rules are made to be broken? and others...

ksmattfish said:
Does photography/art have to be pretty and beautiful?
To quote Susan Sontag 'most people think that a beautiful picture is a picture of something beautiful'.

Pictures, either by accident or design, actually say something about the photographer and the way they view the world.
Most people viewing a picture project their own opinions and world view onto it.
The 'art' of being a photographer is to more or less direct the viewer to see what you want them to. Pre-visualisation is one of the tools that help you to do it.
 
When I speak of beauty, it is more than just a representation of something beautiful. Subject mater pretty or not does not determine deep beauty nor whether or not it is a "pretty" picture. Any subject matter may be pretty or beautiful, either, niether or both and the difference has to do with the seeing of the photographer, not the subject matter.

To quote a good friend of mine:
" To make a pretty picture is to see only the surface of the subject matter, and be relatively unconscious of the beautiful. "

Hertz van Rental said:
Most people viewing a picture project their own opinions and world view onto it. The 'art' of being a photographer is to more or less direct the viewer to see what you want them to.

The viewer has their own unique vision and is dependent on how well evolved that vision is. Which is one reason I have no interest in directing a viewer, the photograph will "speak" to them as they see it regardless of my seeing. Nor does it come in mind when making a photograph as I do not photograph for others. I photograph for myself. The bonus of that journey is that someone may enjoy the photograph.

thebeginning said:
...in fact no rules of course, just strong suggestions or guidelines,...

Are not strong suggestions, rules more or less? While it is important to understand the technical, which is not required to see photographically, when it comes to so called rules of composition, there are none, none what so ever, none to follow or not follow. Techique can be taught how to compose should not be.
 
this is all just idle chit-chat about rules and guidelines and all. in reality there are rules and they must be obeyed. even if there are only two of them all of us obey them in taking a photo. even if the rules are basic ones such as your subject must be in the frame in order for it to enter the shot. :D they're rules and we obey them. most of them subconciousely (i never know if that's the right form) but they are there and we repect them.

a picture indeed is a world of content and the point of view is in itself a key which opens a different door every time.
 
Rather than talk about open-mindedness in viewing photography, I wrote about open-mindedness in life in general. I also went way overboard.

How to open your mind.
An essay by Jadin.


This...
This...
This is going to be a hard essay...

(post writing - meeting my expectations of this essay I failed miserably. this is what's left of it...)

Imagine a child born in a bubble. As he grows the bubble grows with him. It protects him from possible dangers, negative influence, etc. The only problem is he can't see anything outside of his bubble. Some children spend their whole lives living in the bubble, and most are quite happy without ever knowing of it's exsistence. (Ignorance is bliss)

Some children, however, can see the bubble. They look at it. They probe at it. They see how it stetches when they poke it. They see what it does and what it's capable of. And when they are ready, they decide they want to see outside of their bubble. The bubble bursts.

Instantly you are overwhelmed by new thoughts, ideas, concepts, emotions. It's a whole new point of view. You run around taking in as much as you can of this whole new world you never knew exsisted before. You see people in bubbles everywhere. They walk around, go to their jobs, live their lifes all in the comfort of not knowing they are trapped inside a bubble. Trying to talk to them about this whole new experience, they look at you like you're crazy and think nothing more of it. You find talking with them can be unfulfilling, you don't relate as well as you used to.

But as you look deeper you also see other people running around in this new space bubble free. With those you discover you can relate to them on a whole new level. They understand when you talk about your new ideas, and have some of their own that make you think, "Woah! I never would've thought of that!".

Once freed you realize that you will live life with a greater variety of emotions. You experience happier highs and sadder lows. You can't relate to your old friends the way you once could. Sometimes you wish you were still in the bubble, but you can never return, It's gone. Oh, you can close your eyes, pretend, and make it real, but it's not the same. The very knowledge that it's there makes it useless to you.

Years later you are living your life and you slowly realize the space you've been living in is actually just another bubble, much larger than the first, surrounding you. But now you know how it works. Do you run at it with scissors? Or live in the bliss of never knowing what's on the other side. Will you regret popping this one? How many more bubbles will there be? Only one way to find out...

----------

Being open-minded is a never-ending process. Simply because the layers aren't linear. Being open-minded about sex, for example, will not make you open-minded about art, and vice versa. Because of this, noone can walk you through it. You have to open your mind as each opportunity arises. Then you will be an open-minded individual (forever a work in progress). The biggest mistake you can make is assume that you're open-minded. Doing so closes your mind to the other layers you haven't even discovered yet. Only after you've opened your mind do you realize it was previously closed.

