Technical...artistic...of both, which are you?

[oldmacman]

There are other learning styles. Trying to get another person to learn the way I do is useless unless they have a learning style close to mine. So as a "teacher", one of my tasks is to figure out how my "student" absorbs information, and then organize my transfer of information in the way they are best equipped to absorb it. By the way, teacher and student are in quotation marks because I'm not an official teacher - but I often have to teach my employees, or my clients, and I've had years of frustration until I figured out that different people learn in different ways.

Cool. What you are describing is differentiated instruction.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Picasso became a genious by turning the rules upside down. So much for art school...

THIS!

This shows your lack of knowledge of the subject.
Pure ignorance.
Maybe looking at his work, you don't know enough about the elements of design and composition to see it is still F****** there!

If you cointinue to call them "rules" you are pereptuating exactly that which you are against.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I'm not so much against the rules, or theories, if you prefer, as I am the cookie cutter manner they get preached. Too many people get tangled up in them and never get free.

"Why did you put that tree there?"
"Cause I like the way it looks there..."
"It belongs over here in this imaginary line."
"But that's kinda boring..."
"Don't be an idiot, it belongs on the line." :blushing:

This is not how you start teaching children to think creatively.
Try again sir.

 

[NikonNewbie]

I think everyone's interpetation and taste in art is different, and everyone see's things differently, what to some looks like garbage...looks to others as treasure...I firmly believe same goes with Photography.
In my YOUTH (weep weep) I was going to go to Art school on a scholarship, I was all about abstract art, give me 10 years and I started woodworking and making Americana art with wood and paint....now ...Photography...well at least im trying! lol
So....with that said...most people I believe have a built in instinct towards art, I'm not positive it can be taught, the history yes, but how and why it effects a person can not be taught-that I firmly believe.
I dont remember why I wrote this.
goodbye.
off to find my meds. lol
not kidding either. :meh:

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

So if he didn't know he was breaking the rules and produced the same exact artwork, would would it be diminished in some way?

He didn't just break them, he rebelled against them and the mindset that created them. His genious was a total disregard for the status quo.

Throw in a touch of the crazies!
He may have had schizophrenia.
More proof that you have not studied art history.

His work correlates to the work of documented schizophrenics.
You can also look at artists through history who have documented mental illnesses, and see how their work progressed as there illness did.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Beginners make composition mistakes because they arent thinking about the composition, they're distracted by rules, knobs, buttons, theories, focusing, little blinking lights and the sinking feeling they're not doing it right. Get them focused on the composition as a whole and it usually comes pretty naturally.

After all, that's what the rules say, isn't it?

You continue to contradict yourself.

Here, you are saying that once you give them the tools, they get better. Duh!!! You are admitting you have to give them the tools first.


Oh, I also wanted to address your earlier comment that was something about nobody goes in depth (beyond the rule of thirds) when critiqueing images here. You haven't been here long enough to make that judgement. I and others have. I also started a fun little project here, and I'd do it again if I ever have time to be better prepared and devote to it. I started the Bitter Jeweler School of Photography using the "groups" forum function. It was a group of 8 people who I devoted my time to, to try to teach them more about how to see, elements of design and composition, and how to use it. I also touched on the emotional psychological effects of the elements. I wasn't just teaching "put it there, at that thirds intersection, and you're set." I would teach an element, and give a project, and they would post the project here for open critique. A majority of the "students" thanked me for getting them to see and look at things differently. What I found was, it was difficult to teach a group of people all on different tracks. Some struggled with the basics, others wanted to go more in depth. My final observation, was most didn't want to devote the time (or couldn't) to see the project through, and they dropped like flies. It also proved my point, that some people get it, and some don't.

You need to put your money where your mouth is and start giving these in depth critiques you feel are lacking here.

 

[Overread35]

Just because we are going on and on about Picasso - my own viewpoint of much of his art aside - wasn't it proved at some point that fair amount was done by his barber and not the "artist" himself?

