Dance (To A Slow Shutter)

[Trevor Ash]

The guy was not hunting, he was simply shooting.

I agree to a **point** with Irakly.. that is I see your view point, but I don't think it pertains to Tuna's Photo. Those people may have been dancing to a choreographed dance under lights he didn't set, but did they choregraph and set those lights with this vision in mind? No. He captured this vision. Studio Lighting aside, When is light **ever our own** anyway ?
I have thought about this subject before, If someone takes a picture, of lets say a wall with beautiful art / graffiti on it... People are going to think its beautiful . Was it the photo itself or the subject? It depends on if it is a straight on photo or if he worked other elements into the composition or not in order to make it his interpretation of it.
Plenty of people have taken well know art ( or even unknown for that matter) and "put a spin" on it.. I've heard plenty of times " this is my interpretation of this piece..." I think its fine, after all, we re-interpret in our minds anyway, Everyone had a different feeling or interpretation of " art" Taking a photo of it the way you see it, or taking a photo of sheerly because you thought that sculpture would look awesome with dark clouds and a rainbow behind it.. well its still your vision.. and on another note ( not sure if this fits in to this discussion, but it came to mind..) Photos of Plants : Landscaping could even be considered art as well, as it is an arrangement of plant life to gain a reaction from humans, butterflys, birds etc... So, if i take a picture of a flower dancing in the wind, is that okay? afterall a landscaper put it there in that arrangement, in a sunny spot.... lol.

Really, I think this discussion is fruitless, It should only be applied to one photo at a time, not photography as a WHOLE.

I'm not disagreeing wtih you here. You've done a good job of discussing the opposite view I was discussing.

That's all the compromise you'll get out of me

However, I would propose that in the case of this photo, the vision is "borrowed" and then a little "salt" is added for flavor, thus making it a "shared" vision. No matter what, I still think the photographers vision.....if he looks deeply and honestly enough at his self, may agree that it wasn't entirely his own.

I think I'm going to hate this forum because these arguments don't have right and wrong answers

[Trevor Ash]

It seems the argument some of you have goes like this:

If there were another photographer sitting in the rafters above the one that posted this photo and took a photo at the same time but from a different vantage point then both photographers would have different visions.

With exception, I think for the most part that would be complete hogwash. Generally, the difference between the photographs isn't going to be "vision" it's going to be composition or viewpoint. Now, you can argue that different composition or viewpoint is the same as having a different vision if you want but for most photographs I'd probably disagree with you.

So, what would the exceptions be?

Well, when two photographers TRULY have something in mind that they want to accomplish in terms of "vision" and they each individually success in their own apparent vision, and the two photographs are accepted by others as having a separate vision.

I guess there's not an easy way to explain what I'm thinking so I'll just come out any say it....hopefully I'm not offending anyone too much......

If I were at that theatre at the same time as this photographer my photograph would probablt look much the same even though my intentions were different. Based on this particular photo, I think the photographer just took a snapshot that ended up being a very interesting photo. I don't think "vision" had anything to do with it.

Damn, I just took many paragraphs to state what someone already stated which you can only discuss a question like this for an individual photo....it's not something you can discuss that covers all photographs like I (we) were trying to do.

I'm going to eat my lunch now.

[Clicker]

I'm not disagreeing wtih you here. You've done a good job of discussing the opposite view I was discussing.

That's all the compromise you'll get out of me

lol, Thank you!

However, I would propose that in the case of this photo, the vision is "borrowed" and then a little "salt" is added for flavor, thus making it a "shared" vision.

"shared Vision" Wonderful choice of words... I agree.


As I was driving home just now, I thought of another example...Using Irakly's photo of people on a dock / pier...(one in which there is a violin and a woman) Would this be a "shared vision" as well? As someone chose that spot for the dock for its " picturesque" qualities, and he came along added some "salt" and made an image.