Some Photographic Myths

I liked reading this handout because it was very useful. A lot of the things I have thought about and knew but some I found hoard to believe. First off, myth number one was something we've disscussed in class about the photographer being his or her worst edititor. The story about W. Eugene Smith really was shocking to me and I guess was really proof that you can be great but just choose the wrong photos. Myth number 3 was something I never really head about and was kind of shocked. "Photographers are good printers". I guess I always thought that if your a photographer than you should know how to print, naturally. But reading into it, they said that people make it their professional career in printing and they do it all day everyday. And that photographers like Henri Cartier-Breson even got his negatives sent away for someone else to do it. I think overall it made me feel better that maybe I can't print so excellent but that's okay because I'll just send them out when I'm rich and famous. Haha

Some Photographic Myths

I thought this reading was really interesting. It was a very easy read, I didn't struggle through it like I have with others. A lot of the myths are things we have talked about in class or things I have thought about on my own, but it's always good to get the pov of another photographer on different subjects. I'm not sure I completely agree with Myth no 5: Photography is about talent and instinct. I think that, yes, you aren't born a great photographer but I think some people are born photographers. I feel like some people, no matter how much they study, will not be able to produce work like one that was born a photographer. Of course, even those born a photographer must study to be a great photographer.
Overall I really enjoyed the reading and it's probably something I will come back to again, to remind myself about these myths.

Some Photographic myth

Overall, I really enjoyed this reading. I felt it was a fun light hearted read. I found the first myth greatly useful, in relation to trying to pick photos for finals. I never really thought of how the photographer could be a bad editor because "the photographers are the only ones who have the insight and ability to select the best images of their own work". Now, that I look back at my photography from the past few years, a few of the choices were based on my emotions towards the subject matter. The second myth is especially true, I always find some difficulty when trying to talk about my own work. When talking about others work i don't usually have a problem, yet with mine I cant find the words to show what I was truly thinking as I was shooting. Another myth I liked was the 5th myth, saying that photography is about talent. I think that talent is key to keeping the motivation, but no one is instantly a great photographer, like anything it takes practice (why else would be in college for photography).

-Amanda Murley

Some Photographic Myths Response

This text was somewhat humorous, which I enjoyed. The authors seemed to want to give the reader, and other photographers, a reality check, which I also found was refreshing. A lot of the myths I have heard before and we have talked about in class. So those ones basically restated a lot of the things that were discussed in class. However, I never heard the myth that you should never photograph in a foreign culture. The only thing that bothered me about this text, which is weird, was there were only 9 myths, and I thought that maybe there should have been 10, just to make it even. But that's just me. Otherwise, I'm pretty neutral towards this text; it wasn't awful and it wasn't terribly enlightening.

Hannah Johnson

Response to: "Some Photographic Myths"

Juliet Bull

Overall, I enjoyed this reading. I thought it brought up some good points, in a creative way. The reading was interesting and kept me interesting. Although a few points they made I have heard a thousand times, some of them were new and put a new perspective for me. For example, when the author talks about how a good photographer, is not necessarily a good printer. "The fact remains that printing is a highly skilled profession that demands a great deal of time (and enthusiasm) to master. Some photographers have the interest in fine printing, and have invested the effort to become extremely proficient in it. Most have not." I think a lot of photographers, especially at our age, get confused and frustrated because printing can be so difficult. A photographer should know how to print, but should not base whether or not they are a good photographer based on their printing skills. Another good point that I think the article brought up, is photographers are their own worst editors. We have talked about this many times in class, and it is something every photographer should be aware of. We get invested in our own work. It becomes hard to look at it from an outside view and critic our own work. I also thought Myth number six, had some really good points. When the author says, "One of the most pernicious and destructive remarks which can be made to a photographer is that "it has been done before," When a person creates art, it is from what they have seen or been inspired by before and putting their own twist on it. When people say, "I've seen it before" They just mean they have seen something like it before. Every person adds a different twist or a different part of themselves into it. For art to be created it must be viewed and done over again. I really enjoyed reading this piece, it was an easy read and made some good points.

