I want to be a photographer – or maybe an artist. - small rant

[robbins.photo]

It's interesting to try to have an actual discussion here; it's like having a conversation in the midst of a crowd of upset ducks.
Everyone who has nothing to contribute to the discussion chimes in with some version of 'look at me, look at me'.
I really don't care about other people's obsessions with their own wittiness or feelings of inadequacy and how they deal with them, I just wish they would ignore my threads.

Well Lew to be fair you can't really have an "actual discussion" if you simply dismiss anything that doesn't agree 100% with your original premise. I think if you took the time to read back through your responses you'll find that this is a prevalent theme.

And yes, their are some of us who can and will interject a little humor now and again, but for a lot of us it isn't for the egotistical reasons you wish to assign. Their are folks here who will try to deflect a lot of the hostility on both sides by adding a bit of humor before the thread explodes into some totally out of control testosterone fest.

I'm guilty - you bet.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

 

[table1349]

It's interesting to try to have an actual discussion here; it's like having a conversation in the midst of a crowd of upset ducks.
Everyone who has nothing to contribute to the discussion chimes in with some version of 'look at me, look at me'.
I really don't care about other people's obsessions with their own wittiness or feelings of inadequacy and how they deal with them, I just wish they would ignore my threads.

Lew, from the very beginning of this thread you have demonstrated that you are not interested in having a discussion. This has been nothing more than a rant about your personal likes and dislikes that you have asserted are the correct beliefs and feelings. I'm not sure if this whole thing started from your wond feelings of inadequacy and this is the way you deal with them. or you obsession with what you feel is just in right in the "art" of photography. While this may be a crowd of ducks, you have demonstrated that you are the Aflac Duck in the group quacking the loudest.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

this thread delivers

 

[ratssass]

It's interesting to try to have an actual discussion here; it's like having a conversation in the midst of a crowd of upset ducks.
Everyone who has nothing to contribute to the discussion chimes in with some version of 'look at me, look at me'.
I really don't care about other people's obsessions with their own wittiness or feelings of inadequacy and how they deal with them, I just wish they would ignore my threads.

Well Lew to be fair you can't really have an "actual discussion" if you simply dismiss anything that doesn't agree 100% with your original premise. I think if you took the time to read back through your responses you'll find that this is a prevalent theme.

And yes, their are some of us who can and will interject a little humor now and again, but for a lot of us it isn't for the egotistical reasons you wish to assign. Their are folks here who will try to deflect a lot of the hostility on both sides by adding a bit of humor before the thread explodes into some totally out of control testosterone fest.

I'm guilty - you bet.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

your wrong

 

[robbins.photo]

your wrong

Rotflmao - ok that just made my whole day

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

 

[The_Traveler]

Well Lew to be fair you can't really have an "actual discussion" if you simply dismiss anything that doesn't agree 100% with your original premise. I think if you took the time to read back through your responses you'll find that this is a prevalent theme.

And yes, their are some of us who can and will interject a little humor now and again, but for a lot of us it isn't for the egotistical reasons you wish to assign. Their are folks here who will try to deflect a lot of the hostility on both sides by adding a bit of humor before the thread explodes into some totally out of control testosterone fest.

I'm guilty - you bet.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

I call BS on this.
Look back at your own posts, not just here, your behavior is to run in, try and say something funny whatever the situation and then back away.

On my deflecting other people's input.
You know that's called discussion.
I make a point, someone else makes a point.
I don't have to agree.

Go back and reread some posts, I just did.
I continued to talk about what I thought, the constant refrain from others were either in partial agreement or trying to discredit what I thought because I was 'angry.'

It wasn't me that started ad hominem remarks; as I remember Rick58 called me something, I won't look back to find it.
Do you ever think that the way discussions are routinely broken up ir diverted here by hecklers or comedians that actually diminishes the quality of the forum?

It's interesting to try to have an actual discussion here; it's like having a conversation in the midst of a crowd of upset ducks.
Everyone who has nothing to contribute to the discussion chimes in with some version of 'look at me, look at me'.
I really don't care about other people's obsessions with their own wittiness or feelings of inadequacy and how they deal with them, I just wish they would ignore my threads.

