IPF/LIPF

Ballyman

Calina wrote: »

I'm going to change the scope of discussion from "what do you think art is" to "why do you take photographs anyway?" as that interests me slightly more and it might feed into "why would you do a distinction anyway"....

I would also add that a tree is a dwelling place; a source of shelter, a source of raw materials and in specialised cases a source of Christmas decorations.

You can add all you want. That is what you see when you look at a tree. Can you not understand that there are people (me) who when they look at a tree, all they see is a tree. I don't stand there and tell myself it is also a dwelling place; a source of shelter, a source of raw materials and in specialised cases a source of Christmas decorations.

Is this too difficult for you to understand? I am not artistic. Not even down to my small toe. I don't "get" art or what other people consider to be art. I either like something or I don't. Black or white. A or B.

"why do you take photographs anyway?" - Because I enjoy it. Surely thats not too difficult to understand either?

Ballyman

Covey wrote: »

Speaking of acting and the like would that be why you've only a bit part on the fringes of Killinascully ?

Why are all the artistic and creative types ganging up on me?

Covey

CabanSail wrote: »

Which DCC Exhibition do you mean? We change the Gallery every few weeks & also have Exhibitions elsewhere.

I think it was called "the Annual Exhibition" ! . In Pearce St. Library in any event. There were more interesting characters than photos.

Covey

Ballyman wrote: »

Why are all the artistic and creative types ganging up on me?

At the moment I'm lacking my usual artistic muse, so I'm a bit bored, sorry

smelltheglove

wow this is a great discussion and obviously some people have distinct opinions on it.

As to Calina's question above, most of the time I take a picture is to capture a moment, a memory. I don't view this as art, I view it is documentary. However photography can be art, I once said I didnt have time for artsy stuff, I remember being blasted, I think fajitas may have referred to this earlier, however I do see how photography can be a form of art and I do try to go there from time to time, an example Calina if you dont mind, I would find your sports shots as documentary, very good at it too, but I would view your recent landscape shots as art.

My reasons being are, when taking shots in my case of a wedding or a get together I am not doing anything artsy at all, I am merely photographing what is happening, documenting the occassion, I may add processing afterwards that gives it more of an artistic touch. When say Calina sits there in the cold taking pictures of a sunset or sunrise she is designing a scene that may not be caught by the natural eye but is how she sees it and wants other people to see it, i.e. slow shutter, nd, starlight filter, many things such as these can be used specifically to obtain the desired affect. When I said before I didnt have the time for artsy things, I was being completely honest, I didnt have the time to sit there and take such images because of daily routines etc now I have more time I am focussing myself on more aspects of photography, images which need planning, detail, thought etc etc.

As for Fajitas and Ballymans debate, both of you in my opinion have photographs and both of you have works of art, as do the majority of people here on this forum, there is no line between them, only the way people perceive them, as my example above about how I perceive Calinas images someone else may perceive it in the opposite way, art is in the eye of the beholder and not necessariy always the creator.

Fajitas!

Ballyman wrote: »

Why are all the artistic and creative types ganging up on me?

You made a rather strong statement or two, it's a discussion forum, if you wan to state something, be prepared back it up, otherwise you may well just be saying it to get a rise out of people.

And who knows, if you listen and have a look at what the artistic and creative types like, you might even like it yourself. Terrifying.

Calina

CabanSail wrote: »

Once again I do not understand this. The process for the distinctions is set out and you comply to that process for that end. That does not limit you in any other areas of your photography. If some people feel that is the only stuff they want to do then that is up to them. Personally I liked the challenge of doing the LIPF and am glad I did so. I also enjoy putting work forward for competitions and have learned a lot from it. What I don't do is go out taking photographs specifically for those ends. Most of what I take will not be seen by many people at all but I still like it, some I am taking with vague notions of where it will fit in projects in the future, most of what I take is taken just for the fun of doing so & without some ideal or purpose in mind.

The issue is how you perceive the distinctions - are they a recognition of photographic quality or your ability to adhere to a few regimental rules drawn up by someone else? It's sounding more to me like it's not really a recognition of photographic quality at all but of panel selection and form.

For me, this is an issue. If you're going to put some form of distinction system into place, I'd normally assume that photographic quality is key. If it's not, then the distinctions aren't doing what they are perceived to do.

CabanSail wrote: »

I do find some of the twaddle that "artists" spew forth is what bores me more than people getting anal over techinical issues. I often think that many of them just take crud & then write fancy sentiments which justifies it as being something it's not.

There is, however, a balance to be found; I'm not sure it's being found here. The point that is raised - again - is the panels favour form over content. How do you confront that perception?

I personally don't much go for competitions. I've found in general I learn less from competitions than I do from collaborative discussion about the photographs, where they came from, and from looking at other people's photographs (which is why my first piece of advice to every aspiring kite photographer is "subscribe to Kiteworld").

