Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
confidence/arrogance
-
27-01-2009 06:10PM#1
Comments
-
-
-
How do you know when you're good enough to be confident about it? (I know, there's a thin line, but a distinction all the same, between arrogance and confidence...)
When you know you're crap and making loads of money
Seriously, some of what passes for photographic art is horrendous stuff. I reckon someone's ego and self promotion is at least as important as artistic content.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Well said Dragan (Sorry I'm all fingers at the moment
)
Allowing yourself a moment of arrogance as your reward for producing something good, is probably well deserved self satisfaction. Not sure arrogance can exist without an audience.
However your premise, seems to be based on "people who will hopefully end up employing me", which is fine.
Having to survive as an independent artist though is a different kettle of fish and I'm slowly coming to the view that, if thats your chosen path, a large degree of ego and self promotion (whether justified or not) ,is not just neccessary, but in a lot of cases the main element for success.
If anyone wants an example of what I'm on about, just visit Here for a look.
If there's something I've missed please let me know.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Well said Dragan (Sorry I'm all fingers at the moment)
Allowing yourself a moment of arrogance as your reward for producing something good, is probably well deserved self satisfaction. Not sure arrogance can exist without an audience.
However your premise, seems to be based on "people who will hopefully end up employing me", which is fine.
Having to survive as an independent artist though is a different kettle of fish and I'm slowly coming to the view that, if thats your chosen path, a large degree of ego and self promotion (whether justified or not) ,is not just neccessary, but in a lot of cases the main element for success.
If anyone wants an example of what I'm on about, just visit Here for a look.
If there's something I've missed please let me know.
The only lesson i can take from that Covey, is that i need to hope to hell if i ever become arrogant then it will be justified.:)
I don't know, i guess in a way it's all just part of a bigger picture for me...hopefully my success will lie in my ability to do many things, and not just one, and to bring them all together in a manner which interests and provokes people.
I guess the irony is, the above could be viewed as arrogance or confidence, depending on how you break it down?
The reality is more the deluded fantasies of fool i think! 0 -
-
-
-
-
It seems in terms of the history of art that a lot of the 'greats' were not scared to be overly proud of themselves and proclaim how fabulous they were, and i wonder if they were recognised because they were great, or because they told everyone they were? Is it ok to be arrogant if you're really that good?
Any thoughts?
I think you're referring to a time when photography was different though, they were a rare breed and therefore arrogance could expand to fill the void of ego-space, as it were. But what we're living through is something different, we're living through the democratisation of the art through access to cheap technology. Anyone can call themselves a photographer. Even me. And my ego.
I think it all depends what your photographing, if it's plants or landscapes for instance, you don't really have to get in anyone's face, it's an essentially internal pursuit and therefore maybe more of an id thing. If it's portraits you're doing, it requires interaction and engagement with the subject and naturally ego is involved.
Not that I understand any of it, but this is from wiki:According to this model, the uncoordinated instinctual trends are the "id"; the organized realistic part of the psyche is the "ego," and the critical and moralizing function the "super-ego." [1]
Maybe those arrogant photographers out there have a deficient super-ego.
Does anyone ever pick up on an unspoken response from someone else that makes them think they might be getting beyond themselves a bit?
yup0 -
-
-
we're living through the democratisation of the art through access to cheap technology. Anyone can call themselves a photographer.
That's for sure. Mind you, I read about how there was such a furore when 35mm film came into mass availability because it did the democratisation thing too, possibly to a lesser extent than digital. That's where the whole '4x5 or it didn't happen' snobbery came in and we're dealing with ripples of that to this day - snobbery is something born of this idea where people use stuff like that to make themselves feel superior. Then you have the 'Fine Art' label, psh, don't get me started. Is that to let the plebs know that it's not just ordinary art, cos they wouldn't be able to tell the difference? People slapping that label (looks around for websites of boardsies listed as fine art
) on their stuff seem to put across an air of arrogance to me, like you're not able to make your own mind up just how fine it is, you have to be told by someone who knows better...
Um, I'm sure i had a point there before that dissolved into a rant :rolleyes:I think it all depends what your photographing, if it's plants or landscapes for instance, you don't really have to get in anyone's face, it's an essentially internal pursuit and therefore maybe more of an id thing. If it's portraits you're doing, it requires interaction and engagement with the subject and naturally ego is involved.
