"Candid" (actually some random girl who I thought was hot)

[shiningstardv]

Gotcha! Now I may at a later time regret posting this, but it has been bothering me for sometime now, and I thought I would voice my opinion.

Is anyone else getting thoroughly annoyed with these "candid" photos of random girls with absolutely no artistic style or even photographic thought? Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with candid pictures, but when someone just posts a snapshot of a girl's butt to ask how "saturation" looks (among various other posts, from many different users), I just get annoyed. I see this forum as a place to develop and learn about an art form and camera equipment. These childish posts simply pollute the environment. If you want random snapshots of a girl's ass, there are plenty of other sites out there for you. So please, if you are here to post a legitimate candid picture and want to improve your artistic photography skills, by all means do. But if you are here to post a picture just to see someone say "wow she has a nice rack," then go somewhere else.

Sorry if this sounded harsh... :rolleyes:

[Eric DeCastro]

i totally agree.

[RockSlut]

To be honest, I'm not really sure. I've been keeping an eye on the "candids" of late and none have really "said" anything to me. A couple have come close, but for the most part I've seen photos that are merely taken without the subject knowing.

I think its a very hard style to do well. Sometimes I think less than attractive people make better subjects. If I really want to look at beautiful girls, I'll check out the work of Charles, Jo3, Paul B or Frank's work. IMHO pretty girls are always better when they're included in the process of the capturing the images. When you think about it, nobody buys gossip magazines for hot looking girls, they buy them to see Julia roberts without her makeup or Jennifer anniston looking fat.

Just my AUD$0.02

[NikonF4s]

well....yeah, you do have a point.

[dobova]

Finally it happened !!
I was waiting for this thread ... ehehehe !
I'd want to see some story of this "candids"... but this is my point.

Ciao

[Moppie]

You know what I get sick of?

People trying to push thier own deffitions of what is art onto others thinking they are the only ones who are right.
Its selfrightous, niave, and Ill be polite and say unaware.


I happen to really enjoy street photography, including candid photography.
I have seen nothing here that is childish, or random and Im not aware of anyone posting a picture with the comment "wow she has a nice rack".
If you have some examples that prove otherwise then please provide a link, and explain your reasons.

But starting a thread to try and attack the work of others with out provding examples and even a hint of good reasoning does nothing more than make you appear close minded and a little "unaware".

Heres a little tip, all the threads here are well titled and labeled as to the contents, if you don't like a certian style then don't click on the thread title.

[wintoid]

Some people are motivated by pixel-peeping
Some people are motivated by trying to become professional
Some people are motivated by recording memories (which is what I am)
Some people are motivated by a love of nature
Some people are motivated by the pleasure they can bring to others through portraits
Some people are motivated by taking candids of hot girls
Some people are motivated by taking studio nudes
Some people are motivated by taking shiny/filthy/accident shots of hot cars

I don't care what the motivation is so long as people are trying to get better, but I understand what you're saying.

Personally it means nothing to me when someone goes into ecstacy about how great a WRX is (whatever that is!!), or a great baseball player (I don't even know the rules), or how sharp their 3000mm macro is for bug shots. If those shots are good, I will be interested, and if not I will be..... bored!

So, the worst that can happen is that this site gets really boring, which frankly is not about to happen :D

[dobova]

Nice move Pekka....You are completely right !

Ciao

[Illegally_Alive]

shiningstardv,

When you view Charles, Jo3, Paul B or Frank's work you get more comments about how hot girls are.

that's all.

[dispatchermike21]

Am I missing something wheres the hot girl?

talk about labling threads this was a total ambush and that bothers me more then the random street shots.

I come here to look at different styles and looks to get ideas on how I can be better at what I want to do so I look at everything that insinuates it's a picture and well THIS isn't a PICTURE I want a picture not a rant. Thank you.

[Curos]

I think Candid Bandit has come closer than the others in capturing an artistic moment. He has some technique/comp he needs to work on, but hes getting there, and at least hes practicing. But yes, some of the others are kind of..pathetic. "Heres a random, nameless, dull woman i saw walking down the street. How's it look?" :/

[Belmondo]

Am I missing something wheres the hot girl?

talk about labling threads this was a total ambush and that bothers me more then the random street shots.