AnCatDubh

Fajitas! wrote: »

muck is always muck, and a poor photo is always a poor photo

But what happens when muck is actually portrayed as art? Art muck??

(as a side point to all of this. I knew a guy who lived in Arklow called Art so I know who Art is even if I don't know what Art is)


/coat, hat, scarf, gloves, runs..........

Covey

AnCatDubh wrote: »

But what happens when muck is actually portrayed as art? Art muck??

(as a side point to all of this. I knew a guy who lived in Arklow called Art so I know who Art is even if I don't know what Art is)


/coat, hat, scarf, gloves, runs..........

I saw some of that art muck this year, in the RHA of all places!

Calina

Ballyman wrote: »

You can add all you want. That is what you see when you look at a tree. Can you not understand that there are people (me) who when they look at a tree, all they see is a tree. I don't stand there and tell myself it is also a dwelling place; a source of shelter, a source of raw materials and in specialised cases a source of Christmas decorations.

And yet you benefit - on a daily basis - from those who do. The point I am making is that it's a narrow way of looking at the world. Amongst the things I also see when I see a tree is a potential photograph. What do you see?

Ballyman wrote: »

Is this too difficult for you to understand? I am not artistic. Not even down to my small toe. I don't "get" art or what other people consider to be art. I either like something or I don't. Black or white. A or B.

The world is not binary; it's a million shades of light and colour. You couldn't take photographs otherwise. I suspect you don't get what you perceive to be other people's view of art. But you could not possibly take good photographs if you did not have some artistic eye.

Ballyman wrote: »

"why do you take photographs anyway?" - Because I enjoy it. Surely thats not too difficult to understand either?

But you're not giving me that impression. I take photographs because I enjoy it. I enjoy looking at a reality and freezing that moment in time. You've a lot of sports stuff on your flickr stream; does that not motivate you either?

Ballyman

Fajitas! wrote: »

And who knows, if you listen and have a look at what the artistic and creative types like, you might even like it yourself.

But I do like some of it. Have you not been listening to me? I don't differentiate between artistic/creative and photography by numbers. I look at something differently to the way you do. There is no hidden meaning, underlying theme etc for me. I don't look for one. If someone produces a photo that is aesthetically pleasing to me then I like it. I won't stand there wondering whether the photographer was meditating to the god of lumba land while taking it nor wonder if he/she wants me to interact with the subject and their connection with the land.
Ye seem to be having a hard time understanding/accepting this.

Calina

Ballyman wrote: »

If someone produces a photo that is aesthetically pleasing to me then I like it.

Actually, this is art.

Ballyman

Calina wrote: »

Blah blah blah blah.

Seriously. I give up.

CabanSail

elven wrote: »

I do find it ironic that the analogy of winning a race seems appropriate, and i suppose that says a lot about how you look at photography.

I actually did not say anything about winning any race. What I did was use Motor Sport as an analogy as it's an area I used to be involved. It's a pursuit where Technical Competence & Skill/Apptitude both play a part. The vast majority of people involved will never win a race. They are not there for that, they are trying to do the best they can & see how much they can improve. It's about challenging themselves mainly. So in that regard it may say something about me as a photographer. I do look at opportunities to learn new things & try different techniques in order to improve what I do. Things like the IPF Distinctions are a challenge & the journey to achieve them is probably more important than the destination itself.

PaulieC

so back to my original question...

Shoudl I go for one?

Or should I just get me coat ?

Didn't realise it would be such a hot topic...

Calina

Well....


do you want one?

CabanSail

cambo_gueno wrote: »

so back to my original question...

Shoudl I go for one?

Or should I just get me coat ?

Didn't realise it would be such a hot topic...

The only person that can answer that is you.

I found it to be an interesting exercise & learned quite a bit from it. At the moment I am thinking about getting an AIPF Panel together for next year. That is a lot more in depth than the L. The challenge of getting 15 images that hang well together will be quite enjoyable.

Good luck either way.

dakar

4sb wrote: »

But I am having strong second thoughts as to whether the camera club set of values is the way I want to go.

Been there, done that. I did the camera club thing for a couple of years. At first I enjoyed the novelty value of being able to talk about f stops and iso's with like minded people.

The way I see it, there's a progression that we all go along as photographers. This colours what, how and why we photograph what we do. Everybody winds along this path at a different pace. Some people want to go as far as they can in terms of exploring their own capabilities and the artistic side of photography (I think AnCatDubh referred to it as the 'third place' in a recent discussion). Some people want to be able to take 'nice' photographs without worrying about why they do it, or what appeals to them. Some people are happy leaving the camera on auto. Some need their camera to pay the bills and may or may not explore the other airy-fairy (elfish, even!) artistic side of things.