The more I think about this, the more I realize you can't teach it. Simply because it usually requires an epiphany usually from a life-altering experience. A close call with death. A new baby. A mid-life crisis. Etc. I've been trying to think of ways to help the process along, the only way I've thought of is catharsis. I found this definition I rather like...

Catharsis is a form of emotional cleansing first defined by the Greek philosopher Aristotle. It originally referred to the sensation that would ideally overcome an audience upon finishing a tragedy. The fact that there existed those who could suffer a worse fate than them was to them a relief, they felt ekstasis (literally, astonishment), from which the modern word ecstasy is derived. Their spirits are refreshed through having greater appreciation for life.

Basically you can watch a movie or read a book and feel as though you've had a life-altering experience (in many ways you have). During that ecstasy is the perfect time to meditate not only on what you just saw, but on your own life.

Here is some things you can check out that changed who I am today.

Films:
- Fight Club (cathartic + makes you think about your life)
- American Beauty (cathartic + makes you think about your life)
- Amelie (cathartic + makes you think about your life)
- American History X (cathartic + makes you think about your life)
- I <3 Huckabees (makes you think about your life - for whatever reason wasn't cathartic for me)
- Baraka (cathartic)
- Life is Beautiful (cathartic)
- Twelve Monkeys (cathartic)
- Donnie Darko (cathartic)
- Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (cathartic)
- Lost in Translation (cathartic)
- Hero (cathartic)
- The Matrix (cathartic)
- Pi (cathartic)
- Requim for a Dream (cathartic)
- Serendipity (cathartic)
- Shawshank Redemption (cathartic)
- Fallen (cathartic)
- Se7en (cathartic)

Books
- Princess Bride (yes the book, not the movie, movie was good, but the book is exponentially better)
- Siddhartha (cathartic + makes you think about your life)
- The Old Man and the Sea (cathartic)
- Wow. I don't read enough, I can't remember any others right now.

This is by no means an exhaustive list, just ones that moved me to re-think how I think ;)

Post what's changed your life (hopefully for the better) and I'll add them to the list.
 
Well put! :thumbup:

There are people I'd like to show your essay too... but... there's just no point - they either get it already or they'll just read it and think they get it but won't. I wander if I get it really. ;)

As you say, epiphanies are the only way and can be introduced to people; But it's hard work.

It's a beautiful thing when you're trying to open someones eyes on a subject and you suddenly realise that it's your own eyes that have been shut. ;)
 
As far as pre-visualization goes, I find that what I see is rarely what I get out of my photos. Most of the time the photos are way better than what I saw with my eye. It never ceases to impress me. (I think I like my art a little too much at times. I'm definately my own biggest fan) :sillysmi:
 
your essay (and most people don't realise this) is a mixture of philosophies. matrix meets MiB meets vanilla sky. it is what my buddhist friend keeps on preaching about. it is the thing nature is telling us when it shows us its beauty. it's a bit of solipsism and a bit of descartes. you should read nietzsche. his way of opening your mind is at least to me unparalleled. for opening your mind is realising that it is not only you who are trapped in the bubble but the bubble itself is trapped by you, t cannot move outside without taking you. also, once one bubble is burst, another is formed. and the one thing that is indeed constant is cause creates effect. causality. you must look at the problem from an infinite point of view. what does another in a bubble see you like, or what kind of bubbles are there, and can you really know that the bubble is no more, or is it just an impression as another layer just adds up on top of the old? funny thing is, you can never know. you can never be sure of anything (descartes about sensory perception) and therefore you cannot know what opening your eyes is. because you don't really know what they are. define your eyes without the use of your senses. you can't. they are just a convention. everybody says they are up in our head and we see with them. but how can you be sure? maybe it's just a hoax set up for you inside the bubble (solipsism). so you see opening you eyes is only a matter of speaking, for they are forever either closed or open, one can never know, but they do change perspective. as eistein said, everything is relative...
 
eydryan said:
you can never be sure of anything (descartes about sensory perception)
A misconception regarding Descartes is that he cast doubt on 'reality' or what we perceive. What he actually did was go back to first principles - by doubting everything that admitted of doubt and seeing what was left: what was indubitable (intrinsically incapable of being doubted).
Thus he came up with cogito, ergo sum (I am thinking, therefore I exist) and used that as a basis to work out what else exists.
His argument for the existence of 'reality' goes: Whilst I can doubt that objects exist and that I have a body, I cannot doubt that I am having experiences as if such objects were there. Therefore something must be producing these experiences. That something must exist and correspond to the experiences I have. Viola!
He also used this argument to prove the existence of God.
In essence Descartes was trying to prove that things existed which had a correlation to our experiences and therefore you could trust your senses.
You must remember that Descartes was primarily a Scientist and Mathematician*. He needed to be able to trust his senses.