 

[mishele]

lol..........a good old "rules" argument!!!
Sorry I had to do this......
10 Top Photography Composition Rules | PhotographyMad.com

Learn them........then brake them!!! It is a must if you want to build your eye!!
Oh and I agree.....not rules......guidelines.....lol

 

[Chamelion 6]

Beginners make composition mistakes because they arent thinking about the composition, they're distracted by rules, knobs, buttons, theories, focusing, little blinking lights and the sinking feeling they're not doing it right. Get them focused on the composition as a whole and it usually comes pretty naturally.

After all, that's what the rules say, isn't it?

You continue to contradict yourself.

Here, you are saying that once you give them the tools, they get better. Duh!!! You are admitting you have to give them the tools first.


Oh, I also wanted to address your earlier comment that was something about nobody goes in depth (beyond the rule of thirds) when critiqueing images here. You haven't been here long enough to make that judgement. I and others have. I also started a fun little project here, and I'd do it again if I ever have time to be better prepared and devote to it. I started the Bitter Jeweler School of Photography using the "groups" forum function. It was a group of 8 people who I devoted my time to, to try to teach them more about how to see, elements of design and composition, and how to use it. I also touched on the emotional psychological effects of the elements. I wasn't just teaching "put it there, at that thirds intersection, and you're set." I would teach an element, and give a project, and they would post the project here for open critique. A majority of the "students" thanked me for getting them to see and look at things differently. What I found was, it was difficult to teach a group of people all on different tracks. Some struggled with the basics, others wanted to go more in depth. My final observation, was most didn't want to devote the time (or couldn't) to see the project through, and they dropped like flies. It also proved my point, that some people get it, and some don't.

You need to put your money where your mouth is and start giving these in depth critiques you feel are lacking here.

Uhhh... no, that's not what that says. I think you're so determined to tell me I'm wrong, you're not really reading what I'm saying.

Ahhh well.

On the other hand, you are absolutely correct. I've not been here long and my generalization is unfounded, so I'll officially retract it and offer my apollogies. Of the critiques I've seen since I've been her, and admittedly, that's not all of them, they are mostly fixated on minor technical glitches without any reference to the image itself or what the artist was trying to do.

As for those critiques... I've tossed a couple of comments out to that effect. I've not really commented on any blown highlights though...

I'm not so much against the rules, or theories, if you prefer, as I am the cookie cutter manner they get preached. Too many people get tangled up in them and never get free.

"Why did you put that tree there?"
"Cause I like the way it looks there..."
"It belongs over here in this imaginary line."
"But that's kinda boring..."
"Don't be an idiot, it belongs on the line." :blushing:

This is not how you start teaching children to think creatively.
Try again sir.

I agree... So why do we do it?

(BTW... that dialogue was sarcasm...)

 

[o hey tyler]

Just smoke a ton of weed. :thumbup:

 

[Derrel]

The theories of composition are a foundation to be built upon by the individual. The talented individual can learn them in the beginning and build upon them. The less talented will never move beyond them.

You can give a person the tools needed to succeed, or you can let them figure it out for themselves. Which way will take far longer?

In the future, every time you tell some one to put the books away, I will simply respond with "that is the slowest way to learn, speed up the process by reading the books."



To "color outside the lines" you must first know the lines exist.

Wow...there's one person in this *cough,cough* discussion, who's making some sense. Bitter Jeweler.

Just "looking at pictures" will not teach one the elements and principles of design. One could go to every museum in American and not learn the elements and principles of design. A one-term, college-level course in art history would be a faster path to learning about composition than five years spent looking at pictures. Especially the crap that is being churned out these days and posted by unstudied, talentless hacks on Flickr and Photobucket.

Good Lord...learning about composition and design, well, it's like humankind's understanding of the universe prior to the telescope...we were pretty sure the Earth was flat, and if one went to far out in to the oceans, There Be Dragons Here...