I come here to look at different styles and looks to get ideas on how I can be better at what I want to do so I look at everything that insinuates it's a picture and well THIS isn't a PICTURE I want a picture not a rant. Thank you.

This is a discussion (and a good one at that). This is the Talk About Photography forum, and in that context, the thread is properly named.

If you're looking for photos, those will be in one of the 'share' sub-forums. If you're looking for 'babes,' then you might be in the wrong forum altogether (although we do have more than a few posted here and there).

[dobova]

People trying to push thier own deffitions of what is art onto others thinking they are the only ones who are right.
Its selfrightous, niave, and Ill be polite and say unaware.

Ok ok.... I'm sorry if I've given the impression that I want push my idea, in particular talking in Candit Bandit threads. My posts "against" his candids were just for him, not to be inteded in general. I beleave that he has great curosity in street life, curiosity that can be pushed deeper, with more thinking in it. What I mean is that he can do lot better, not that what he'is doing is not ok. It's important that each of us find the right way, techincs, color and flavours to express the own thought.

Ciao

[CyberDyneSystems]

I find the trend disturbing....

This is MY opinion,.. it is not to be confused with my role as moderator.. please do not mistake my feelings on this for anything to do with forum rules.

We have had a number of gifted photographers on this frum who endeavor to share the "street life" as somone called it above,.. and they have done so with distinction.

Personally however I see a large difference between photos that capture a moment,. a candid of street life,. and what I can only see as a digitized version of a peeping tom.

I also find it ironic that we tend to portray the "paparazzi" as such villains,. and yet we have no problem with intruding on non celebrities lives as these people try to go about there daily business.

I am not at all sure why I find it all so unsettling,.. but I do.

I am not judging.. nor am I trying to impose any view,.

I am just expressing how unsettling I find the idea of somone zooming in on ,.. say for instance,. my daughter,... as she walks home from school,. capturing the photo and then posting it on the internet. :(

There are many circles in which such activity would clearly be deemed "odd" behavior.

Consider if for some reason the RIAA for instance managed to get a court order to have the State Police seize your PC... and they found such photos of young women on your PC... obviously taken covertly.

Consider a State Trooper's interpretation of this material?


Just food for thought,.. maybe

[berto]

like a couple of posts up there.. i don't really see any art in the street photography i've seen so far in here.
all i see are women walking or talking. thats what i call a mug shot.
i could take a picture of someone walking and post it here as candid but what's the point?
i'm amazed that people post so many praises for something that was shot with the least amount of thought other than just pressing a button.
personally, shouldn't a picture at least have some kind of personality? try convertingit in black and white or something. give it a journalistic feel.
after all this is all supposed to be a learning experience.

my .02 cents

[ssim]

To each their own. I personally don't spend alot of time looking in the people category but give it a cursory review every now and then. If I find something I like, I comment. If something is not my bag, then I move on and don't go back.

No one is forcing me to accept or comment on what their view of art is. To them perhaps these so called "snapshots" are a form of photography that they personally enjoy and to them it is satisfying. I think the key here is that most of us on this board are into photography for the pure enjoyement of it. If this type of imagery fulfills their requirements to this end, then good for them.

My thing is really wildlife and nature (peppered with the odd elk hugging person). I have tried the so called street photography and I suck at it, but it was enjoyable nonetheless. To me that is all that matters, if I enjoy what I am taking and you don't share that same sense of passion then it is no skin off my back.

