Self Portrait in Bathroom #1 by Noah McLaurine
- burn is an evolving
journal
for emerging photographers.
burn is curated by
magnum photographer
david alan harvey.
burn magazine
photographic essays
- ellie brown – capsule relationship
- vicky slater – colourblind
- panos skoulidas – wandering in greece
- marcus bleasdale – the rape of a nation
- marco simola – metro
- jacopo quaranta – naomi
- noah addis – sempre jardim edite
- roger ballen – boarding house
- imants krumins – etrouko the book I
- adam smith – fight journal
- james nachtwey – struggle to live
- adrián arias – harvest of man
- david degner – uighur identity in xinjiang
- chloe dewe mathews – hasidic holiday
- igor posner – notes from underground
- thomas freteur – abu sakha…
- jerome brunet – cops
- beso darchia – stigma
- jennifer richter – california overpasses
- jonathon bowman – monkey business
- ARCHIVE
selected photographs
in the spotlight
dialogue
twitter feed
- Best way for me to see new work from u is to submit to Burn mag.I look at all.Also do not forget $15,000. EPF grant deadline in two weeks. 23 hrs ago
- Started to look at my Rio pictures, but stopped. Not ready yet. Bad weather turned into good and the beautiful day won out over everything. 1 day ago
- Home. Fireplace. Nasty weather but who cares? Time to think or not think. May start looking at work tmrrw. No rush. Chilling the only deal 2 days ago
- More updates...
recent comments
- pomara on ellie brown – capsule relationship
- bob black on ellie brown – capsule relationship
- david bowen on working….
- david bowen on working….
- eva on working….
- audrey bardou on working….
- kurtlengfield on working….
- david bowen on working….
- bob black on ellie brown – capsule relationship
- panos skoulidas on working….
- david bowen on working….
- eva on working….
- david bowen on working….
- Thodoris Tzalavras on working….
- david bowen on working….
links
- “At Home with David Alan Harvey – Workshop 2006: A Week of Inspiration and Learning” by Lance Rosenfield
- “Thailand:9 Days in the Kingdom”
- 100 eyes
- 37th frame
- anthropographia
- Arles Photo Festival
- Bruce Davidson
- Burnians
- david alan harvey
- David Griffin’s Blog
- Digital Journalist
- Editions Didier Millet
- Eugene Richards
- Festival of the Photograph
- Greg Gorman
- James Nachtwey
- John Vink
- Kim Reierson
- La Pura Vida
- Larry Towell
- Lens – New York Times photoblog
- Magnum in Motion: Living Proof
- Marie Arago
- Martin Parr
- MediaStorm
- Michael Courvoisier
- Michael Loyd Young
- National Geographic
- Oaxaca Day of the Dead Workshop 2008
- picturestoryblog.com
- Sally Mann
- the Click
- Trent Parke
- VII Photo
- Visa pour l’image
- Winephoto 2010
- YourPhotoTips
- zReportage
hmm… this shot is not particularly interesting imo: sometime when I enter a public bathroom/a hotel room’s bath/a friend’s bathroom I am struck by the light+mirror(+tiles) combination found there, but I guess that a good light is not enough to get a good (self-)portrait. Basically I agree with David B. for what concerns the “self” part in this shot.
Magnum has lost its way? I disagree Jim. I think Magnum has really taken in some fantastic, exciting talent lately. Parr, Soth, Sangunetti, Sobol, Power, Parke…how could anyone say that Magnum has lost its way. You know, watching newspapers fold makes me think that maybe PJ is not the way to make a living. Take Sobol, who simply lived in the moment and came away from Greenland with photos that later came together to become Sabine. Or non Magnm but still applicable, Richard Billingham who simply took photos of his family and later gave us maybe the most stunning visual creation of the last decade – Ray’s a Laugh. The one thing that seperates the best from the rest is that the best see their work as a passion, the rest see it as a job.
rafal
that it the distinction – some see it as a job.. and it is a job.. perhaps it is the difference between being a taxi driver, as my father was, and being an F1 driver.. as he was not :ø)
Rafal,
What has Billingham produced since? He happened to have an extreemly disfunctional family and photographed it (that takes guts) I do not disagree with you, Ray’s a laugh was ground breaking and fantastic but you need to consistantly perform. There was an article on him in PDN a while back he seems to be completely lost now.
