Page 14 of 15
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:29 am
by costanza
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Thu Mar 29, 2018 11:06 am
by bels
Photography never managed to establish an aesthetic standard before it was swarmed by adverts, photojournalism, holiday pics etc. Most 'art photos' are:
Visual punchline - Something with some kind of thematic contradiction or bait and switch
Uncommon sight - This is mostly just photojournalism and only of interest because it's a photo. (a photograph of god would be amazing, a drawing of god is pointless)
Appeal to authenticity - black and white or at this point medium/large format film photography or even just digital that's been edited to look as such. Looks 'good' because it appeals to baked in value systems of old (read expensive) things having superior aesthetics. Would have no appeal if it was taken with a bad camera (unless that camera was wielded by someone with enough social capital that they could claim the bad camera had some level of authenticity that was important). Basically audiophile art (it's just so much warmer looking/sounding)
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Fri Mar 30, 2018 6:10 am
by Minkhoi
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Fri Mar 30, 2018 6:53 am
by oucho
has anyone here heard of karl martin holzhäuser? I came across him ages ago on the internet on a blog that doesn't exist anymore
http://www.souslesetoilesgallery.net/ar ... w=slider#4
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 3:03 am
by kremvax
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Sat Apr 07, 2018 3:24 am
by kickingthefly
i have to agree with fellow teen above who asks bela what an aesthetic standard even is. and i actually think photography did have its moment, kind of based around barthes' camera lucida, all photographs being about death etc. unfortunately it just crystallised around that, nobody took the form forward- even today when i talk to 'big' photographers they just go on about the same shit, and look blank when i point out they're relying on idees recus that dont even make sense any more (for example the 'documentary' power that barthes talks about has gone entirely and now resides in new technological forms, like facebook live).
its not even like im entirely against the nostalgic aspect of loving kodak film when used by a good artist (tacita dean for example)
but at this point as ive said photography seems almost 100% correlated with a global leisured class of people who can afford a good camera and the time/money to find picturesque locations, look at all these laughable 'taste' signifiers (the new 'laughing indian slum children' is fucking brushed concrete staircases, brutalist buildings, non-lieux etc.).
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Tue Apr 24, 2018 8:19 am
by bels
The aesthetic standards were defined by the tastes rich people who commissioned art/were patrons/owned museums/were collectors. Photography from the very start lacked of any kind of structure to dwell within/rebel against except for 'being accepted by the establishment' which they managed to do once colour film was invented (meant you could take black and white photos and they would be considered art)
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Tue Apr 24, 2018 4:34 pm
by INNIT
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2018 9:34 am
by bels
Think I'm just arguing for the sake of it now, but surely novels were pretty elitist for a good amount of time (most people were illiterate etc), same with film (very difficult to get hold of video equipment for cheap until quite recently)
Theatre probably the odd one out. But maybe I can try and formulate an argument to take down the medium of theatre if I'm already trying to take down photography.
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:28 am
by INNIT
well, novels developed simultaneously with capitalism and the printing press in the 19th century; they were very much a "popular" genre contrasted with poetry and, at this point, theater. 18th century novels were like, a different beast, and vary drastically across continental Europe in terms of acceptability (many 18th century works read like weird pomo novels without the chapters and were published anonymously).
but anyways, what we think of as aesthetic standards, at least the way you describe them, are usually applied retroactively by some sort of bourgeoisie class rather than being emergent with the form itself. we might say modernism rebelled against 19 century realism but it's not really until the "modern period" that the latter works are being valorized in the first place. that's the point that i was trying to make. i think that most emergent forms start off rather rhizomatic and that it takes time for elite classes to retrospectively decide "what's good," codify/striate things, etc. this process obviously speeds up in the ages of mechanical and digital reproduction.
(this is my weird defence of photography, a medium that i know nothing about)
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:11 pm
by oucho
I think the more pressing topic is how can we (care-tags) wrest power from the elites and finally couple our bourgeois userbase with true aesthetic influence.
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Fri Apr 27, 2018 12:51 pm
by bels
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Fri Apr 27, 2018 4:14 pm
by INNIT
i guess that (and i'll let this return to being a thread about pictures after, i promise!) i'm suspect of how much power we willingly forfeit to "elites" when we say that a medium is shit because the sovereign, the bourgeois, the 1%, w/e, haven't spent money to territorialize it, or no longer have that opportunity because the form is too dynamic. the development of photography (again, a medium that i know nothing about) is also coextensive with the development of digital technology, and in the digital age emerging forms are bound to be rhizomatic, and i'm not sure if this is a bad thing. a little structure is always good, mind you, but too much and we end up with 19th century realist novels.
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Wed May 16, 2018 6:59 pm
by radicalbusiness
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Thu May 17, 2018 2:14 am
by tweefwend
picked up a Fuji x100s for a good price today
took it out downtown, here's some of my favorites:
its wayyy more fun shooting street style stuff with a small camera. The x100's leaf shutter is silent, making it so much easier to work with. Excited to shoot more with it. I've also been really into 6 x 7 crops recently
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Thu May 17, 2018 2:36 am
by ellascottgm
Oh! This camera was a good purchase. So beautìul
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Thu May 17, 2018 6:51 am
by 106-2
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Thu May 24, 2018 10:24 pm
by soko
Don’t know anything about photography in any meaningful way, but Interested in seeing if/when photography takes on the purposefully poorly-composed-all-things-in-life-given-equal-weight approach of autofiction in literature a la Shiela Heti or Karl Ove. What’s the photography equivalent of a bad prose stylist? If someone could link me?
*edit:
Interested in any kind of photography that doesn’t really do anything, anti-nostalgia, anti-romantic images.
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Sun May 27, 2018 3:57 pm
by swampblood
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Tue Jun 26, 2018 6:40 am
by kickingthefly
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:53 pm
by kickingthefly
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Tue Jul 17, 2018 5:36 pm
by bleeker
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:21 am
by surfdude69
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Sun Aug 05, 2018 12:23 am
by swampblood
Some polaroids from a day trip to Baltimore.
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:51 pm
by zevolution
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 4:14 pm
by zevolution
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:37 pm
by Sam
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 5:53 pm
by Sam
had a go at fashion photography on the weekend, quite pleased with the results
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:34 pm
by Benson
Re: Photography thread
Posted:
Tue Apr 02, 2019 2:14 am
by tweefwend