la familia abrazada

58 Responses to “la familia abrazada”

---

• Jason_Houge

  October 29, 2009 at 12:44 pm

  Frank Hack – Jim Powers,
  I can say in my family album from years back, nothing looks as sophisticated in content and composition… however I do agree, as a documentary, this flatlines and doesn’t work – But that’s due to the individual eyes that saw and shot these images. However – if we think about Burn as the digital media it is, I feel that for this moment, it’s been converted into David’s loft with images on the walls. Or maybe a dedicated gallery. The goal of burn isn’t to just promote documentary and journalistic material, but all photography that is emerging into greatness. Be it conceptual art, other contemporary art, perhaps alternative processes, digital, journalism, documentary, and commercial. think of all of the types of photography that the photographers of Magnum do… That is what Burn does. The people of Magnum have emerged and been found. The people of Burn are those who are emerging and unknown at this time. Robert Capa, HCB, and the other early photographers of Magnum had an idea, and perhaps over time, that idea has changed a little and or maybe now it needs an update, an attachment to encourage young photographers to come into the light and be seen…
  Now back to this piece, these photographers are all unknown to me as I never use flicker since part of the agreement you have with them is to allow them to use your images free of charge for their advertising. I think these photographers are naive for accepting that. If they produce work that is worthy of notice, then it should be spotlighted and given a chance. it also helps them feel better and lets them know they’re on the right track to becoming somebody.

  I do agree some of these images are posed and a bit goofy – perhaps that speaks for the individual in the image? I know in my family, we have a wide mix of goofballs, boring stiffs, salesmen, and young punks.
  Think about the world as a family – what a mind boggling mix of madness it must be!
• Francesco Bonomo

  October 29, 2009 at 1:22 pm

  When I first saw the slideshow I scratched my head: sure there are some good pictures, and others that I would have left out of the final selection, but I guess that depends on one’s mood and taste. Then i watched it again this morning and it made me want to check those photographers’ websites, flickr accounts, etc. It made me want to find out more, and that, to me, is the sign that it somehow affected me. I cannot say how or how deeply, because again, some of those photographers’ pictures didn’t impress me at all, but to me it says a lot about the quality of some the material and the huge effort of the curator/editor.
• Thodoris Tzalavras

  October 29, 2009 at 2:46 pm

  I like neither the individual pictures nor the edit. (I’m generalizing of course here to make a point… there are pictures which I like more than others in there, but…)

  I see nothing exceptional visually and feel no personal connection to these families through these pictures…

  We’re all photographers here (with the exception of Civi…) and if any of us was to go through his archive he’d come up with at least something similar to the LFA “essay”, and probably many would come up with something way more interesting…

  This reflects my very particular tastes and is in regard to the work at hand. There is no doubt that there IS amazing work on Flickr, on Photonet, on Artmesh, on Deviantart, etc, etc… it just happens that this is NOT it.

  By the way, if I’m not mistaken, there was a link a while back with what I thought at the time was a pitch of an edit from the LFA pool that contained WAY better pictures.
• John Goldsmith

  October 30, 2009 at 12:25 am

  @Jason_Houge – Thank you for your comment. I agree about your assessment that photography is in need of a transformation. The accessibility of tools and platforms brings the power to any individual towards making contribution in photography, journalism, and a host of other disciplines. This democratization means that the Fine Art world and media moguls no longer get to mandate what is important. This is a blessing and, of course, a curse since many people believe they are an expert at everything just because they have an audience and camera. Many of us who use Flickr and are participating at burn recognize this; I hope the reverse is also true. It’s too bad there there isn’t more cross fertilization though I’m thrilled that Rafal connected with DAH to make this essay happen.

  While burn is certainly a valuable resource, and achievement given the recent Lucie Award (congrats DAH and others!), I’m disappointed at the flippant attitude towards certain groups on Flickr which offer far more robust discussions about photography than are allowed here simply because of how content is delivered. Recent posts by Joerg Colberg display the same kind of attitude where he sensationalizes that Flickr gives him a headache. I won’t offer an apology for that, only a Tylenol — maybe. Communities such as burn, HCSP or LFA are each families living under their own roof. While it may be challenging for us to visit your home, and you to ours, the kinds discussions at each respective site are bringing mutually inspired people together for at least one purpose: improve photography. By pairing up with trusted peers who critique, introduce new ideas, and distribute a wealth of information, such as that found in HCSP, a photographer can improve no matter where or how they network.

  Anyway…

  LFA doesn’t have any big plans to upset the the Fine Art world, though I do think it will eventually happen because making and publishing photographs is out of their control. I think I can speak for many members at LFA by saying we simply want to make nice pictures for our families. If a person or group can elevate these so that a new reference point is adopted in galleries, museums and zines, more power to them! It’s something I would like to see.