Speaking of giving people the tools to understand things via education as opposed to people learning through the process of osmosis, let's look at a shocking example of how incredibly inefficient untutored, unguided observation is as far as learning about art: It took HUNDREDS of YEARS (millenia, actually) for 'artists' of all abilities to learn how to draw three-dimensional shapes without resorting to a black OUTLINE around all the objects! Europe's finest painters and artists were stuck,hopelessly, with black-outline drawing, for centuries, until art education was invented. Seriously. No exaggeration; the world's foremost, best painters did not even have a clue as to how to paint without using a black border around figures! They also had no clue as to how to draw a vanishing point. So...if one things one will learn composition by just "looking", well, one is desperately wrong. You'll be dead before you learn as much as a second-year art student.

Dude... This isn't brain surgery. It's making pictures. So if you needed school to learn how do draw a vanishing point, who taught the teacher? My kids seemed to do pretty well without much formal education on the topic. Ummm... and I never used a black ouitline to paint. So I guess I got it right. Is using a black outline wrong?

How hard do you guys really think this stuff is????? You don't need to go to school to learn this stuff. Most of it is intuitive, the rules are based on what looks appealing!!! People need thousands of years of osmosis to figure out what they like to look at?

Beginners make composition mistakes because they arent thinking about the composition, they're distracted by rules, knobs, buttons, theories, focusing, little blinking lights and the sinking feeling they're not doing it right. Get them focused on the composition as a whole and it usually comes pretty naturally.

After all, that's what the rules say, isn't it?

Your lack of education, and lack of understanding on this subject is so staggeringly profound that there's no point in trying to discuss this issue. You keep referring to "rules"...thus showing me that you have no grasp of the entire subject. Seriously, you're missing the point of education and instruction so badly it's pathetic. So, excuse me....I need to go listen to a stack of classical music CD's I checked out from the library, then tomorrow I am going to write a symphony. I mean, dude, this is just writing classical music...listening to 10,12 hours of it and I ought to be able to write something at least approaching Beethoven. Fer' sure dude! Then next weekend, I am going to a concert to see Peter Frampton perform and I am going to become a master guitar player by Tuesday! Woo-hoo! Then on Saturday, I am going to watch a NASCAR race, and become a race car driver. I think Jeff Gordon's team will hire me.

 

[Chamelion 6]

LoL!!! I really wasn't trying to butcher the sacred cow here and start a mess o' controversy... But since the sucker's already dead I guess my only recourse is to offer burgers to eveyone. Whad'ya'll say? :hug::

In the early day's I was a stickler for details. Sorry, but art isn't physics. It isn't black and white and the guidelines, rules, theories, academic suggestions, or what ever you want to call them, just don't carry the weight for me that some people wanna place on them. It's about personal expression. Some people feel more comfortable with some formula to validate what they see and there is nothing wrong with that. Follow whatever muse moves you. If you're happy with what you're producing, that's what's important, right?

The OP felt they weren't "artistic" enough and leaned too much to the technical. So my advice is stop obsessing over technical crap and just learn to enjoy it. Stop shooting what you think is "good" and start shooting what you like. It isn't a contest and the only valid judge of "good and bad" is whether you managed to say what you intended.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Your lack of education, and lack of understanding on this subject is so staggeringly profound that there's no point in trying to discuss this issue.; You keep referring to "rules"...thus showing me that you have no grasp of the entire subject. Seriously, you're missing the point of education and instruction so badly it's pathetic.

I'd thank you for this, but used up my allotment.

I have to say, I am so thankful for the schooling I recieved.
I was an art major, that started with a psychology minor, then switched to education. A guy had to have a fall back plan. You know, if the art thing didn't work out. I am amazed at how my choices are rather intertwined. :thumbup:

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

In the early day's I was a stickler for details. Sorry, but art isn't physics. It isn't black and white and the guidelines, rules, theories, academic suggestions, or what ever you want to call them, just don't carry the weight for me that some people wanna place on them. It's about personal expression. Some people feel more comfortable with some formula to validate what they see and there is nothing wrong with that. Follow whatever muse moves you. If you're happy with what you're producing, that's what's important, right?