Ian
Jim:
the great irony of much of what you’ve written (including on this thread) is that you continually refer to ‘disdain’ that some of the commentators apparently have, as you see it, for the kind of photographer you were (i still have not been able to fathom that one) or the practice that you’ve executed. And yet, time after time after time, you widdle away with the most disdainful attitude toward ideas or work or photographs of whom you feel nothing. It’s a ponderous and ridiculously patronizing mentality. Sorry Jim, but I have grown weary of your anemic comments.
To begin with, not one photographer that I know thinks Magnum has lost it’s way. If anything, many photographers that I talk with, meet with, correspond with, still think Magnum is playing catch up. Magnum is not the apotheosis of photography as a art form nor as a house of journalism: there are now olympian panthenons. Magnum certainly has the most extraordinary archive in the business and has a singular place in 20th century photographic history and still is a collective of extraordinary and interesting photographers, but it is not, and never has been, the be-all to end-all photographic practices. That sad, Magnum has had the insight to attempt to shift the strictures of HCB and company to embrace more disparate and questioning practices. A look at the recent nominees and members (anderson, arthur, bendiksen, d’agata, majoli, parke, parr, pellegin, power, sanguinetti, safarti, soth, sobol, subotzsky, van agtmael, wylie) reveals a disparate and photographically rigourous practice. You CANNOT lump any of these photographers within a nomenclature of similarity, for they are all different, all have different aims, different styles, different backgrounds. The one thing they all have in common is a visual disdain for the pedestrian image or mentality (with regard to photographic practice). In fact, i would argue that Magnum still needs to widen itself: get filmmakers into the group, or photographers who also write (write not as an adjunct but as part of the practice), get photographers who also question the entire practice of an image in anyway dictating truth. Magnum still produces great work and continues to inspire a younger generation. Is it for everyone: no fucking way. In fact, Dave Harvey and i became friends beginning from a post i’d written that i, as a photographer, would never want to be a part of Magnum. That impetuous comment created a great conversation and dialogue which has since bloomed into a real life friendship, born of trust and respect and affection and not from the fact he’s a magnum photog.
Moreover, your eye, for someone who has been a photographer for as long as you claim, is incredibly aneimic. You continue to fall back of the us vs. them mentality (we the hard working stiffs in the newspaper trade, the true bloods vs those pompous pretentious vacuous folk in the art world) which is frankly as vacuous and narrow as any of the teen-angst drivel that much of the art world generates. I dont think there is a single serious photography in the world who doesnt struggle with ‘making a living’ or struggle with putting roofbeams over their family or fruit on the table, especially those whove committed their live to this artform/profession and have families to sustain. the irony is that in the photographic world i live, if i asked the same pompous question of most of the journal/newspaper photos, “I wonder how well the images on his website are selling in the real world?”, the answer would be few few few….pics in newspapers ’sell’ because they have a manufactured outlet (the paper) and i’ve been to tones of shows for paperjournalists and they struggle too…and much of that work, removed of the context of the paper, doesnt hold much photographic power stripped of the outlining: you watch the POY’s??…most of the work??….and yet, you dont hear me writing this dross as you do….
i really, jim, wonder about your photographic chops. I rarely call a photograher’s bluff, but it is very hard for me to believe, photographer to photograher, that you’ve spent much time exposed to the entire spectrum, including doucmentary work, begin done over the last 30 years, and still write what you write. this isn’t about Noah’s picture, but the extent of what you’ve written.
YOu are entitled to your ideas and to your reaction, i just wish you would stop couching it in terms of your ‘40 years of experience’ because frankly, much of what you ’see’ in the work showcased so far undercuts that kind of visual experience. And please resist describing to us about the real world and the working photographer. My wife and i live that working photographer’s life, and its hard and i have respect for all people who slug away at their trade in order to survive. the difference between you and i: i have admiration for the profession and love of it, not patronizing admonishment.
As for Noah’s photograph, I see it as a very young photographer trying to explore himself. The photograph does not resonate with me as i see self-portraiture as a vehicle that has less to do with outward appearance as much as the collision and contradition between who we are, the ‘me’ of the ‘I’, and the outside shell. I didn’t have any attraction to the image but I enjoyed reading Noah’s description of his struggles with identity, brought on by his experience and loneliness in Korea. I’d love to see how this struggle manifests itself as his photographic journey widens and deepens. I think the discussion of art vs. non-art is just empty fodder. to me the only question is: is the photograph interesting and/or evocative. For me, i wasn’t struck but i understand clearly how others might have enjoyed the picture.