Lew, from the very beginning of this thread you have demonstrated that you are not interested in having a discussion. This has been nothing more than a rant about your personal likes and dislikes that you have asserted are the correct beliefs and feelings. I'm not sure if this whole thing started from your wond feelings of inadequacy and this is the way you deal with them. or you obsession with what you feel is just in right in the "art" of photography. While this may be a crowd of ducks, you have demonstrated that you are the Aflac Duck in the group quacking the loudest.

Go back and see if you can find where I talked about other people here - and see where people started attacking my position and my reasons for writing this.

 

[The_Traveler]

It's interesting to try to have an actual discussion here; it's like having a conversation in the midst of a crowd of upset ducks.
Everyone who has nothing to contribute to the discussion chimes in with some version of 'look at me, look at me'.
I really don't care about other people's obsessions with their own wittiness or feelings of inadequacy and how they deal with them, I just wish they would ignore my threads.

Well Lew to be fair you can't really have an "actual discussion" if you simply dismiss anything that doesn't agree 100% with your original premise. I think if you took the time to read back through your responses you'll find that this is a prevalent theme.

And yes, their are some of us who can and will interject a little humor now and again, but for a lot of us it isn't for the egotistical reasons you wish to assign. Their are folks here who will try to deflect a lot of the hostility on both sides by adding a bit of humor before the thread explodes into some totally out of control testosterone fest.

I'm guilty - you bet.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

your wrong

Funny, but better without the spelling error.

 

[ratssass]

you're wrong

 

[robbins.photo]

I call BS on this.
Look back at your own posts, not just here, your behavior is to run in, try and say something funny whatever the situation and then back away.

On my deflecting other people's input.
You know that's called discussion.
I make a point, someone else makes a point.
I don't have to agree.

Go back and reread some posts, I just did.
I continued to talk about what I thought, the constant refrain from others were either in partial agreement or trying to discredit what I thought because I was 'angry.'

It wasn't me that started ad hominem remarks; as I remember Rick58 called me something, I won't look back to find it.
Do you ever think that the way discussions are routinely broken up ir diverted here by hecklers or comedians that actually diminishes the quality of the forum?

Actually Lew I do interject what I find to be humourous comments on occasion, but I also discuss things in a more serious light quite often as well. If I find that the OP or whoever I'm discussing something with is completely unwilling to converse or exchange ideas then I don't bother proceeding. You'll find evidence of that in this very thread, if you'd care to take a gander back at some of the original postings I made you will find I did try to address the subject in a more serious light.

It became abundantly clear very quickly that you had no desire to actually discuss the topic. So my options were I could either continue to try and approach the subject seriously and simply be dismissed as you have with myself and everyone else who didn't agree with you wholeheartedly, or I could do what little I could to keep the thread from exploding. I chose to do the later. If you take issue with that, you'll simply have to find a tissue I'm afraid. I will most likely be doing the same thing in the future.

Deflecting anything that doesn't agree with your original premise is not a discussion. Discussion : the action or process of talking about something, typically in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas

You cannot exchange ideas if you completely ignore or dismiss anything that wasn't in lockstep with your original premise. So if you must cry BS, this would be an excellent place to start I would think. Disagreeing with someone elses point, if you make a rational argument to support your disagreement would be fine and would certainly be part of a valid discussion. But let's face it Lew, that's not what's been happening here. You haven't been making rational arguments, you have been completely dismissing anything that disagrees with your premise out of hand.

As for who started with the personal attacks, it wasn't something I brought up but since you did in your reply I'll be happy to respond. I would submit that it really doesn't matter, and it certainly doesn't give on leave to personally attack one poster because you were personally attacked by another. If you feel you were the subject of a personal attack, then report it to the mods and let them deal with it. You can't discourage childish behavior with more childish behavior.

As for so many people telling you that your angry, have you ever stopped to wonder where they are getting this impression?