:facepalm:

Nobody here is saying it is physics, or black and white. I think it's a given that art is about expression.
The key argument here has been, and always will be with you, whether or not you teach with the proven foundations. There is also science backing up this stuff. It wasn't pulled from thin air.

Ok, so I know you won some award for something or other. Where has your career as an artist taken you?
I didn't want to play this card, and I know how it can be torn apart to a degree, but the sentiment still rings true.

Does your work hang in galleries?
Are people buying your work?
Did you make a career with your talent?
Do you make a living at it?

You went to school for photojournalism? What other forms of art did you study?
Are you a successful photojournalist?

I know this post is rather dickish, but people tend to listen more to someone who as succeeded at what they preach, rather than the armchair hobbyists opinions. One reason Derrel is > than you.

 

[Chamelion 6]

Wow...there's one person in this *cough,cough* discussion, who's making some sense. Bitter Jeweler.

Just "looking at pictures" will not teach one the elements and principles of design. One could go to every museum in American and not learn the elements and principles of design. A one-term, college-level course in art history would be a faster path to learning about composition than five years spent looking at pictures. Especially the crap that is being churned out these days and posted by unstudied, talentless hacks on Flickr and Photobucket.

Good Lord...learning about composition and design, well, it's like humankind's understanding of the universe prior to the telescope...we were pretty sure the Earth was flat, and if one went to far out in to the oceans, There Be Dragons Here...

Speaking of giving people the tools to understand things via education as opposed to people learning through the process of osmosis, let's look at a shocking example of how incredibly inefficient untutored, unguided observation is as far as learning about art: It took HUNDREDS of YEARS (millenia, actually) for 'artists' of all abilities to learn how to draw three-dimensional shapes without resorting to a black OUTLINE around all the objects! Europe's finest painters and artists were stuck,hopelessly, with black-outline drawing, for centuries, until art education was invented. Seriously. No exaggeration; the world's foremost, best painters did not even have a clue as to how to paint without using a black border around figures! They also had no clue as to how to draw a vanishing point. So...if one things one will learn composition by just "looking", well, one is desperately wrong. You'll be dead before you learn as much as a second-year art student.

Dude... This isn't brain surgery. It's making pictures. So if you needed school to learn how do draw a vanishing point, who taught the teacher? My kids seemed to do pretty well without much formal education on the topic. Ummm... and I never used a black ouitline to paint. So I guess I got it right. Is using a black outline wrong?

How hard do you guys really think this stuff is????? You don't need to go to school to learn this stuff. Most of it is intuitive, the rules are based on what looks appealing!!! People need thousands of years of osmosis to figure out what they like to look at?

Beginners make composition mistakes because they arent thinking about the composition, they're distracted by rules, knobs, buttons, theories, focusing, little blinking lights and the sinking feeling they're not doing it right. Get them focused on the composition as a whole and it usually comes pretty naturally.

After all, that's what the rules say, isn't it?

Your lack of education, and lack of understanding on this subject is so staggeringly profound that there's no point in trying to discuss this issue.; You keep referring to "rules"...thus showing me that you have no grasp of the entire subject. Seriously, you're missing the point of education and instruction so badly it's pathetic. So, excuse me....I need to go listen to a stack of classical music CD's I checked out from the library, then tomorrow I am going to write a symphony. I mean, this is just writing classical music...listening to 10,12 hours of it and I ought to be able to write something at least approaching Beethoven. Fer' sure dude!

"Rules" is semantics for "guidelines" is semantics for "theories..." We were all good with "rules" at the top of the thread... It is called the "rule" of thirds, isn't it? :greenpbl:

But answer me this... Honest question. What makes Beethoven's tunes more valid than the Sex Pistols? Or Howlin' Wolf?

"There's only two kinds of music, good and bad. I like both." Kinda applies to art on the whole don't cha think?