As for Einstein, what he meant was: how things appear to behave is determined by the position of the observed relative to the position of the observer.


*He was the inventor of Cartesian Co-ordinates.
 
hmm, well that could be. i really need to actually read descartes. unfortunatelly he was one of those i never had the time for. but that is what i had heard in an essay about his principles. and that is what i heard. and also the fact that his famous quote was actually in two of his books and only mentioned the idea but not in those exact words. so i cannot actually confirm that yet but i'll be on it asap :D

and einstein is quite the same thing, you refrence to the applied principles not the actual ones. what you say is the applied physics principle. but he also wrote a book which i borrowed from the goethe institut and in it there was a more phylosophical approach to the matter(it's called "the theory of relativity", kinda figures :lol: ). as in what i said, the relativity of all objects. different points of view and everything leads to a different perception.

but of course, it is all a matter of interpreting what was written. therefore, our views upon the work itself may be completely different because of our different age, background, nationality, favourite football team, sock size and everything. :D
 
eydryan said:
your essay (and most people don't realise this) is a mixture of philosophies.

Ahh see, you're a learned man. Truth is I've never been to college, and never read any philosophy, quite literally. Oh I might've picked up a hint or two along the way from the films I watch, but that can't be much. I always had this idea that if I read other people's philosophies it would change my own. Enough so that my philosophies wouldn't be my own, only my interpretation of someone else's. As a creative person I like to do my own thing, even if it's reinventing the wheel. What is in that essay is my own philosiphies.

[the bubble stuff was from my website a few years ago, original rougher version.]


I've never cared for the "you can never be sure of anything" stuff. But then I'm a firm believer that we were created by a God who knew what he was doing. I believe reality exsists, regardless if are there to perceive it.* Our sensory perception affects our brain, our thinking, but not reality itself. For example, a schizophrenic or someone tripping on drugs may see things that don't exsist in reality, but they don't exsist anywhere besides their own mind. You and I will certainly never see them.


*just in case anyone brings it up, while the simple fact of our viewing atoms [i think it was atoms, something molecular anyway] actually changes the way they behave, doesn't change my belief. The atom is still an atom, it doesn't stop exsisting, or turns into something outrageous like a banana [for lack of a better 'something outrageous']
 
Descartes explains most of this in his Discourse on Method and in his Meditations. And he would have frowned on you drawing conclusions from 'knowledge' derived at second hand.
As for Einstein, he was talking and thinking about the physical world and how to describe it in Mathematical terms. In particular he was trying to produce a theory that explained all phenomena in the Universe.
As a by-product it also explains differences in observations between different observers, but only if those observers are in different places. Einstein would have argued that two observers standing in the same place observing the same phenomenon would see exactly the same thing. This is a cornerstone of Scientific principle.
What you are doing is interpreting things to suit yourself.

As for putting different interpretations on things, that is always possible but some interpretations must be more accurate than others. A good indication as to whether you are on the right tracks is to compare your interpretation with the majority view.
And to be prepared to accept that you may have got it wrong.
 
eydryan said:
in reality there are rules and they must be obeyed.
What are they, if I may ask?
 
i do accept that. however you see what you say about what einstein said is impossible by the first rule of logics: "two objects can never be absolutely identical because they do not occupy the same time and space". so there can never be those two observers in the same place, can they.

i must however bow down and admit arrogance. you have more knowledge here and as good as my logic may be a conversation would give you the upper hand. so i back down slowly, but i shall resume this as soon as i can...

however, about interpreting things, isn't that what argumentation is all about? bending the truth... pulling your listener in the direction you want him... and then playing out his weaknesses in order to reveal the soft spot. and i personally believe this is everyday life, even when you buy coffee from a shop or when you ask a person a question. only time you admit defeat is when the doors are locked in front of you or when you feel a wall coming up.

general interpretations i find are boring. that is why i do not like philosophy as a science. it tries to make everything clear when everything is not. and it is all inside us. all of this knowledge is right down there. all that has ever been said in this field can be reproduced by a handful of people who are brilliant enough to see them.

