On 6/25/2015 8:47 AM, Bob Whitmire wrote:
Apropos of this, I've been reading a lot of art stuff lately in the ongoing
effort to become a better person. (The only cause worth fighting for is the
lost cause.)
What if you are already there, and only need to recognize and accept that? :-)
It has come to my attention that in a great deal of the
digested discourse on the, ah, manual arts, that is, drawing, painting,
etc., the number of times I've come across the admonishment that artists
should not try to imitate reality is fairly astonishing. Even Van Gogh says
in several of his letters to his brother Theo that it's not necessary to
recreate the exact color of something, but rather to create the color that
best represents that something. Yet in photography, we are severely
censured by large numbers of critics, real and self-styled, if we deviate
even slightly from what they believe to be a spot-on authentic rendering of
a spot-on authentic scene.
Painters are encouraged to give flight to their vision of something. We are
kicked in the (metaphorical) nuts if we try to do the same.
I recently read a piece of St. Adams in which he says that photography is an inaccurate representation of the subject.
Reasonably accurate in the geometric rendition. Tonally, he says if you were able to hold up the print against the
original subject, you would be amazed at the great difference.
I'd quote him properly, if I recalled where I read it. ;-)
A change, at least, from the negative = score; print = performance line.
From Memory Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|