Dance (To A Slow Shutter)

[Elysian]

Irakly, I'm going to be honest with you; you made some great shots, you're a well known and respected photographer, but why do you have such a conservative way of commenting? Above all you should lead the gang in the right direction, give an opinion, give advice, come up with background information and things like that.

Sorry, but I'm not used to that. I prefer to dig deep and give all I can give with all the experience I've gained during these last 25 years. I'm able to be straightforward in my review (most members know this), so why can't you, after all my impression is that your comments will have more value than mine (knowing your background).

People need to see the whole picture, people need to know where to go from there. Maybe it's because I just expected that you would be the driving force in this forum and maybe that was my wrong interpretation.

I mean what is the real content of the comments you made like "not dynamic enough", "definitely something going on here", "I like the shot, it's funny and it definitely has several interpretations" or "I am not sure if I like this shot". It's all so vague, so restricted as if you avoid to express your real opinion. I don't understand it. In your situation I would have great joy sharing my knowledge, experiences or ideas.

Just a bit confused here, that's all ;)

[Irakly Shanidze]

Just try to think about it this way. For instance, you have... let's say Vacheon Constantin chronograph. It is undisputably one of the finest time pieces ever made. You glance at it p[eriodically, and every time it gives you a complex experience of figuring out time, enjoying craftsmanship and aesthetics and feling superior to all those Timex wearers. Now, take the atch off, unscrew the back, extract the caliber and disassemble it to 724 pieces. Will it now be able to give you, or somebody else the same experience? Basically, you expect me to do the same with a photograph. Believe me, looking almost at any photo I can find a dozen of reasons to like or not to like it. But if I give you a list and you read it, will you be able to percieve and enjoy (or perhaps hate) this photograph the way you did before? Even disregarding my own feelings towards this painful process of deconstructing art, do you think that I have a right to impose my views on everybody else? If you want me to, I will, just let me know.

Irakly, I'm going to be honest with you; you made some great shots, you're a well known and respected photographer, but why do you have such a conservative way of commenting? Above all you should lead the gang in the right direction, give an opinion, give advice, come up with background information and things like that.

Sorry, but I'm not used to that. I prefer to dig deep and give all I can give with all the experience I've gained during these last 25 years. I'm able to be straightforward in my review (most members know this), so why can't you, after all my impression is that your comments will have more value than mine (knowing your background).

People need to see the whole picture, people need to know where to go from there. Maybe it's because I just expected that you would be the driving force in this forum and maybe that was my wrong interpretation.

I mean what is the real content of the comments you made like "not dynamic enough", "definitely something going on here", "I like the shot, it's funny and it definitely has several interpretations" or "I am not sure if I like this shot". It's all so vague, so restricted as if you avoid to express your real opinion. I don't understand it. In your situation I would have great joy sharing my knowledge, experiences or ideas.

Just a bit confused here, that's all ;)

[Irakly Shanidze]

Steve, I've been thinking... Once on one of the local art shows I saw a guy who was selling his photos ov sculptures. Even though I generally regard this type of activity as very similar to shooting wildlife in a Zoo, this time I was stunned how good it was. What was good about it, actually, is a very original and unusual approach to the subject. Statues on his pictures looked almost alive, even passionate. I do not want to get into technical mumbo-jumbo of wet printing and supersensitive emulsions because it is not how you achieved your goal, rather, how did you come up with the concept.
When I recalled this from my memory, I immediately realized what was wrong with the picture under discussion. It looks like almost any picture taken in a theatre with a slow shutter speed and correctly exposed. That fellow at the art show was taking pictures of common objects beautiful by nature in a dramatically unconventional fashion, and that's what made his work art. A photograph becomes a work of art when a photographer puts more into it than just his technical expertise.
That said, I will move on to arguing that most landscape photos that I see are not artistic, because all I see is very well recorded beauty of Nature, which makes a great postcard, but will never withstand a test of time.

My point earlier is that a theatrical environment with dramatic lighting and trained performers will always be a fertile place to create photos...

[opus]

Irakly, you have said precisely what I was trying to say.

[Asylum Steve]

Kelly, I agree with you here. IMO, Irakly's logic on this is seriously flawed.

Only a relatively small percentage of photographers shoot with and set up their own lights.

Most people shoot using available light, or artificial, but existing light (street lights, building lights, etc.) and often creative wonderful images, yet they had nothing to do with the light setup.

As you say, many times it's the TIMING of the shot that is the critical element, and that takes skill regardless of how the lighting was created.

Also, theatrical lighting changes dramatically over the course of a performance, so choosing the exact moment of the shot is not much different than watching the sunlight change and choosing a moment when the light strikes you.

What we have is a lighting situation where you have to LOOK, ANALYZE what you see, and CHOOSE a moment to shoot, and that is no different than any of dozens of other shooting situations.

[Irakly Shanidze]

Steve, perhaps I did not clearly express my thought. I am not saying that artificial lighting is a prerequisite of art, quite opposite is often true.
My beliefe is that art involves more than just recording of reality, it also requires interpretation of this reality. Just read my post before

Kelly, I agree with you here. IMO, Irakly's logic on this is seriously flawed.