Noah: sorry for the hijack.
all the best
bob
David,
I mean more than just a job. Im sure DAH or anyone in Magnum sees it as a job, but they also see as much more than that…and primarily as something else. Jim keeps talking about paying the bills, Ive rarely seen anything else from him…Ive never seen Jim write about passion for example. He writes about money and ranches and thing he bought…but where the passion. Ive RARELY seen DAH write about money. Theres the distinction.
Ian,
true but lets give him time.
rafal – yeps- i get it.
i guess there are many professions within the profession.. a papp could not be asked to appreciate with passion.. however, a papp COULD choose to appreciate with passion.
jim – i-m guessing you are here because you have a deep love for photography.. i´d like to echo a little of bobs post though.. surely you will have confronted your love and expanded it onto other ground over the past decades? maybe that´s what you are doing here
again – apologies noah for the high-jacking.. jim – do you shoot personal work? what might it cover?
jim–
i, for one, am very glad you’re here.
your opinions and back and forth’s with DAH are very valuable
and your comments are anything but anemic.
thank you for your presence.
sorry, noah..
BOB…
bless you…..you are right on it….
cheers, david
Katia:
questioning the legitimacy of a photographer (as Jim as done here time and time again), you’re right is not anemic, it’s partonizing. the anemia comes from a refusal to delve into the pictorial skill in imager that differs from his own prescribed set of values. As an editor, that’s an anemic eye. i’ve worked for newspapers too, and i’ve never met a editor who, even when they found work inappropriate for a given story, couldnt articulate the merits of said work.
how about the presence of dissent that at leaves gives rise to a richer photographic vocabulary??
Jim, DAH, Bob,
I’ve been following this discussion, and I think David’s late night essay really hits the nail on the head, not just for photography, not just for art, but for any pursuit that requires creative thinking and innovation (e.g. my world of academics, science, technology, invention etc).
If one’s primary goal is to make money, then the work will reflect that. Even if we’re talking about someone in the financial industry, the results will not be as successful. The best example: Warren Buffet, the most successful investor ever, who since a tender age was fascinated by company financial statements: balance sheets, cash flow, income statements. His obsession had a secondary effect- he practiced that skill, mastered it, and built a multi-billion dollar empire. Yet he has always lived a relatively very modest life, in the same house in Omaha since the 1950s, and pays himself a salary of $100,000/year (was $50,000/year even when Berkshire Hathaway was worth several billions). Clearly, pure financial gain was not his motivation, and nobody has beaten his consistency over 50 years.
If one’s primary goal is to just do the best job possible, the money will come, as David illustrated so well for photographers in his comment. People value results over motivations. If one’s primary goal is linked to one’s passion… the results will be outstanding, and the financial gains will come secondarily.
Cheers,
Asher
Asher, tell that to all those outstanding artists, both painters and photographers, who saw no financial gain from their work, which only become popular after their deaths.
Hi Folks,
Just had a quick read through some of the comments above. Seems like there’s a lot of comments about the old art v’s photojournalism debate. When are we going to get over it? Really, what is the point of bring this up? OK, It seems that Jim likes to harp on about such inanities, but its sounding like a broken record to me. Who fucking cares what you call it. If a photos moves you and communicates something to you when you look at it: its a good photo! End of! It doesn’t matter where you look at it, magazine, gallery, computer screen, shop window, book or family album: all of this is irrelevant; just like the distinction between so called genres of photography. What’s wrong with just being a photographer? Screw the labels and boxes, just do what ever you like.
I’m a fan of some magnum photographers, and I interned at Magnum’s London office, being there for a short amount of time, speaking to the photographer that came by, I really don’t get the impression that Magnum is loosing its way either. I think the proof of that pudding is in the people who have been accepted over the last few years. Also look the drive there is to produce, or to borrow DAH”S phrase, to Author work: look at Requiem in Samba and Libra Me by Alex Majoli or Minutes to Midnight by Trent Parke, etc, etc,. The diversity on show really highlights Magnums evolution. This diversity, this breaking down of the old conventions is something that is visible all through the photographic world. It should be embraced not stifled by narrow mindedness. What’s more, Magnum isn’t alone in doing this. At the end of the day, Magnum is just an agency and like the others – it must do what it can to survive.
I don’t see what’s wrong with photographer earning a living form their photography, if that mean doing assignments for mags, prints sales, stock sales – I mean, who wouldn’t want to earn their living by doing what they love. But for me, the work must come before the money. The money should be a by product, for want of a better word, of someone producing good work. I think that a photographer, who does nothing but fulfill the needs of editors, runs the risk of loosing their creative soul. Sooner or later their work will become nothing but a series of boring cliches, produced to meet the needs of an often stale media.
