly always an individual image which people commented on.

Maybe they would not be imporved if in a series but with out seeing the whole concept it is, I think, difficult to dismiss them.

Anyway just my thoughts.
 
Knikki said:
I find the link and images intresting, but I also think it is difficult to make a statement of "bin it" when only one mage is present. If they are a body of work, or part of set then seeing them all in context may give more insite into the photographer or what they are trying to achieve.

Also interesting is peoples comments on them, :D. Do we all have to have the same techincal proficiency, does everything have to be sharp, well exposed for it to be accepted by people on here?

I think the students have explored photography and from it linked stories and meaning which I think is great, maybe they should "stand up in there own right with out a explanation" but I also don't think they should all be consigned to the bin.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with this comment. Most people on here overlook any inspiration or interesting shapes for how well exposed/lit/focussed etc etc the image is.
However, it is most definitely a necessity to focus/expose/light your image in an aesthetically pleasing way. No such thing as an artistic mis-focus :p
 
I'm split between good photography, which most are not to me, to good art, which I can't tell without the context of the whole sets.

I do find the second moving and I didn't need the words to get the point, however its a bit basic an idea I think ...I'd hope that whole set had much more to say than was apparent form that one...

I have to say I find them mostly very interesting, shots and words.

I mean that one about the love letters being re-told in photos sounds like it would be worth seeing I think!
 
I've found better on here in all honesty, each of the images might stand well as part of its set but removed they seem a bit lacking.
 
Does anyone else here think there's only two kinds of photograph?
The ones that make you think "I wish I'd taken that!"
...and the ones that make you think "I could do better than that!"

...and no middle ground...
 
foodpoison said:
I totally agree with this comment. Most people on here overlook any inspiration or interesting shapes for how well exposed/lit/focussed etc etc the image is.
However, it is most definitely a necessity to focus/expose/light your image in an aesthetically pleasing way. No such thing as an artistic mis-focus :p
Click to expand...

Er,no.....I just think,with the one exception,that they are crap...:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top