Some Photographic Myths

This reading was interesting because of the concentration of it to disprove myths about photography and people's misconceptions. A lot of these misconceptions were things i have heard or experienced and overall i agreed with the opinions of the authors. I really liked the part where the author spoke of the mysticism of art that is mostly just bullshit. I could not agree more with that, as a person on the way to developing a career in the arts it is both frustrating and difficult to sift through the bullshit and the integrity of art. I liked that this article was very real, it had a down-to-earth approach. I really enjoyed the quote: "the immature artist imitates; the mature artist steals. " I also really liked the section titled "The it-has-been-done-before-syndrome" because it was all about the misconception that everything has been photographed before, therefore it's not worth photographing again. this was reassuring because it is something I often think about.

Response to "Some Photographic Myths"

I really liked this reading, especially as a final reading for the class (or maybe it would fit better as a first reading?) I though it was interesting, and liked that like some of the other readings it had a lot of examples. It was nice that it echoed and sort of reinforced what was being said in class about photographers being their worst editors. I think that the commerce vs art being corrupt was one of the more interesting sections that had a lot of good points as well as the section after it about photography not being based on the talent and instinct one is born with.

Some Photographic Myths.

When reading the first myth about photographers are the best editors of their own work, I thought it was crazy W.Eugene Smith shot over 11,000 negatives in one year. I felt kind of bad for him when he ended up resigning from his job because he wasn't allowed full control over the picture selection, because he wasn't a very good editor on his own. From this reading I realized it's really important to collaborate with people when creating your art to get the best possible results, like talking with an editor, writer and printer. You are the artist and take the image, and having someone else help you doesn't take away from that. Once you have your image, you want to be able to show it in the best possible way. So handing it over to someone like a really good printer with a lot of experience, is a good idea, to get the best print. Also the quote "The immature artist imitates; the mature artist steals," is a line I heard all the time in high school and I still hear all the time now. If you are going to take an idea from someone you defiantly want to make it better or a little different or it does end up just imitating and seeming like you just copied an idea, not being very creative.

PRC- color photo awards

Curtis Mann's work was really fascinating. I just want to examine every corner of the photograph. I'm drawn into the large white spaces, and then want to look at every detail of the color. They almost don't look like photographs, like the picture Out Scouting, looks a lot like a painting to me. Also Alejandro Chaskielberg's work was really beautiful. The color in it was great, and for some reason made me think of the I Spy books I used to read when I was younger. I was not a big fan of Claudia Angelmaier's work. The images were just too light for me. It's hard to tell what exactly is going on in the image and what it's a picture of.

PRC- Color Photo Awards

First off, I loved this show because color photos/prints are always interesting to look at. I absolutely loved Alejandro Chaskielberg photos. They all had some quality of fantasy to them. The color is so rich you just can't stop staring at them. Curtis Mann's work was definitely interesting. It's like crosses between photos paintings and mixed media. I'm not sure how much I like it. I found it a bit to bright and florescent for my taste. Nicholas Kahn & Richard Selesnick work is so fun. They utilize multiple exposures, props, costumes and location to convince historical fiction that also critiques the major issues of today's environmental and financial crises. Those Photographers stood out to me the most. I thought the showing was great.

PRC Color Photography Awards Response

I would say the pieces all worked together as a cohesive show based on the concepts behind them. These surreal-type photographs all depict either a fantastical landscape or setting with people. Especially impressing, whether it is just their unusual format or not, are the panoramic photos by the duo Nicholas Kahn and Richard Selesnick. Putting their unusual size aside, I think the two panoramas are successful in creating accessible, though creative, scenes, and going beyond the norm. I also enjoyed how Curtis Mann put together the panels of separate images, although I'm not too keen on his work. Claudia Angelmaier's work however, really stood out to me. Maybe it's just the air of mystery in them that captures my attention; it's hard to tell exactly what those are photographs of, or what exactly is going on. But still I like the fogginess, and the fact that they are traditional opposed to digital prints. Since I've mentioned all the other winners I should mention Alejandro Chaskielberg. His work is nice too. It's vivid and definitely is a display of surreal settings on account of the lighting. They all possess strong composition and out of this world feeling, which ties them all together.