[Moppie]

dobova please don't think my comments were aimed at you, they we're aimed at the thread starter and others like him who think you can define art and put it in a nice little square box with a label on it.
Your comments have been very helpful, not only to candit bandit Im sure, but also to anyone who has read them, myself included. I found your comments positive, informative, and clearly based on lots of personal experiance, please keep sharing your ideas and experiance :)



wintoid said it best with "Some people are motivated by pixel-peeping
Some people are motivated by trying to become professional
Some people are motivated by recording memories (which is what I am)
Some people are motivated by a love of nature
Some people are motivated by the pleasure they can bring to others through portraits
Some people are motivated by taking candids of hot girls
Some people are motivated by taking studio nudes
Some people are motivated by taking shiny/filthy/accident shots of hot cars"



A photo dosn't have to be artistic, at its most basic forum it is an analouge or digital recording media. A mechanical device is used to capture a pattern of reflected light in a digital or chemical format.
The same is true for painting or sculpture, at thier most basic definitions there is nothing artisitic about them. One is the covering of surface with a liquid media and the other is the shaping of raw materials into a new form.

Anything artisitic only occurs with higher level subjective human interaction. At some point, undefinable because its differnt for everyone, the covering of a surface with liquid media becomes art. It could be useing 3 differnt colours to paint my bedroom wall, it could be a painted representation of a can of soup, or it could be a painted representation of a man reaching out to touch the finger of a god.
All 3 are very different from each other, yet all 3 may produce a similar reaction from a human mind, causing that mind to call them art. At the same time somewhere out there will be a human mind that finds them quire boring, and wonders what the fuss is about.



The artistic interpretation is purely subjective, what is art to you maybe wall paper to someone else.



A satalite photo of a cloud formation may hold lots of infomation important for scientific inquiry, but it might also contain some contrasts between light and dark and patterns or textures that the mind finds pleasing to look at, causing the scientist to stop his examination and simply enjoy the photo on a differnt level.

A photo of a man walking down the street may hold similar values, someone from another country unfamiliar with that part of the world may find it interesting as in insight into a differnt culture, giving the photo no artistic merit. Then they may become aware of elements that make it interesting to they eye, and so redefine it, from a social recording, to a work of art.

[tommykjensen]

My thing is really wildlife and nature (peppered with the odd elk hugging person). I have tried the so called street photography and I suck at it, but it was enjoyable nonetheless. To me that is all that matters, if I enjoy what I am taking and you don't share that same sense of passion then it is no skin off my back.

This made me think of the photos You took of a couple of lovely ladies last year

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=30194 :)

[dispatchermike21]

This is a discussion (and a good one at that). This is the Talk About Photography forum, and in that context, the thread is properly named.

If you're looking for photos, those will be in one of the 'share' sub-forums. If you're looking for 'babes,' then you might be in the wrong forum altogether (although we do have more than a few posted here and there).


You are correct of course about the forum this was posted for but I tend to look through new post and use the Title to decide what to look at and this Title was misleading was it not? I am sure you read all that I said and relize I am not here cruseing for chicks or posting those kinds of photos. I am sorry if I gave that impression.

[Candid Bandit]

My definition on candid street photos is anything "I,myself" find interesting, contrast, ugly, pretty, anything out of the ordinary. The art itself is capturing the subject and the timing of the shots. People going around shooting girls butts are not getting the point of this at all imo. Its tooooooo easy. Anybody can come up with shots like that with no problem. So I agree with the shiningstdv and a few others on that point.

But I would have to disagree with the things said about what is art and what isin't art or have artistic styles. Its really in the eye of the photographer if you ask me. Like how I see alot of painting of just blobs of paint selling for thousands of dallor. Its crap to me but the painting might have taken hours and hours to complete. Who am I to say its not art..? It is, but just not what I like.

I love to hear opinion by others photogs but not judgement. When I go out shooting photos, I shoot like I'm crazy.. I go home and look at each picture and come up with a story of what it looks like even if it isin't in reality. I've even have candids of cops in uniform checking out chicks while on the job!! It might not be anything to you, but when I see how nice the shots came out for that moment I feel very happy and want to share with everyone here to maybe brighten up your day a little bit. Not to piss you off so you could publicly write some rant about how you feel my style of photography isin't suited to your taste. You are probably not pointing this rant at me personally, I hope I didn't come out sounding too harsh also. All I really want to do is capture interesting moments in the streets on my little corner of the world. I hope you know that a candid smile always always always beats a posed smile.