and i am a learned man, well boy would be more appropriate, but only from one point of view. somewhere along the line i lost touch with my abilities and now all i have are speculations and weaseling. just like a drop of water i hit nothing but walls and instead of tearing them down i search the crack and drip through it. going through life like a mole. blind.

the reason i have read philosophy was a coincidence, the actual topic presented itself as no interest to me but i grabbed hold of aphorisms(is that the translation?) by nietzsche. and i loved it. so i read more, heideger, kant, even that bit by einstein, and such until one day i just got bored. and quite started forgetting. As phillip k dick said "Don't try to solve serious matters in the middle of the night." and it's mainly night here.

the reason i cling to these is well foolish pride would be one. as a young person i tend to do stupid things for unimportant reasons. alpha male stuff especially. demonstrating superiority without actually having it. a bluff not many would call. but of course there are those who do and well they are the true teachers. they are the real scholars.

i must brag here but i am one who sees things in life clearly. that is why i am so sad and undecided. i see the good things always have a catch. they always drag you down. take the most obvious example: money. it happened to me once as i fell asleep on a sidewalk (no,i wasn't drunk) and it was the best sleep i ever had. i mean money and material possesions are all just drugs, short-term fixes for people who are constantly frustrated that they cannot reach total happiness. and they don't realise that joy without pain is nothing. or that life no matter how small is just as important. i found this "school of life" in buddhist writings and especially in the legend of krishna.

jadin, i believe you will like this as it resembles your philosophy somehow. the writer is a zen master from new york i believe but he has some points worth checking out: www.organelle.org my request is that you hold this page to yourself as it is quite a sanctus and people who do not wish to learn such things and are ignorant may damage its point and well mainly ask stupid questions.

i for one hate this place this world. it is in my veins that i hate every human in this world and given the choice no matter how radical it sounds i would kill them all. now this is no video game rush but more along the lines of logics. in life you are alone. all people want to either get rid of you, use you or make you suffer. therefore you realise that they are all out to get you. if there is nothing in it for them they leave. and i have such hatrid for this place which does not see its corruption and its flaw. for it is a system that all feel is wrong but no one manages to change it. for in order to change there is need for one man. and then there is need for all men to do the same. and that is simply not possible in this style of education. dumming our brains in order for them to function as we want them. what i speak of is the fact that if it ever happened to you when all of a sudden your brain responds to a question or arithemtical problem quicker and better than yuo could through your so called embettered processes.

and i honestly believe that given the "Codes" you could turn into a banana because our brain has the ability to command any cell in its composition.

fortunatelly no one really has the time to think of all this, except perhaps schizzos. but that is another matter. i believe they should be let loose. for maybe they are what we are missing. (ever seen k-pax?) the twisted mind lets some of its secrets pour out.
 
eydryan said:
i do accept that. however you see what you say about what einstein said is impossible by the first rule of logics: "two objects can never be absolutely identical because they do not occupy the same time and space". so there can never be those two observers in the same place, can they.
Two observers can never be in exactly the same place - but this does not affect what is being observed.
eydryan said:
i do not like philosophy as a science. it tries to make everything clear when everything is not.
Philosophy is more to do with exploration. It is a means of defining our uncertainties, not our certainties. If this were not so, philosophers would not be able to question the thinking of their predecessors.
As for the rest, welcome to the Human race. Try reading Kafka. ;)
 
I hope you don't mind if I pick apart your post...

eydryan said:
i do accept that. however you see what you say about what einstein said is impossible by the first rule of logics: "two objects can never be absolutely identical because they do not occupy the same time and space". so there can never be those two observers in the same place, can they.

Hertz answered this one, but I'll go the laymen route. The key is IF they were in the exact same place, they would see the exact same thing.

eydryan said:
i must however bow down and admit arrogance. you have more knowledge here and as good as my logic may be a conversation would give you the upper hand. so i back down slowly, but i shall resume this as soon as i can...

I find logic trumps knowledge usually. Just my opinion.

eydryan said:
however, about interpreting things, isn't that what argumentation is all about? bending the truth... pulling your listener in the direction you want him... and then playing out his weaknesses in order to reveal the soft spot. and i personally believe this is everyday life, even when you buy coffee from a shop or when you ask a person a question. only time you admit defeat is when the doors are locked in front of you or when you feel a wall coming up.

You don't suppose that maybe they just want to sell you your coffee? You're a half-empty guy I take it?

eydryan said:
general interpretations i find are boring. that is why i do not like philosophy as a science. it tries to make everything clear when everything is not. and it is all inside us. all of this knowledge is right down there. all that has ever been said in this field can be reproduced by a handful of people who are brilliant enough to see them.