Hannah Johnson

hey guys,

just wanted to say hi and that i hope all of you made wonderful pictures over thanksgiving break.

i know its early in the game for all of you, but a little something called creative setback or block has come upon me and it will happen to all of you. i want you all to know the best way to battle that is to keep making photographs or art in general. sometimes it seems impossible upon everything in life that is going on, school, boyfriends and girlfriends, exams, work, parties, etc but remember you are all photographers. you all love making photographs, so keep doing that. and tell me to do the same if you see me!

time is ticking for editing and printing, if you need help with anything i am always around, email me or find me in the halls or darkrooms.

-your TA

PRC- Color Awards

I think the show was really interesting. The pieces all worked really well together, the sense of colors were strong and vivid. Most of the pieces seemed to be creating fantasy worlds. The "Real World" series by Seung Woo Back and "Eisbergfreistadt" by Nicholas Kahn & Richard Selesnick had the most surreal and otherworldly quality to them. I think that, compared to the rest of the artists, Claudia Angelmaier's work is out of place yet stands out because it's so different from the rest of it. Her work is very desaturated and not as brightly colored as the rest of the show. I think out of all the artists I was most attracted to the work of Nicholas Kahn and Richard Selesnick, I think their creatures and fantasy worlds are very interestingly constructed and make an impact. Overall I think the show and the artists were well chosen and they all fit well together.

No man's land

I loved the black and white images in the show, at university hall. It was an interesting take on landscapes, alot of images were things that were not the standard of beauty, for example the image" Kluza Fortress, Soca Valley, Slovenia". The wide sense of space gave an allusion of true loneliness. It is nice to see images that are not of a city in the city. The perception is some of these image is spectacular such as the image "Gettysburg, Pennsylvania". These images as a whole creates surreal imagery with a sense of beauty within emptiness.

-Amanda Murley

No Man's Land

Since I missed class last week, I went to the No Man's Land exhibit at the porter square AIB gallery. The images were beautifully printed, especially the black and white pieces. Many of the images conveyed a great sense of loneliness and abandonment. In this series of photographs it stays true to its title "No Man's Land", as there is not one portrait in the series. My Favorite photographs from the exhibit were the one of the moss and lush landscape, its colors were beautiful and the textures were very interesting. the "Abandoned Farm Near Elizabeth City" pictured farm equipment on another beautiful landscape. The photograph titled "Gettysburg Adams County, Pennsylvania" was almost dream-like. The colors of the grasses and brush are dark in the foreground and fade to lighter green in the background. The sun is a baby-blue with fluffy clouds, and it seems like something that could not exist in this country. I liked that many of these pieces are places I may never see because of their random locations in rural countrysides.

PRC Color Awards

I think all the pieces in the show fit well together. It seems like they all have some sort of surreal/fantasy quality to them which is caused by the setting in some and how vivid the color is in others. I didn't completely understand Claudia Angelmaier's pieces though. I'm not exactly sure how they're considered photography enough to be getting awards as photographs. Nicholas Kahn and Richard Selesnick's photographs were the most interesting to me. They make a lot more sense with the titles and description, but they were captivating images without them too. Alejandro Chaskielberg's images were also really captivating and surreal with the setting and colors, but became more grounded with their description. The people almost looked like set up miniatures because the grasses are so tall. I'm not really sure if I like the really saturated colors though. Curtis Mann's pieces were interesting but I wasn't really sure about them until reading the description and finding out what he did to the photographs. I think all of the sets of photos fit together into a show pretty well, but Claudia Angelmaier's pieces were the least fitting with the rest.