  As far as Flickr gaining advertising rights to our photos: you’re dead wrong. Posting photos to Flickr does not give consent, explicit or otherwise, (i.e., Flick or Yahoo, or Getty, for that matter) to use a photographer’s image in any way except to post it to the users photostream. At that point, it is up to the user to license their images as they wish. For me: I retain full copyright with all rights reserved. Others use Creative Commons, which I oppose, but it is ultimately their choice. It is only a fraction of these CC images that Yahoo! can use for advertising, but they don’t need Flickr to achieve that. At most, the platform makes these photographs more accessible and, thus, available to a wider audience which means they can be wrongly used. But that can happen via burn or any other website. Aside from La Familia Abrazada, another group I help admin is the Licensing Awareness Working (LAW) Group which helps inform photographers about their rights. So, aside from identifying emerging and established photographers, Flickr can also serve as a tool for education about copyright

  http://www.flickr.com/groups/lawgroup/
• Rafal Pruszynski

  October 30, 2009 at 12:25 am

  It may “flatline” as a documentary because for about the 20th time, it isn’t a documentary. What it is is stated in the intro, and repeated several times in the comments. So I won’t say again what it is, because you can find it yourself, though I’m doubtful some will even take the time to do that. But just so that we are on the same page, it isn’t and never was intended as a documentary. I think Francesco got it, it is an invitation to explore. Now, if you hated every single photo here, hey, that is your taste and whatever, but I’m sure even Jim liked at least ONE pic. He wouldn’t say it because that would take him to write more than a short sentence, which means he might not get his word in first. Now our other non-photographer, the emerging graphic designer Imants hated everything, and that’s a good sign IMO. However, if you stop trying to make some silly point nobody really cares about, Thodoris, I’m sure there is one pic, even one, you liked. Why not follow it down the rabbit hole and see where you emerge? There are plenty of links there, to individual photographers, to the LFA pool, to the LFA tumblr. Who knows where it will lead you, right? Instead of trying to prove some silly point why not go explore? What would be my reaction, as a lover of photography, if I was presented with a plate full of diverse photos and links to photographers? I’m pretty sure I would take some time to simply go and look. But I do understand it is easier to yell and scream.

  And I’m sure that family albums are more interesting than this. But this isn’t a competition with family albums. And the reason why family albums are more interesting is that family albums are more coherent, they actually create real storylines because the photos are related to one another, there is a temporal line running through them, you see a real in depth evolution of a family within its pages. How could this compete? it couldn’t and that’s why an attempt to force some imaginary story onto these photos was never even attempted as it would be an exercise in futility and dishonesty. That’s why it isn’t a documentary, it isn’t a story, it isn’t a essay in that sense if you simply see an essay as a literal journey from start to finish. In that case it flatlines but I think you need to open up your mind to other interpretations of what essays can be because not everything is “Here and here this and this happened.” I mean I took a look at your personal page and I could see your point, you are very much into a literal interpretation of things and that’s fine, but it doesn’t all have to be that way.
• Frank Michael Hack

  October 30, 2009 at 12:20 pm

  OK I am on the record for not paying any attention to rules. I see part of the success of any particular “essay” published on Burn as the number of comments posted. The median is around 25-30. This will be the 56th posted comment which I think says a lot and what I value about Burn.

  Rafal I have no objection to your curation or the Flickr photos being published here. I would prefer as the curator you choose one photographer’s album, curate that and submit it to Burn. I think that would be a lot more powerful, would highlight that particular photographer, and avoid much of the the critical commentary. The term democratization of photography has come up a few times. I think it is important to realize that democracies seldom work as intended and if we really want to talk about democracy and every human being on the planet had one vote the planet would be the Global Republic of Communist China. David has said in reference in his workshops and curation “this is not a democracy” If we choose democracy over content then we are choosing mediocrity over genius and inspiration.

  Jason well said, not sure if being referred to with Jim in the same sentence is good or bad.
• Rafal Pruszynski

  November 1, 2009 at 7:14 pm

  Frank,

  thats one possibility and we have already done that on LFA, we have already spotlighted 2 photographers and we are going to do a third. I always encourage them to publish to Burn, too, but I don’t think that for Burn me editing one photographer would really work on Burn. I know I would want to have the ultimate control over my own work if it were going up on Burn not part of a group edit and I would not presume to try and edit solely one person and take credit for any part of the work. I think that can work on LFA because there I am an editor but not on Burn where you already have David who is a much better editior than me and this is his platform.
• emcd

  November 3, 2009 at 10:08 am

  Dinah DiNova kicks ass.

• la familia abrazada | burn magazine | The Click
  Pingback on Oct 27th, 2009 at 8:48 am