Only a relatively small percentage of photographers shoot with and set up their own lights.

Most people shoot using available light, or artificial, but existing light (street lights, building lights, etc.) and often creative wonderfully creative images, yet they had nothing to do with the light setup.

As you say, many times it's the TIMING of the shot that is the critical element, and that takes skill regardless of how the lighting was created.

Also, theatrical lighting changes dramatically over the course of a performance, so choosing the exact moment of the shot is not much different than watching the sunlight change and choosing a moment when the light strikes you.

What we have is a lighting situation where you have to LOOK, ANALYZE what you see, and CHOOSE a moment to shoot, and that is no different than any of dozens of other shooting situations.

[opus]

One more illustration I thought of to illustrate my point.

An architect designs a building, creates its form, chooses how best it will take advantage of natural light around it, etc. He builds a beautiful building.

Now someone comes along and looks up, sees the light hitting the beautiful building, and takes a wonderful picture of it. Is his photo invalid because someone else "set up the shot"?


Now here's my answer: "Yes, the photo is not art", if the photographer adds nothing of himself to the image. But there are many ways the photographer could add his own personal touch to the shot. Maybe a long exposure. Maybe enhanced contrast. Perhaps an unusual DOF. A filter. Etc...

Will he succeed? That's for the observer to judge. But one cannot disregard the photo just because the subject was beautifully created by someone else.

I am saying it's the same with theatre. You are not guaranteed a work of art if you take a picture in a theatre. You have to add that little piece of yourself to it. But it IS possible.

[Elysian]

Believe me, looking almost at any photo I can find a dozen of reasons to like or not to like it. But if I give you a list and you read it, will you be able to percieve and enjoy (or perhaps hate) this photograph the way you did before? Even disregarding my own feelings towards this painful process of deconstructing art,

A list? Who's talking about a list. Is it too much to ask for more if someone only comments in the way like this: "I (don't) (think) I like it". It helps us to develop as an artist, maybe not right away, but all these little experiences, ideas, discussions and explorations allow us to 'grow'.

do you think that I have a right to impose my views on everybody else? If you want me to, I will, just let me know.

Impose? Never heard of the word 'sharing'?

You really don't get it sometimes.
What an individual considers art when he/she was 10 years old, might be ordinary now.
What an individual considers art now, might not be considered art by them 20 years later
(And it's just not a matter of age). And art in this case can be photography, dance, music, architecture, film making, etc.
You have to ask yourself why that is and once you're discovered the 'why', you'll understand why people share views, ideas and experiences or why there are sites and boards like this or why people like to explore.

That's all I wanted to add.

[Irakly Shanidze]

Elysian, your behaviour is certainly not my business, but as a person whose intentions are as friendly as they can possibly be, I would really enjoy seeing a little bit more dignity in your posts. You seem to act like a schoolboy trying to put up a fight with a new kid on the block. Try not to post anything of this nature here forr a couple of days, then read whatever you have already posted, and you will understand what I mean. Remember, the key word is "dignity". We are adults here.

A list? Who's talking about a list. Is it too much to ask for more if someone only comments in the way like this: "I (don't) (think) I like it". It helps us to develop as an artist, maybe not right away, but all these little experiences, ideas, discussions and explorations allow us to 'grow'.



Impose? Never heard of the word 'sharing'?

You really don't get it sometimes.
What an individual considers art when he/she was 10 years old, might be ordinary now.
What an individual considers art now, might not be considered art by them 20 years later
(And it's just not a matter of age). And art in this case can be photography, dance, music, architecture, film making, etc.
You have to ask yourself why that is and once you're discovered the 'why', you'll understand why people share views, ideas and experiences or why there are sites and boards like this or why people like to explore.

That's all I wanted to add.

[Irakly Shanidze]

Kelly, I fully agree. I just have not notice enough of that little piece of oneself. Again, it just so happens that everything so subjective in this wold...

[Trevor Ash]

One more illustration I thought of to illustrate my point.

An architect designs a building, creates its form, chooses how best it will take advantage of natural light around it, etc. He builds a beautiful building.

Now someone comes along and looks up, sees the light hitting the beautiful building, and takes a wonderful picture of it. Is his photo invalid because someone else "set up the shot"?


Now here's my answer: "Yes, the photo is not art", if the photographer adds nothing of himself to the image. But there are many ways the photographer could add his own personal touch to the shot. Maybe a long exposure. Maybe enhanced contrast. Perhaps an unusual DOF. A filter. Etc...

Will he succeed? That's for the observer to judge. But one cannot disregard the photo just because the subject was beautifully created by someone else.

I am saying it's the same with theatre. You are not guaranteed a work of art if you take a picture in a theatre. You have to add that little piece of yourself to it. But it IS possible.

Great job kelly! This is what I was trying to say in my last few posts! You make it look so easy. Maybe I should go study the english language.

[Tuna]

Thanks for all the comments. It's definitely been an eye-opening experience.