I suppose mostly i'd be taking the commercial side out of things because it's fairly well seen that the people with the best business heads, and not the best artistic talent who make money/find success in this game.
I just wondered why i cringe at the prospect of showing someone my stuff and declaring "i'm good, me", and yet hundreds of other amateurs seem happy to shout it from the rooftops. I wondered if it was a personality thing, and going down that line of id and ego that's probably what it's all about. Sometimes it is frustrating when your instinct and social conditioning are at odds though - you'll be sitting there looking at, say, the results of a competition you lost and internally screaming "but mine was better!!!!" but you know it would come across as ridiculously self absorbed to say it out loud to anyone else. Sometimes it makes me question our objectivity when it comes to our own stuff. I think my original question was possibly whether there is a stigma attached to being confident, in this sort of environment, when it comes to someone else's behaviour?
Thinking more about:Everyone should be confident in what they do, if they are not, then why are they doing it?
I'm not so sure about that one. if you're not naturally confident about anything, does that mean you shouldn't do anything? the word confident implies to me a self assuredness that you can come up with quality. I'm not sure that's a prerequisite for enjoying anything, never mind doing it at all. Am i misunderstanding your point here maybe Dragan?
I suppose we are all being egotistical to a certain degree by posting our stuff online - it's very much a 'look what i did' thing. But that's going to branch of into the whole 'what do you care about what others think of your stuff' thing which is for another thread, another week... :P0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
Well, some people are just rude (not arrogant), and I think it's important to make that distinction before going any further. Arrogance without success/money is pretty much just rudeness. However, if someone has built themselves up over a lifetime, so on and so on, I think arrogance has it's place - I mean, I've often heard of people giving out about how arrogant Helmut Newton could be. He's a fantastic photographer, probably my all time favorite, and yes, he could be incredibly arrogant, with just cause though. And I highly doubt he would have gone as far as he did, in the industry he did, at the time he did it, if it weren't for his arrogance.It seems in terms of the history of art that a lot of the 'greats' were not scared to be overly proud of themselves and proclaim how fabulous they were, and i wonder if they were recognised because they were great, or because they told everyone they were? Is it ok to be arrogant if you're really that good? How do you know when you're good enough to be confident about it? (I know, there's a thin line, but a distinction all the same, between arrogance and confidence...)I think it's important to be confident if you're, say, a wedding photographer, because you have to put it across that you're in control and you're going to give them the results that they want, so that they are relaxed and happy around you - a nervous photographer will make for nervous subjects. But when you've done the job and you're just discussing it with fellow photographers though, is there any need for self promotion? How do you feel about pimping yourself, or when others do it? Is it an Irish/British personality trait to feel awkward about selling yourself? Does it get on your nerves when other people have an "I'm fantastic!" attitude when maybe sometimes they could do with being told where they are actually going wrong? Does thinking you're fantastic stop you from learning and improving? Does anyone ever pick up on an unspoken response from someone else that makes them think they might be getting beyond themselves a bit?
As a professional photographer, you *have* to be confident in your abilities, if you can't be confident enough to promise the wares, you won't get the work. I don't sing my praises when I'm meeting new clients, I show them previous work, along the same vein as they want. It usually says enough. I must admit, I do suffer from the 'Irish/British personality trait to feel awkward about selling yourself' - Which is a long shot from a lot of our stateside counterparts, but then again, our consumers are used to this too.... It tends to work itself out.But you can be very confident and still be a **** photographer!
Absolutely - Anyone can set up a studio or practice, and fools and their money are easily parted... The amount of shoddy photographers out there is unreal - And I'm going to be arrogant here - I'll happily LOL at their work. If they're going to put it out for display, I've every right to have my own thoughts of it. It often makes me more confident with my own work (Well, if they're charging that for THAT, I'm more than happy to charge this for that )When you know you're crap and making loads of money
Seriously, some of what passes for photographic art is horrendous stuff. I reckon someone's ego and self promotion is at least as important as artistic content.
But surely the horrendous side of it is incredibly subjective - There's a difference between the professional photographic industry and the world of fine art - And I don't agree with it nessicarily, but a lot of contemporary artists (Of all mediums, not just photography) root their pieces deep into the conceptual side, rather than just plain aesthetics - And not everyone has an understanding of the conceptual, or the time to work it out. Myself, I think art is for everyone, but I can assure you, that's not a common thought.
