Overrated Photographers... and not just famous ones.

[Ccauceg]

So I am not trying to be an A**hole or anything but this has been bothering me.

I was looking through photo blogs and came across this Rachel Hulin | Art

I then was looking through these photos and almost immediately thinking the poor effort put in almost all of them, 90% of them were snap shots. Basically I didn't think any of them were good at all.

For example Rachel Hulin | Art | Hidden House (you cant be searious, really?).

I then look at her info and saw that her work as been shown in 5 galleries. Why would anyone want to showcase this stuff in their gallery? Let alone 4 others! If this is the kind of work that is being showcased and displayed as professional to the general public, no wonder the medium is considered "easy" by non photographers.

Anyone have any thoughts on this, or feel the same way I do?

 

[Iron Flatline]

Thomas Struth

 

[Derrel]

"90% of them were snap shots"

Nice try, but you'll need to do better if you wish to become an art critic. That's a tired old slam, and actually quite inappropriate. She's working in a genre that requires an educated viewer who has a background in art.

 

[lamergod]

I agree with you.Some photographers are just overrated.
One thing that is worth commending is that she kept the exposure well.
In another forum,a photographer who is very good,you can see it here Flickr: night86mare's Photostream

But when he posted a picture of a sunset that was just like any beginners shot,usually if a newbie posted it,people will say that oh,your exposure is wrong,your composition is bad and all that,but all everyone said was,it's a safe shot.I was like WTF!?!His shot is as rubbish as some newbies and all you say is a safe shot?

 

[jackieclayton]

ya i agree with lamergod, the exposure is nice on most of them. I'm not a fan of Hidden House either, lol... or Hill House... the blur hurts my eyes, its crooked, and its ugly... or Xmas House... looks like a kid took it without looking through the viewfinder... lol...sorry. I agree on your wording of "snapshot" she truly takes pics of random things... like her picture entitled "gold sponge." Not to mention a lot of them are grainy as hell ("New Years"). And sorry, "Sara and Sequin Light" looks like a bad grainy cell phone shot. I'm not a fan

Her commerce work is pretty nice, i can see them for ads and stuff. Not liking the art sets though

Derrel, please explain the education and need for a background in art to like these pictures... i'm not trying to be a smartass, i just really want to know what the photography community would find interesting in her work? Perhaps i can take correctly exposed crooked and grainy pictures of my 7up can sitting right here and get in a gallery.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

In this case I quite agree but you have to keep in mind that art is a very subjective thing. I love Yoko Ono's work. Do you know how few of us there are that do? And I can't agree that "90% of them were snapshots." The exposures, if nothing else, are very good. Not something you find in a collection of snapshots.

Nice try, but you'll need to do better if you wish to become an art critic. That's a tired old slam, and actually quite inappropriate. She's working in a genre that requires an educated viewer who has a background in art.

Not every one wants to be a critic but that doesn't mean someone can't say how they feel about a piece of art. Also, requiring someone to be a critic to give his view of things is pretty elitist and is a big part of why so few people actually go to galleries. Not to mention that I think most critics are useless artists rejects. The only ones I've ever liked were actually full fledge artists themselves.

 

[manaheim]

I thought a number of them were at least interesting.

They're not snapshots, though. She's doing "something" with most, if not all, of them. A couple I don't quite get what she's doing myself, but most I can at least see it... even if it doesn't appeal to me.

As Derrel said... I think it takes a bit more knowledge to see what she's up to.

EDIT: And btw... who cares? Her being acknowledged and whether or not she is 'worthy' is not important... unless you are taking it personally and saying "If her, then why not me?", at which point... well...

 

[kundalini]

Although I wasn't all that impressed with her outdoor shots so much, I felt her interior shots were very good. The use of lighting and geometry really got you to focus on the subject. There was also a good smattering of using texture and color to bring the viewer into the image. IMO, these were not snapshots, but well thought out and executed on the most part.

 

[usayit]

One of the goals of art is to capture the eye of the beholder and invoke some sort of reaction. Is it not?

If so, then shouldn't this be true regardless of the beholder's background; art educated or not?


Personally, no photographer comes to mind at the moment. Many have a series of wonderful photos but also have series that make me say "wtf?" Bruce Gilden comes to mind. I like some of his work but his photos of people's "deer caught in headlights" surprised look as he shoves a flash in their face doesn't do anything for me.

[EDIT]
Who is that photographer that takes pictures of other pictures? I think he/she took photos of billboards and such.. then sold them as art...

 

[lamergod]

Photography is changing .From the time of HCB,Ansel Adams and all that,their picture all had a story.But now,when you look at landscapes,you just see a picture of a beautiful landscape and nothing else.Even in street,I find that people are just taking picture of other people walking on the street.Whats so nice about it?It seems to me like voyeur.

 

[gsgary]

One of the goals of art is to capture the eye of the beholder and invoke some sort of reaction. Is it not?

If so, then shouldn't this be true regardless of the beholder's background; art educated or not?


Personally, no photographer comes to mind at the moment. Many have a series of wonderful photos but also have series that make me say "wtf?" Bruce Gilden comes to mind. I like some of his work but his photos of people's "deer caught in headlights" surprised look as he shoves a flash in their face doesn't do anything for me.

[EDIT]
Who is that photographer that takes pictures of other pictures? I think he/she took photos of billboards and such.. then sold them as art...

I think the opposite and the Bruce Gilden street stuff is class

 

[usayit]

I think the opposite and the Bruce Gilden street stuff is class

Oh certainly.... some of his work is A+. Don't get me wrong, I like his work.

There are a few series that just seem like a lot of people surprised that some big dude is shoving a flash in their face. Unlike his other series, they lack "emotion" or as another magnum photographer would put it "the moment".

 

[Iron Flatline]

Did I mention Thomas Struth?

 

[gsgary]

I think the opposite and the Bruce Gilden street stuff is class

Oh certainly.... some of his work is A+. Don't get me wrong, I like his work.

There are a few series that just seem like a lot of people surprised that some big dude is shoving a flash in their face. Unlike his other series, they lack "emotion" or as another magnum photographer would put it "the moment".

HCB is my all time favourite photographer, i think i have all of his books

 

[Chris of Arabia]

I wouldn't say all of her stuff appealed to me, but there was quite a lot of stuff I found thought provoking. I do think I saw something that would be worthy of a 'Blurry Cat' award in there though...