Are these photos bad?

chrisb0109 wrote in post #9675323
Myself and Onix had an exchange about these images on another forum, unrelated to photography

The only thing that is remotely curious about this strange, strange thread, is what the other 'unrelated' forum was...

Perhaps it was BSFOTN (Bad Seventies Fashion On The Net)??

:p

Sounds like two opinions; which in the end, really do not matter. Right now you two sound like highschoolers. Agree to Disagree and move on.

onix wrote in post #9675591
It is true that great photography can be achieved with or without the advantage of technology, but availability of such technology makes things much easier. That means to have more acceptable pictures in your term, either better photographer is needed, or better equipments are needed -> that's why budget matters.

Also, previously you claimed that "the lighting equipment makes no difference". But here you made several comments on lighting. You are contradicting yourself.

I didn't say lighting doesn't mater. I said lighting equipment doesn't matter. Lighting is one of the most important elements of a photograph, but whether it come from a profoto, a desk lamp, or the sun makes no difference in the quality of the final image. A good photographer can make any of it work well.

The availability of technology does not make it easier to come up with a great photograph. It makes it substantially easier to create numerous mediocre photographs. The distinction of being great has goten harder and harder to achieve as a result of easy access by the masses to reasonable quality photographic equipment.

A poor photographer with great, high end equipment will still produce poor photographs. A good one will succeed no matter what the technological limitations.

Budget really doesn't matter. The skill of a photographer does not directly correlate to prices. Prices are about marketing and how one places oneself in the industry. There are plenty of genius photographer charging next to nothing because they don't have the business know how to promote themselves.

So that's why you were inappropriately hiding under a second ID, in an effort to prove your point by getting "unbiased" opinions from the rest of us? Please.....

Likely most of us don't know you.

And for sure most of us can confidently stand on our own beliefs, and render the "unbiased" opinion you sought without being influence by who you may or may not be. Give us a little credit.

The point is, that was then, this is now, and we learn from the historical record. But to be TRULY IMPARTIAL and fair, it would be necessary to view those pieces within the context of other work of that time and genre, side-by-side. Not to mention - as I've said before - scanning has degraded those images.

Take it out to the playground guys....

chrisb0109 wrote in post #9675323
To explain the thread here, Myself and Onix had an exchange about these images on another forum, unrelated to photography. He started a thread here to further discuss in a more appropriate place.

In before the ban and close. 1. Multiple accounts are not permitted by POTN rules. 2. Images posted must be your own and not someone elses. If they are not yours, you can link to them only.

I don't have two accounts. You are talking to the wrong guy. I'm not sure why he felt the need to start a second one.

sapearl wrote in post #9676267
So that's why you were inappropriately hiding under a second ID, in an effort to prove your point by getting "unbiased" opinions from the rest of us? Please.....

Likely most of us don't know you.

And for sure most of us can confidently stand on our own beliefs, and render the "unbiased" opinion you sought without being influence by who you may or may not be. Give us a little credit.

The point is, that was then, this is now, and we learn from the historical record. But to be TRULY IMPARTIAL and fair, it would be necessary to view those pieces within the context of other work of that time and genre, side-by-side. Not to mention - as I've said before - scanning has degraded those images.

Take it out to the playground guys....

I can't get past the fact that he's got gloves on, yet has a hand in his pocket. Plus, his over coat is off and hanging off his shoulder! Weird.

Sorry about that Chris - my bad.:o

chrisb0109 wrote in post #9676515
I don't have two accounts. You are talking to the wrong guy. I'm not sure why he felt the need to start a second one.

This is the funniest thread I've seen on here - ever.
All because of just a couple of bad seventies fashion photos that have no obvious point or relevance.
Still, it's a funny thread and I hope it doesn't get locked or dumped.

onix wrote in post #9676556
User is banned from forums

And hopefully any other identities he might have. This is an odd thread - these guys must be 12 years old...


-js

Well, that was fun while it lasted, wasn't it?

Now let's move along. Nothing to see here.

But before you go, please re-read our rules. Pay particular attention to the "Don't be a jerk" rule.