Is philosophy considered a science?? Wow, that makes no sense to me either. It seems like the complete opposite.

eydryan said:
and i am a learned man, well boy would be more appropriate, but only from one point of view. somewhere along the line i lost touch with my abilities and now all i have are speculations and weaseling. just like a drop of water i hit nothing but walls and instead of tearing them down i search the crack and drip through it. going through life like a mole. blind.

If you ask me (which you didn't) I'd say you didn't lose touch with your abilities, but that you lost your faith in the system that is supposed to teach you. Like you've come to a point where you realize you can learn more on your own.

eydryan said:
i must brag here but i am one who sees things in life clearly. that is why i am so sad and undecided. i see the good things always have a catch. they always drag you down. take the most obvious example: money. it happened to me once as i fell asleep on a sidewalk (no,i wasn't drunk) and it was the best sleep i ever had. i mean money and material possesions are all just drugs, short-term fixes for people who are constantly frustrated that they cannot reach total happiness. and they don't realise that joy without pain is nothing. or that life no matter how small is just as important. i found this "school of life" in buddhist writings and especially in the legend of krishna.

You are exactly right about money etc. But I wonder why you consider it a "good thing". I agree about life at any size is important. Not because I think they will reincarnate as something else in their next life, but because I believe they have a right to exsist. Ten-fold when you consider the fact that no animal destroys it's environment the way humans do.


eydryan said:
jadin, i believe you will like this as it resembles your philosophy somehow. the writer is a zen master from new york i believe but he has some points worth checking out: www.organelle.org my request is that you hold this page to yourself as it is quite a sanctus and people who do not wish to learn such things and are ignorant may damage its point and well mainly ask stupid questions.

I'll check it out. I had a bad experience with a zen master once. I hope it's not him!! :D

eydryan said:
in life you are alone. all people want to either get rid of you, use you or make you suffer. therefore you realise that they are all out to get you. if there is nothing in it for them they leave. and i have such hatrid for this place which does not see its corruption and its flaw.... and that is simply not possible in this style of education. dumming our brains in order for them to function as we want them. what i speak of is the fact that if it ever happened to you when all of a sudden your brain responds to a question or arithemtical problem quicker and better than yuo could through your so called embettered processes.

I can't help but think you're seeing what you want to. Not what actually exsists. Your view of friendship is very depressing, and fortunately not true in my opinion. The people you describe are not worthy of being your friends. Find a few true friends whom you can relate to, who care about your well-being, and make you happy! Don't settle for the users and abusers, they are simply not worth your time.

Honestly, I think you need to look at yourself more than your friends. Birds of a feather, flock together. Are you the type of person who uses and abuses people to suit your needs? Are you pretending to be someone you're not to befriend them? If so, you're not helping yourself. Just look at your outlook on life because of it.

Have many aquantances, have few friends. But make the friends you do have count. I've found the opposite to be true. I've found that all humans are in nature 'good at heart'. I believe we are born with a fully functional conscious. (every civilization always comes up with the same basic laws to live by. murder for example.) It takes persistance to become something else. They slowly dull themselves to badness. These people know what's wrong but they do it anyway, even if they never admit it. I imagine a serial killer or something thinking at times, "Wow, I'm f***ing crazy!".

So as far as the world not seeing their corruption and flaws? Doubtful. I guarantee you they see it. They just don't acknowledge it's presence. They have too much to lose if they do.

And for the last statement about our brains, you have no idea how exactly right you are. When you, for example, bounce a ball against a wall and catch it, your brain is doing physics, geometry etc on the fly, fractions of a second. The same calculations on paper would take soooo much longer.

eydryan said:
and i honestly believe that given the "Codes" you could turn into a banana because our brain has the ability to command any cell in its composition.

fortunatelly no one really has the time to think of all this, except perhaps schizzos. but that is another matter. i believe they should be let loose. for maybe they are what we are missing. (ever seen k-pax?) the twisted mind lets some of its secrets pour out.

As far as schizzos, not a good idea. Their hallucinations can be very dark and dangerous if unchecked. With virtual reality technology they've been able to show what it's like being a schizophrenic. A quick google search found this which gives a good idea of what it's like.

Just plain crazy people on the other hand? Hell yeah, let 'em run loose! Crazy people are so fun to hang around with. I'm totally serious, they are a blast.

Just wanted to add I'm really enjoying this thread...
 

Most reactions

Back
Top