[shiningstardv]

OK, I would like to say a few things regarding my original post.

First of all, I want to say this post wasn't directed at anyone, it was directed at specific posts. I want you to know that I think every single person has the capability for art in them. I think it's just that some people are just trying to misuse the idea of "candid" shots, giving it a bad name, and also polluting the environment. I myself take many a candid shot and think it's a wonderful way to capture a person.

I hope you know that a candid smile always always always beats a posed smile.

This is so true, and this is what makes it an art form--taking a "snapshot" (as I said in my original post) of some random girl on the street (or her ass) does not constitute any form of true art in my mind.

Candid Bandit, this post was not IN THE SLIGHTEST directed at you, as I said above, it was not directed at anyone. In fact, I have been watching your posts and find your work to have great potential.

Another thing, I am not trying to flame anyone here, as I said originally, I didn't want to sound too harsh. Apparently some members here think I was trying personally attack other members of the forum, and in response have attacked me back. This not the case. You may not agree with my opinion, but I am not trying to hurt anyone. You are entitled to your opinion--there is no need to violently attack me for voicing my opinion, which also seems to be the opinion of several other members.

And lastly, I would like to make a more general comment about this forum. I LOVE this forum because we can have a thread like this one where people can discuss their opinions and not have their posts deleted. In many other forums I lurk in on the net, this kind of intellectual freedom is not allowed. This forum ROCKS!

[Moppie]

shiningstardv it is pretty clear that your orginal post has been somewhat missunderstood, and I aplogise if I offended you in anyway.


, it was directed at specific posts.

Unforunatly when you direct something at a post, or a thread you are directing it at the person who made that post, or started that thread.
So despite your intentions otherwise, it was taken as a somewhat personal commentary on a spefic style of photography.


One of the things that makes this forum so great is the very wide range of differnt people who are members. The whole range of photographic pursuits are represented here, from photo journalists to proffesional glammer photographers, from hobbiests with the latest and greatest equipment, to well paid pros useing equipment that is several years out of date.
A whole range of styles is covered, some of it is artistic, and some of it isnt, so when people see a post that is trying to say that some photos, or style of photos are not artistic they tend to get a bit defensive, and in may case's offended.
Makeing a post to that effect in a thread will simply be taken as your own personal opion, and prehaps any advice in it may be taken on bourd, but a new thread on the subject begins to sound very quickly like selfrigthous preaching, hence the nature of the replys you recieved :)


Your opinion on the nature of candid photography is infact quite valid, CDS and Candit Bandit both pointed that out, but since it, and the themes behind it are such touchy subjects it needs to be expressed in a more diplomatic manner if you are expecting a rational discussion :)

[shiningstardv]

shiningstardvMakeing a post to that effect in a thread will simply be taken as your own personal opion, and prehaps any advice in it may be taken on bourd, but a new thread on the subject begins to sound very quickly like selfrigthous preaching, hence the nature of the replys you recieved :)

Your opinion on the nature of candid photography is infact quite valid, CDS and Candit Bandit both pointed that out, but since it, and the themes behind it are such touchy subjects it needs to be expressed in a more diplomatic manner if you are expecting a rational discussion :)

"Hence the nature of the replys you recieved" Actually, in my mind, your reply was the only one that i found to be a bit over the line. (And once, again this is MY opinion, so please don't take it too personally.) I just think that you labeling my post as "selfrightous preaching" is a little narrow minded. Are you so arrogant that you can't even listen to someone who has an opinion which differs from yours, without attacking their opinion? By all means post your own opinion, but don't label mine falsely.

I feel that the manner is which I expressed my opinion was very "diplomatic" as you say. In fact, I spent about 30 minutes writing that post in an attempt to avoid a reaction such as yours. I think that we have a "rational discussion" here, and you preaching to me about how I should voice my opinion is the only thing that is selfrightous preaching.