Hope to see most of you in the Critique forum.

Bye bye.

Tuna

[Elysian]

Elysian, your behavior is certainly not my business, but as a person whose intentions are as friendly as they can possibly be, I would really enjoy seeing a little bit more dignity in your posts. You seem to act like a schoolboy trying to put up a fight with a new kid on the block. Try not to post anything of this nature here forr a couple of days, then read whatever you have already posted, and you will understand what I mean. Remember, the key word is "dignity". We are adults here.

So act like one!

Also try to be a man and have the courage to discuss what I said in my previous reply. I refuse to believe that I was only talking nonsense in my last reply, trust me, after 42 years you learn to know yourself quite well, the qualities and the limitations.

I have quite some experience in photography and art myself. I also have a clear opinion about things and several of my ideas were not the same like yours. Take for example that "So what is art anyway" thread. I disagreed with the usefulness that thread and I come up with strong arguments and two people agreed with the points that I was trying to make. I always come up with many arguments and a well thought over reply. But I didn't start to call you a schoolboy who doesn't know what dignity is, because that is a really immature reaction of you.

If you can't handle a different opinion... count to ten, something what you also should have done before you started that "Art. Crap or photography thread".

I have tried to do my best to see some positive sides of you, but the more I stay in this "Photography as art" forum, the more I get annoyed the way you can't handle the ideas of others, especially when they're not the same like yours.
You also didn't apologize for your behavior in the "Photography. Art of or crap?" thread.

I also should have listened to 3 different people who wrote in that thread;

"Irakly -- Your dialogue leaves me to believe that you are a spoiled and petulant human being with misplaced arrogance. While you may come one here and imply that your bogus venom is a "rally cry" for people to put up better work, it's nothing more than an attempt to stroke your own ego. "

"I have absolutely no respect for him, and I would hope he is removed from this site permanently. I'm not going to sugar coat this- he's just not the kind of person we need here. I will refrain from name-calling, since I would end up listing every name there is. Normally I would premise a post like this with "I'm sorry but..." But I'm not sorry- Irakly should be sorry."

". Everyone came to your defence and made sure that it was understood what your true meaning was. Everyone but you. Are you a spoiled little brat? The truth is, you were rude in a big way. Can't you be a man and admit it?"

Since an honest opinion is not appreciated by you, I have no other choice than staying out of this particular forum.

I do leave with laugh though, after reading the part in which you describe yourself;

"a person whose intentions are as friendly as they can possibly be, I would really enjoy seeing a little bit more dignity in your posts"

That was a good one Irakly!

Good luck with 'your' forum... you're gonna need it.

[Irakly Shanidze]

Thank you Elysian,
I think that you've made a right choice. Although it is regretful that such a fine photographer as you is not going to be a part of this forum, it is probably for the better, at least until you can get over the bitterness. I certainly did not want to offend you in any way, and if I did, for that I apologize. Do spend some time offline, and if you come back, you will be welcome here.

Irakly

So act like one!

Also try to be a man and have the courage to discuss what I said in my previous reply. I refuse to believe that I was only talking nonsense in my last reply, trust me, after 42 years you learn to know yourself quite well, the qualities and the limitations.

I have quite some experience in photography and art myself. I also have a clear opinion about things and several of my ideas were not the same like yours. Take for example that "So what is art anyway" thread. I disagreed with the usefulness that thread and I come up with strong arguments and two people agreed with the points that I was trying to make. I always come up with many arguments and a well thought over reply. But I didn't start to call you a schoolboy who doesn't know what dignity is, because that is a really immature reaction of you.

If you can't handle a different opinion... count to ten, something what you also should have done before you started that "Art. Crap or photography thread".

I have tried to do my best to see some positive sides of you, but the more I stay in this "Photography as art" forum, the more I get annoyed the way you can't handle the ideas of others, especially when they're not the same like yours.
You also didn't apologize for your behavior in the "Photography. Art of or crap?" thread.

I also should have listened to 3 different people who wrote in that thread;

"Irakly -- Your dialogue leaves me to believe that you are a spoiled and petulant human being with misplaced arrogance. While you may come one here and imply that your bogus venom is a "rally cry" for people to put up better work, it's nothing more than an attempt to stroke your own ego. "

"I have absolutely no respect for him, and I would hope he is removed from this site permanently. I'm not going to sugar coat this- he's just not the kind of person we need here. I will refrain from name-calling, since I would end up listing every name there is. Normally I would premise a post like this with "I'm sorry but..." But I'm not sorry- Irakly should be sorry."

". Everyone came to your defence and made sure that it was understood what your true meaning was. Everyone but you. Are you a spoiled little brat? The truth is, you were rude in a big way. Can't you be a man and admit it?"

Since an honest opinion is not appreciated by you, I have no other choice than staying out of this particular forum.

I do leave with laugh though, after reading the part in which you describe yourself;

"a person whose intentions are as friendly as they can possibly be, I would really enjoy seeing a little bit more dignity in your posts"

That was a good one Irakly!

Good luck with 'your' forum... you're gonna need it.