As I said, I've done the camera club thing, went as far as putting together an L panel which I was assured by the wise owls in the local camera club would definitely be successful. I looked at it and went 'meh'. It may have been worthy of an L, but as a representation of me and what I wanted my photography to be, it didn't do anything for me. It was a selection of well exposed, well composed, pretty sharp mostly landscapes, and for me represented a formulaic bunch of shots that I had already left behind on my own journey. That was pretty much the beginning of the end for me and camera club culture. Maybe it was my inability to articulate where I wanted to be, but once you went beyond the f-stop/iso thing, I found it difficult to have a meaningful discussion.

So where am I now? Is what I'm doing now on the odd occasion I pick up a camera 'art'? Does thinking something is art make it so? For that matter, does the process of merely thinking about the artistic merit of a photo automatically raise it above a humble snapshot? I genuinely don't know.

CabanSail

I have done the "Camera Club thing" twice now. First time was in Australia in the early to mid 90's and while it was enjoyable it only went so far & I soon moved off into other things & photography was just an adjunct to those activities. It was when I came to Ireland that I once again joined a club & have got a lot more out of it this time. It's not just that talking shop but also the social side of things that I find really enjoyable. Being able to learn from a lot of people who have loads of experience & also helping those who have just joined to explore their potential.

Anouilh

Ballyman wrote: »

But I do like some of it. Have you not been listening to me? I don't differentiate between artistic/creative and photography by numbers. I look at something differently to the way you do. There is no hidden meaning, underlying theme etc for me. I don't look for one. If someone produces a photo that is aesthetically pleasing to me then I like it. I won't stand there wondering whether the photographer was meditating to the god of lumba land while taking it nor wonder if he/she wants me to interact with the subject and their connection with the land.
Ye seem to be having a hard time understanding/accepting this.

I think what you have written is very clear and that your reaction to photography is that of many others. Photography is both an art and a science but it does not invoke the same reactions, often, as paintings or sculpture do. It is so linked to the moment in time in which the image was captured that the intention of the photographer is often forgotten... or is not particularly of interest.

That does not solve the problem of whether or not one should follow a formation with a camera club or institute.

Really, there's plenty of scope for all.
For some, the words "Fine Art" are enough to cause a seizure; for others they are just a descriptive term.

nilhg

cambo_gueno wrote: »

so back to my original question...

Shoudl I go for one?

Or should I just get me coat ?

Didn't realise it would be such a hot topic...

Well you have till April to think about it, even if you don't go ahead if your free on the day it's and interesting day out just to sit in on the judging, at the very least you'd know for certain whether it's for you or not.

Anyway well done on starting an interesting thread, it might even qualify as one of those old time "friday" ones.;)

smelltheglove

nilhg wrote: »

Well you have till April to think about it, even if you don't go ahead if your free on the day it's and interesting day out just to sit in on the judging, at the very least you'd know for certain whether it's for you or not.

Anyway well done on starting an interesting thread, it might even qualify as one of those old time "friday" ones.;)

Can anyone just go and watch?

I've been pondering the idea myself for a while although is there any point of it other than it being a recognised pat on the back?

Ballyman

Covey wrote: »

Speaking of acting and the like would that be why you've only a bit part on the fringes of Killinascully ?

It's a good job you are better than me. I wouldn't have the gumption to make such a patronising and ignorant commment thank god. I'd expect no less from the greaater than thou brigade though.

Covey

Ballyman wrote: »

It's a good job you are better than me. I wouldn't have the gumption to make such a patronising and ignorant commment thank god. I'd expect no less from the greaater than thou brigade though.

Go get a sense of humour, there's nothing artistic about that! ( Covey GTTB !)

CabanSail

smelltheglove wrote: »

Can anyone just go and watch?

I've been pondering the idea myself for a while although is there any point of it other than it being a recognised pat on the back?

Anyone is welcome to come & watch the proceedings. I found it an interesting day but had to leave early to get back for the Book Launch.

dakar

CabanSail wrote: »

also helping those who have just joined to explore their potential.

Also my favourite aspect of my camera club experience. I can see how a bigger club could cater for all levels better, but I can only speak from my own experience, and it didn't work for me.

CabanSail

I think that each club has it's own personality. They also have strengths & weaknesses.

This Sunday we have a Beginners outing where we team up 3 or 4 new members with an experienced photographer. They then go for a wander & take photos. It is a very enjoyable day & some of the images they come back with are great.

nilhg

smelltheglove wrote: »

Can anyone just go and watch?

I've been pondering the idea myself for a while although is there any point of it other than it being a recognised pat on the back?

Somedays i wonder if there's any point getting out of bed......

Seriously though it's a challenge, if you are prepared to take that challenge on, on it's own terms then it's something to work towards. And the old letters after the name might impress some potential clients, if not some folk here?:p

Ballyman

Covey wrote: »

Go get a sense of humour

I have one. All you have to do is read this thread in it's entirety to realise that!!

Covey

Ballyman wrote: »

I have one. All you have to do is read this thread in it's entirety to realise that!!

Exactly