[Les]

This is not exactly what I was hoping for...
By posting " butt" image, I wanted to spark discussion on different subject.
It didn't come to my mind it would focus on candid photography.
The idea was to open some mouths on the forum on something I find amazing.
Did you notice how much attention and comments almost ANY female thread finds on the forum? Replays like "I'm drooling..." make me think about author's real drive to see these images. Seems to proof the theory (picture below) .
Difference in number of views on thread suggesting "hot" subject is huge!
I tested it with my yesterdays thread ( white sheets and shoolgirl ).
I'm sorry for offending you with " butt" photo- at least now you know my intensions.

[berto]

Did you notice how much attention and comments almost ANY female thread finds on the forum? Replays like "I'm drooling..." make me think about author's real drive to see these images. Seems to proof the theory (picture below)


the main reason why I would joke around in posts like Paul buceta's or frank or Charles is that thy've alreay achieved their skills as photographers. we can't really critique people who've taken steps to go to the "higher level". their works to us now, we can only judge subjectively because technically they are "sound".
its the difference between just getting lights and shooting AND getting lights and thinking of the ideal setup for the moment, model's clothing, depth of field, etc... and shooting.

am saying WE should try a little harder. give it some kind of thought before we post. what's so nice about taking a picture of a guy just standing there? at least wait for him to pick his nose or something or scratch his butt.

my .02 as usual

[ray mackie]

May I recommend a book by the recently deceased Susan Sontag called On Photography. She really takes hold of these issues surrounding photography. These are not easy questions. Its interesting how quickly questions of ethics and morality rise to the surface when discussing issues of merit and intention. I remember how shocked I was by a fellow art student many years ago, while on my first trip to NYC, who brashly photographed down and out street people. It troubled me at the time, and still does, but Im still not entirely sure why....it just seemed so rude and invasive. I think photos tell way more about the person taking the pic, than the actual content of the pic a lot of the time. Where am I going with this........................dunno. :confused:

[Moppie]

I think photos tell way more about the person taking the pic, than the actual content of the pic a lot of the time.



As do most forms of art, infact Iv seen complete pschological works up done based entirly on peoples art work, and analyising drawings is an accepted practice in child psychology.
Most art involves some form of self expression, if you see enough work from the same artist you soon begin to recognise thier style, which is nothing more than thier own personality showing through in thier work.






shiningstardv you mentioned a "rational discussion", this generaly involves stateing some form of fact or opinion then providing reasoning to back it up. Please feel free to jump in at any time, it is your thread after all.

[chris.bailey]

Do people on this forum go looking for a photographic styles they do not like so they may then go off on one? I dont particularly like looking at other peoples baby pics (I have a million of my own) so pass them by. Most of the candids are labelled as such and as I dont care much for most of those either I do likewise. I dont like rap music so I dont listen to radio stations that play it, I dont suggest it shouldnt be played.

The great thing about this forum is its breadth (cultural, taste, geographical etc) and fairly relaxed forum rules so lets not spoil that by getting all narrow minded. If you dont like it dont look at it and if you dont like the replys, dont read them.

[dobova]

Eheheh...

chris.bailey: Do people on this forum go looking for a photographic styles they do not like so they may then go off on one?

Yeee right, this is the point. Same is for discussion.
I don't think this is a foolish thread.
One of the important advance with Internet is exactly the possibility to disscuss with so many people like this forum. Once upon the time photography was just a club of passionate people, always the same, making same things; it was difficult the confrontation with different point of view.
I'm really engaged in candids discussion becouse I was fond of that. Really I spent lot of films and compact flash. But few years ago I felt that there was more behind the faces I continued to shoot with my tele. Looking through the thousands of images in my stock, no one of them told me any more the feeling of the moment. Some of them are good pictures, good color or good moments, oh yes..but empty and old.
I was needing more.
I was really against nude, model and studio photography. I love natural light, not fiction.
But few years ago I met Andreas Bitesnich and took me in a stage of female shooting for a calendar in 2003. It was amazing and so interesting, that I had to change my mind about the creativity and the difficulties of this apparently edonistic and vacuum photography. It's not my "style". But never close the mind "a priori".

Just to conclude, the probem is marketshare : a nude nice girl is always more attractive (in terms of statistics) that a beautiful mushroom or flower. Advertisement teach to us without any possibility to discuss.

Ciao

[Tom W]

Eheheh...
......

Just to conclude, the probem is marketshare : a nude nice girl is always more attractive (in terms of statistics) that a beautiful mushroom or flower. Advertisement teach to us without any possibility to discuss.

Ciao

I suspect that hormones have something to do with this as well. :)

Good thread. Maybe there is room in the "images" part of this forum for those of us who strive merely for the perfect railroad image.

[Belmondo]

I suspect that hormones have something to do with this as well. :)

Good thread. Maybe there is room in the "images" part of this forum for those of us who strive merely for the perfect railroad image.

Any railroad image is by definition perfect already.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Just a cautionary tail...

"You may find in your lifetime that those who spend the most amount of time trying to define "art" in any way.. whether it is to pidgeon hole it or quite the opposite,.. are often the least equiped to grasp it's full breadth..... "

[CyberDyneSystems]

.... and of course in so saying the above., I have pidgeon holed myself as one of those least equipped to grasp.... :rolleyes: :lol:

Ahh well,. I was willing to make the sacrifice :)

[shiningstardv]

I kind of like to where this thread has lead to. It really makes me take a step back and look and my views and opinions of photography and art as a whole.

I am not disputing the fact about pictures of attractive women being posted and receiving more hits than any other thread. The human body is an art form in itself, and so is properly represented in photography which respects it. What annoys me is the random snapshot taking of girls or parts of girls and then posting them on the web. I see this as a violation of those persons. The reason I say "snapshot" and not "picture" or "photograph" is because I see a snapshot as a thoughtless, quick photograph. Whereas a picture or a photograph requires some thought or artistic style, even if just a little bit. This is why I think these candid photos cannot be properly judged (nor should they be), as we are trying to, because it is all about the photographer's intention.

I am not calling anyone to stop posting any types of pictures, I am just communicating my point of view. I find that I am not offended very easily, and in fact I will still continue to look at all the candid photos of "girl on the street" and "juicy", simply because it wouldn't really make sense to not look at them.

[Bruce Hamilton]

Is anyone else getting thoroughly annoyed with these "candid" photos of random girls with absolutely no artistic style...

Photography in and of itself is art... You're using various light sources to paint images on film, be it digital or mylar. The subject may not have artistic style, but that's a whole different thread...

[shiningstardv]

Photography in and of itself is art... You're using various light sources to paint images on film, be it digital or mylar. The subject may not have artistic style, but that's a whole different thread...
I think that I am going to have to disagree with this. Photography is an art if you want it to be. The 7th grade student who takes snapshots of his or her friends for fun with their digital camera is making memories, not art. But then again, this is just my opinion.

[ray mackie]

http://www.art-forum.org/z_Witkin/gallery.htm

ok, here we go.....this could get messy. I just cant resist. Most people spend most of the time, somewhere in the middle. There inevitably are extremes, usually offensive to, and rejected by, those in the middle. Most of the images being discussed in this thread are definitely in the middle....still worthy of discussion, but clearly in the middle. How do we handle work on the extremes, at least in terms of content, but which display a high level of artistic merit (my question mark isnt working, seeÉ) So, I am curious how ppl in this thread react to the work of Joel-Peter Witkin. See link above, or type the name as a query in google. Betcha a lot of us cant help looking, and being haunted and provoked by the images, despite their unsettling, disturbing, and contorversial content. Is this spiritual pornography....is this the underbelly of the psyche. Does this resonate in some dark primordial way, and if so, can it be said to be great art, or do we reject it out of hand as too disturbing and not-in-the-middle-istic. ok..


Ray

[Jyoti]

Personally, I like the Witkin stuff. I don't find it shocking - it reminds me of a mix of Hieronymous Bosch and Simon Larbalestier. I think Mapplethorpe is more shocking for most people.

As for "snaps" not being "art".... Is this art? :

http://www.sfcamerawork.org/books/src/3934923011-1.jpg

[ray mackie]

very, uhh, snappy.