Ugh, that reminds me of my sociology classes... :pac:I think you're referring to a time when photography was different though, they were a rare breed and therefore arrogance could expand to fill the void of ego-space, as it were. But what we're living through is something different, we're living through the democratisation of the art through access to cheap technology. Anyone can call themselves a photographer. Even me. And my ego.
I think it all depends what your photographing, if it's plants or landscapes for instance, you don't really have to get in anyone's face, it's an essentially internal pursuit and therefore maybe more of an id thing. If it's portraits you're doing, it requires interaction and engagement with the subject and naturally ego is involved.
Not that I understand any of it, but this is from wiki:
Maybe those arrogant photographers out there have a deficient super-ego.
yupsuperflyninja wrote: »So true.....
As for arrogance nothing i hate more than these "artists" that photograph a white wall and bleat on about its significance.... *points the finger at the RTE arts show the View ;p )
But is that just a comment having seen an image, without actually looking to understand it? I mean, I've linked many a Jeff Wall and Stephen Shore photograph here, and usually get returned by 'meh' or 'wtf' comments... Fair enough, it's not your thing, but there's an audience out there for it.
So... did I come across arrogant enough?0 -
no its where the image is just not worth the pretentious twaddle from certain people that accompanies it....umm i think i posted this in the wrong thread lol.......it was just a pet peeve i was dying ot get out. ignore and continue please good sirsWell, some people are just rude (not arrogant), and I think it's important to make that distinction before going any further. Arrogance without success/money is pretty much just rudeness. However, if someone has built themselves up over a lifetime, so on and so on, I think arrogance has it's place - I mean, I've often heard of people giving out about how arrogant Helmut Newton could be. He's a fantastic photographer, probably my all time favorite, and yes, he could be incredibly arrogant, with just cause though. And I highly doubt he would have gone as far as he did, in the industry he did, at the time he did it, if it weren't for his arrogance.
As a professional photographer, you *have* to be confident in your abilities, if you can't be confident enough to promise the wares, you won't get the work. I don't sing my praises when I'm meeting new clients, I show them previous work, along the same vein as they want. It usually says enough. I must admit, I do suffer from the 'Irish/British personality trait to feel awkward about selling yourself' - Which is a long shot from a lot of our stateside counterparts, but then again, our consumers are used to this too.... It tends to work itself out.
Absolutely - Anyone can set up a studio or practice, and fools and their money are easily parted... The amount of shoddy photographers out there is unreal - And I'm going to be arrogant here - I'll happily LOL at their work. If they're going to put it out for display, I've every right to have my own thoughts of it. It often makes me more confident with my own work (Well, if they're charging that for THAT, I'm more than happy to charge this for that )
But surely the horrendous side of it is incredibly subjective - There's a difference between the professional photographic industry and the world of fine art - And I don't agree with it nessicarily, but a lot of contemporary artists (Of all mediums, not just photography) root their pieces deep into the conceptual side, rather than just plain aesthetics - And not everyone has an understanding of the conceptual, or the time to work it out. Myself, I think art is for everyone, but I can assure you, that's not a common thought.
Ugh, that reminds me of my sociology classes... :pac:
But is that just a comment having seen an image, without actually looking to understand it? I mean, I've linked many a Jeff Wall and Stephen Shore photograph here, and usually get returned by 'meh' or 'wtf' comments... Fair enough, it's not your thing, but there's an audience out there for it.
So... did I come across arrogant enough? 0 -
I think the 'thanks' option is a great little tool, especially in the photography sections of boards.
Should there be a 'no thanks/not my cup o' tea' option too as a corollary? Or am I just being arrogant?Fajitas! wrote:Myself, I think art is for everyone, but I can assure you, that's not a common thought.
The Spanish have a great attitude to art, it's inclusive rather than exclusive. I think for a long time here, art was associated with being West Brit or posh or wealthy/elitist in some way and for that reason you wouldn't saunter down Sherriff St toting your easel, smock & palette. But I suppose things are changing albeit slowly, the democratisation of all art. Not that it necessarily means new art is good ...
?
H0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement