Date   
Re: Questions about this board

 

One thing I'll continue to post here is new understandings about how this site/board software works.

Here's the first:

When editing a comment, to fix typos for example,  there are two re-publishing buttons, one for save-and-send, and the other just for saving. The difference is that the save-only button just fixes the typos on your already-published post (probably your intent) while the save-and-send not only publishes it, but also causes it to be re-sent to the membership in their daily emails.

I'd suggest that unless you're correcting a major mistake in content, the "save" button, (rather than the save-and-send) is the appropriate choice. (I apologize to those of you who got multiple typo-fix messages before I finally figured this out.)


--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery

Re: Visual versus Visceral

 
Edited

Hi Rick

Wonderful questions.

I'd suggest that you're confusing "Fine Art" with "Good Art".  "Fine Art" photography is a type, not a quality, of photography. Like wedding photography, advertising photography, street photography and so on, fine art photography is a type of photography, and like any type of art (painting, sculpture, music etc) can be of good, or bad or indifferent quality.

What type, then? If it is your intent, as the photographer, to product a piece for others to hang on their wall, as they would, say, a painting, for long-term enjoyment of your photographic vision, then it's fine art photography  that you are doing. 

One of the other keys to "fine art" is that the finished work stands on its own - the viewer doesn't need an explanation to understand it. This separates "fine art" from "conceptual art" which is yet another type of art.

Is it "art?" That is a contentious subject, with the answers ranging from "Yes, if a total stranger gets out of it what you intended" to "Yes if someone with expertise in art says it is" on to "Yes, if it's hanging in a place that hangs art, such as a gallery or museum." Much of the contention comes from the confusion caused by "Art" having multiple meanings. Yes, "art" can be defined - one must simply pick which definition to use before talking about it, or the discussion turns to a Tower of Babel.

I recently gave a talk about all this at the Center for Photographic Art, and will shortly have the text of that talk available. I'll post here when it is.

As to the question of electronic display of images - of course there have been LCD frames for years now, so both, as you note, are current display methods. Do I think printed art will ever give way to only digital? No, frankly, I don't - the sensory and tactile experience, and the subtlety of tone and nuance of the print are just too different from glowing LEDs.  Paper and painting have weathered the last several thousand years, and I expect they will continue to march into the future.


--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery

Re: Visual versus Visceral

Rick Verbanec
 

Hi Tracy,

I, too, am interested in how the discussion on Fine Art Photography progresses.  Having attended several Image Makers and Independent Photographers meetings in the last few years, I appreciate the fine work that has been displayed ... everything from Mary Aui's composites to Will Furman's single exposure Inside Out series, and on to Oliver Klink's HUGE pieces, not to mention numerous other travel photography and abstract works.  Not coming from an artsy background, after 15 years I'm still trying to sort out all the concepts of what constitutes Fine Art.  It does seem a bit presumptuous to me for one to claim one's own photo as Fine Art - the definition is somewhat amorphous, giving rise to a thread such as this.  

If only the maker thinks the product is Fine Art, is it?  If two think so, is that sufficient, or do they need to think it's Fine Art for the same reason?  Without some intrinsic basis, is the definition essentially a commercial or popularity issue?  In other words, what separates Fine Art Photography from general Photographic Art?  Is it one of those 'I can't define it but I know it when I see it' situations?  Or is it just a matter of opinion?

And one last question perhaps worthy of a separate thread, with the rapid advances in display technology, what do you think will be the future trajectory of fine art photography (whatever it is) from print only to print and digital as wall display media?

Re: Where do you get your supplies?

CNg
 

been using http://www.framedestination.com/.  very happy with the quality of their stuff.

Re: Questions about this board

 

No problem, Jim. I've put in a support ticket to get the answers to your questions. Also signed up for the paid version. Meanwhile, I'm just deleting out the "pre-filled" sig, that appears in these replies.


--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery

Re: Questions about this board

Jim Kasson
 

Thanks for setting this up, Tracy.
--
Jim Kasson

ImageMaker

Blog: blog.kasson.com

Gallery: www.kasson.com


--
Jim Kasson

ImageMaker

Blog: blog.kasson.com

Gallery: www.kasson.com

Re: Questions about this board

 

I can answer both of those with the same reply: I dunno.

I did just discover the site, and start this group less than 72 hours ago, so I'm exploring myself.

In the first post I made, I discovered the double sig, and was actually looking at trying to resolve that when your post came in. When I find the answer, I'll post it in this thread, of course.

As to PM...(pause while I look around...)

(back) - I thought it might be a feature of the paid version, but it's not listed in the Paid Features, so at this point, I can't say if PM (Private Messages) are possible, per se.

I will note that in the posting buttons, below your reply, one of the buttons is "Send to Sender" (as opposed to the "Send to Group" option, so that might be their version.

The paid version of groups.io is only $10 per month, so I may just pay for it, and be done with it, anyway. Today seems to be the day to figure all this stuff out.

Good questions, Jim. Thanks.



--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.gallery

Re: Visual versus Visceral

 
Edited

Hi Ken.


Welcome, and thanks for signing up. Please don't just sit in the back... one sided discussions are lectures...and frequently boring! :-)

And... good question. I can only supply my own personal take, of course, and hopefully others will chime in on this important topic.

As to "visual impact" in fine art photography - I prefer a strong statement, expressed simply and with no distractions. The more "stuff" an image has in the frame, that is unrelated to what the photographer finds worth expressing, the less effective the image is. In other words, the less distractions, the greater the visual impact. Now, visual impact is not solely the province an uncluttered shot, of course, and composition, lighting, perspective and the other 100 or so "usual suspects" still apply, of course.

But overall, the visual impact is what will draw your viewer in the first place, and will go a long way toward holding him as well. On the other hand, I've seen ghastly over-sharpened, over-saturated images that have "visual impact" that make me cringe. Finding your own personal brand of visual impact will become your signature style, be it color, composition, frame, subject or whatever.


As to "visceral impact" - well, that's what makes it art, eh ? The dictionary says that visceral is "...relating to deep inward feelings rather than to the intellect."  Again, just my take, but as an artist, you're capturing (or trying to capture) your own personal gut-level response to what is before your lens. If you succeed in getting that into an image, then your viewer will experience his or her own internal response in a quite similar fashion. If that communication happens, the piece succeeds. (I stressed your own because anything less makes no contribution, either to the image, or the viewer. In short, a Xerox machine will make a better copy of an Ansel Adams print than you ever will, and it doesn't add anything either.)

The visceral impact of music, literature, dance, sculpture and so on, including photography, is the very heart of what we're doing. It is the Zen of Zen Archery.

So: my importance-weight of both those subjects: visceral and visual, is that they are doing the heavy lifting, and could not be more central to photography.

Does that help, or did I wax too philosophic?

Let's see what others say.



--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

Imagemakers

www.valleau.gallery

Questions about this board

Jim Kasson
 

I'm starting a thread for questions about the board itself. Maybe Tracy can help us, and maybe we can help each other.

First question: why is my signature appearing twice at the bottom of posts?

Second question: is there a PM feature here?
--
Jim Kasson

ImageMaker

Blog: blog.kasson.com

Gallery: www.kasson.com


--
Jim Kasson

ImageMaker

Blog: blog.kasson.com

Gallery: www.kasson.com

Re: Where do you get your supplies?

Jim Kasson
 
Edited

Atlex often has really good prices on printer paper, sometimes shockingly so, but not consistently so. They're worth checking. 

http://www.atlex.com/

Sometimes their packing for shipment leaves something to be desired.



--
Jim Kasson

ImageMaker

Blog: blog.kasson.com

Gallery: www.kasson.com

Where do you get your supplies?

 

Making prints isn't cheap, and I know we're all on the lookout for better prices and/or quality. So: where do you get your supplies?

I buy my paper from whoever has it on sale, and factoring in taxes and shipping. Sometimes it's Amazon (although they charge CA sales tax) and sometime B&H Photo (tax and often shipping free). ITSupplies.com often has good prices, including ink.

I get 32x40 matte boards most often from jerrysartarama.com, or http://www.utrechtart.com/. These last may be good for Neilsen frames too.

I've been getting my acrylic glazing from http://www.craigframes.com/

These are just my choices, and no doubt others can recommend even better places. Please do, so we can all benefit from better prices and/or service.

What are your secret supply houses?

--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.gallery


--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.gallery

Visual versus Visceral

 

Hi Tracy, and thank you for putting this together. I'm looking forward to sitting toward the back with my ears wide open as the group and the dialogue grow. Thanks, too, to Chester Ng for letting me know about this group.

To my question, Tracy: How would you weight the importance of an image's visual and visceral impact?

For the Love of Photography

David J. Gubernick
 

I love photography in all its various forms and I love helping others with their photography.  I teach photography workshops, Lightroom and coach/mentor individuals.  I mostly do nature/landscape photography, as well as, abstract, conceptual, architectural, macro, nocturnal, color, black-and-white, infrared, among others.  You can see examples of some of my work at rainbowspirit.com

I look forward to participating in this group and sharing what I know.


regards,

David

David J. Gubernick

www.rainbowspirit.com

What is the Fine Art Photography group about?

 
Edited

What is Fine Art Photography?


That's much (and often hotly) debated, and I've even given lectures on the topic, but for the purposes of this group, it is this: photographic prints, designed to be hung on a wall, and enjoyed for their content alone.

Yes, technically that includes pictures of your kids, but then your kids are not "art" to others, so while snap-shooters are certainly welcome here, (if they want to learn and improve beyond that skill-level) this group is generally aimed at artists.

What about conceptual photos? While all photos have a concept behind them, "conceptual photography" requires an explanation of the image in order to be appreciated, and therefore does not qualify as traditional "fine art" wherein the artwork stands by itself.

Weston, Adams, even Gursky, would be at home here, but fine art photos do not have to be just "pretty pictures." However, it is imperative that they hang on the wall as art in their own right, without requiring explanations.

Finally, I'd like to make it clear that this group is about learning and sharing. It is, therefore NOT just for established artists, but for those wherever they may be on the journey that is photography. Unlike commercial photographers, fine art photographers have no secret techniques they need to keep secret. Every fine art photographer I've ever met is delighted to share freely with anyone who is interested. Why? Because fine art is your personal vision, and no one can duplicate it. Hopefully, here you can learn something new (or revised) that will help your own expressions become ever more accurate to your vision.

"Journey" is a perfect word for photography, as it is a path, with waypoints and discoveries we all make. Early in the journey, we all 'discover' composition; then shape, line and form. Later we discover B&W, and swear "it's the only real art" yet that waypoint on the journey softens as time goes on. Those of us who have been doing this for decades have seen the thing beginners are just finding. That does not make us "better" - but like a guide, gives us the perspective to recognize that waypoint, and to understand what comes next.

And for those of us who are old hands - well, we all know that the journey never ends. The major points may be behind us, but each of us continues to discover subtle and interesting new things, and sharing those propels all of us forward.

Ask a fine art photographer what is the most exciting thing about his craft, and most will say the same thing: "the next photograph."


I hope this description helps you decide if this group is right for you.


(If you want to discuss the nature of fine art photography, please start a new topic, apart from this welcome message, as it's likely to be a long and heated discussion!  :-)


--
Tracy Valleau, moderator

www.valleau.gallery