Ray of light

[lomond]

This is an interesting thread. I’d like to add my take on this.

Going back to the original post;

“Getting thoroughly annoyed with these "candid" photos of random girls”….No, and to be honest there has only been one or two.

“Absolutely no artistic style or even photographic thought”…. You could say the same for some shots in every category.

“These childish posts simply pollute the environment.”….Some religious people might say the same of Charles, Jo3, Paul B or Frank's work, which I think is excellent work. However if we go right back to basics, what's the difference between sexy shots of women in the street with short skirts and sexy shots of women in the studio with no skirts. The only difference I can see is consent and quality.

On to the subject of taking shots of people without there knowledge.
As far as I’m aware it’s not illegal to take photos in a public place. Photographers have been taking pictures of people in the street since cameras were invented. Whether it’s moral to take and post a picture of someone that might be unflattering of whatever is another question.

And so to art.
Some shots might be artistic but is it art? I think there are very few true artists in photography. The great bulk of us might be described a technicians, and some great technicians. We choose a scene, compose a shot, determine the exposure, add supplementary lighting, perhaps introduce some filters, etc,etc and then press a button. Some artistic work might take place in Photoshop but the purists would put that down too.

So to some up.
I have no problem with candid street shots as long as the person is not being ridiculed or of school children etc.
Is it art. Well we all have our own opinions on what art is. For me it can be artistic but it’s not art.

[ray mackie]

I checked out Larbelestier....this is really outstanding work. It has a gentle sadness that isnt morose, and a great sensitivity to form and light. I am humbled yet again

Ray-o-gram

[Jyoti]

I think both Larbalestier and Witkin play round with some of the themes Man Ray was exploring, but both put their own twists on them

I first saw Larbalestier's work in the amazing Vaughn Oliver designs for 4AD Records like The Pixies, This Mortal Coil etc.

Larbalestier (http://www.simon-larbalestier.co.uk/home.html)

Sorry, all the above is a bit off-topic...

[shiningstardv]

As for "snaps" not being "art".... Is this art? :

http://www.sfcamerawork.org/books/src/3934923011-1.jpg
To answer that, I will quote myself. Pay particular attention to the bolded:
The reason I say "snapshot" and not "picture" or "photograph" is because I see a snapshot as a thoughtless, quick photograph. Whereas a picture or a photograph requires some thought or artistic style, even if just a little bit. This is why I think these candid photos cannot be properly judged (nor should they be), as we are trying to, because it is all about the photographer's intention.
So I guess I would answer your question by asking you if YOU think it's art. Because there is no formal definition to art, and even if there were, there are always exceptions. I'll just leave it at that.

[ray mackie]

You wont catch me arguing about what art is....it just keeps going around, and around......I like Duchamps approach....I dont think he really cared. I like the idea of the readymade. Find something, apply an idea to it, and voila, ART. Somewhere I saw a show of "found photos"...discarded snapshots which became much pithier (sp?) because they were discarded, and re.presented. Photos are like onions (Shrek 1)...they have layers.

Ray-o-hope

[ray mackie]

sorry....to answer ur question, I thinks it's art now, even if it wasn't at the time it was taken. Also, the presence of the cat in the background is very artistic. meow..

[Airedale1]

Occasional vulgarity is a by-product of the vitality and passion without which there can be no great art. -Francis Toye

[NikonF4s]

"A photograph is a moral decision taken in one eighth of a second, or one sixteenth, or one one hunded-and-twenty-fifth. Snap your fingers; a snap shot's faster. Halfway between voyeur and witness, high artist and low scum, that's where I've made my life, making my eye-blink choices."

The Ground Beneath Her Feet - Salman Rushdie

What an interesting post this turned out to be, so many differing opinions, and not a single one wrong.
Does anyone remember the first shot they took and thought, 'wow, that's really cool'? What an amazing feeling.

Enjoy it while you can...

[ray mackie]

Grade six field trip using a baby brownie I got for free for opening a bank account. I still have the pics. They were mementos. Now photography is a way of noticing the world. So, the shots are notices.