 

[The_Traveler]

you're wrong

funny

Ipad & safari don't seem to like smileys.

 

[rexbobcat]

lol. cool I will add to it.

im probably going to heat for this. But perhaps you all are making photography as a art into more than it actually is. Not to slight it at all, or the potential complexity. just sayn.
im also questioning the reasoning here, of what is art. Like there is some bar it has to reach to be art, some people to appease. Im not sure most historical highly recognized photos were intended by the photographer to be art or appease anyone at the time of shooting. The person (did he/she even consider themselves a artist or photographer?) was probably just taking the photo for their own pleasure, or for their own personal meaning. Next thing you know fourty years goes by and it is the national gallery of art acclaimed by critics.
I bring this up because to create a imaginary bar (and oh yes, this bar that is being invented here is totally imaginary) is to say that a photo has to appease. To reach a standard of acclaim. A standard of proficiency. while I was under the impression most highly recognized, famous photos were not shot with the intention of hitting any imaginary bar or appeasing. I don't think most painters, sculptors or any other artists or even beetoven on the piano for all the reason had any goal of having others invent a bar for their work and then further following through on appeasing the others imaginary standards. I actually think the entire idea of this is idiotic.
Couple hundred years from now, they accidently turn up two photos. one done by a acclaimed professional and one done by a five year old with a insta-cam. Flip a quarter on which one they decide to throw out and which one they think might have some value. Or what if they just decide this. That this was the century of NO ARTISTS. what if they blackmark the entire century as the "lost art " or "bad photograph" century. Then they pretty much say everyone sucks. kind of like certain other periods in history when it was decided nothing worth a damn thing came out of it. so much for the high art bar then.

oh, and I think half the crap in studios and gallery's does suck. The times i've been in them seem hit or miss to me. But I guess if they are acclaimed by someone , or meet some rule or standard, hey , it must be good art eh?

Back several hundreds of years ago there used to be rigorous academies of art in Europe. They took several years to complete (I believe 4?) with each year focusing on a specific foundation of painting (and possibly other forms of art, but through the past 500 years painting has been kind of considered the big daddy mac of art), until in the last year they would seek out a skilled mentor and would typically try and reproduce one of their best artworks. A lot of the masters of painting went through the academy or had apprentices in the academy.

Some of the most influential artists, however, are also those who opposed the "idealistic" views of the academy. One spin-off of this criticism was impressionism, which is a naturalistic approach to painting and art. It's not as calculated and academic as a lot of the art before it.

There has always been a bar. It just depends on how much you care or how applicable that bar is.

 

[rexbobcat]

Also; there is A LOT (see: A WHOLE HELL OF A ALOT) more artistic freedom than there used to be. Back 200 years ago, mixed media was hardly even a thing. Even 100 years ago, people would spit on you if you were a photographer and considered yourself and artist. Art has always been about the definition and the categorizing.

I think my issue with modern artists is how, and I think this is evident in many artist statement, they all think really, really highly of themselves. Like, many famous artists through history have committed suicide or have almost wasted away because they couldn't profit from their art, but modern artists are very "I'm an artist, and even though I can't actually get anyone to pay attention and I work at a coffee shop because I can't sell enough art to live, I am f-ing amazing."

That's not to say that all past artists were depressed and suicidal. Salvadore Dali was very egotistical, for instance. But the current generation of artists seem generally entitled and just so self-absorbed that there aren't appears to be trying too hard.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I LOVE all the sweeping generalizations about artists, that really aren't true.
But if that makes you feel good, carry on.

 

[kathyt]

I still have no ****ing clue what am artist really is. If one of my images ends up on a wall of a Museum...am I an artist? I am getting the hell outta this biz!

 

[robbins.photo]

I LOVE all the sweeping generalizations about artists, that really aren't true.
But if that makes you feel good, carry on.

Well let me ask you then good sir, what purpose would the internet serve if not for the promulgaton of such ridiculous stereotypes? Lol - Oh wait. I made a funny. On Lew's thread. Yikes. I am a bad, bad man.. lol