Anyway, I’m off.
Jason.
JIM…ALL
well, you do one thing very well my friend…Jim, you do keep the discussion interesting!!! in your antagonism, you have allowed many of us here to really express ourselves….i suppose that, in and of itself, is a good thing….
Although , somehow poor Noah’s thread did get hijacked and after this week i swear all comments will go under Dialogue ..three blog spots is too much i think….
in any case, i think Bob, Rafal, and David B. having pretty much expressed anything i would have to say about Magnum in terms of where it is and where it is going….good old Magnum has always drawn fire…from outside and from within as well…for sure Magnum is very much a living breathing organism of individuals..like any organism , some things will change…
without change all things creative die….
i mean, we could have been swallowed by Corbis and Getty a long time ago along with all the other independent agencies they bought out……they offered us a whole lot of money (something you seem to relate to) several different times… to “sell out”…and we decided to live or die by our own wits….we rejected a buy out …yes, we did….with hardly a leg to stand on we survived the most difficult last 10 years on our own..scrambled, made it work, evolved,brought in new talent, and we certainly get swamped with new portfolios every year from some of those PJ’s you mention who say we have “lost our way”..pretty funny actually to see who tries to get into Magnum…very often the loudest critics portfolios seem to end up on our desk…hmmmmmm
Magnum is certainly not for everyone…it cannot be for everyone…we are only 40 strong (active members) and that is about the size we will always be….but, the philosophy of independent production works and can be a model for many young photographers to start coops of their own …and they do…surely you must realize that both VII and NOOR and many other new coops model themselves after Magnum….and Magnum photographers in turn have great respect for the new coops….i work with young photographers all the time to help them think about setting up coops…
now Jim, you have NEVER heard me disparage your profession , your career , or the net worth of your newspaper background….you are happily married (31 yrs.no small feat!) and are “set” on your Texas ranch…cool….my only problem with some of your written blasts is that they seem to be written without you having done your homework..you often do not employ basic reporting skills….in other words, without the very research fact checking tenants that make for a good newspaper man!!
opinions are just that..opinions…but, they do hold more value when backed up by facts…and facts are what make for good newspapering, the profession which you hold so high…
so, in this regard , please take half and hour and go look up all the magazine pieces, newspaper articles, exhibitions, and books and educational programs being done by Magnum right this minute and tell me if you really believe Magnum has lost its way…
indeed Magnum may not survive the current publishing crises…so be it….but, for the last 60 years we have given it a pretty good shot and have gone through one crises after another with only one thing in our mind :placing the ultimate value on the integrity of photographers who believe in what they do regardless of commercial success…yes, we must all pay our rent and put our kids through school…
however:
i believe that if you do what you love and do it with passion and zest, then good business will follow…
this is in fact my whole philosophy with BURN…..this is my long term message for the young photographers who log in here every day…the reason i am even here at all….i do not show my own pictures on BURN..it is in fact a struggle to do this and to keep up my own work too….BURN is just part of the “educational wing” of my life..a very big wing!! i have failed at many things Jim…and dammit i will fail at many others….but, the one thing that does work for me is in putting the work first and the employment second….yes, i satisfy my “clients” and yes they pay me..BUT, that is because i give them MORE THAN WHAT THEY ASK FOR ….and the MORE is coming from my heart and yes “personal work” and not from some practical desire to “please”….
now my curious side is up….and i will be rolling across Texas at some point this spring to photograph American families….i think you may know of this project…may i photograph you and your bride on your ranch??? med format film…you get the contact sheets….you get to approve of the picture…there will be no picture in the book or exhibit without your thumbs up and mine..we both have to agree on the picture or it goes nowhere…up for it???
peace, david
bobblack, of course I see and react to photos from my own perspective. But what difference does my background and my photography have on the validity of my opinions? The majority of the people who see our photos have no background in photography, no visual language. If I had never held a camera in my hands, would that preclude me from making a judgement about a photo? You actually sound kind of elitist.
David, you are welcome any time. There’s always cold beer in the fridge.
JIm:
now that is so ironic considering ;you have CONTINUALLY spoke of YOUR EXTENSIVE BACKGROUND…not for a moment have i ever spoken of my background to ground my own reaction to work. You are the one from day one that has defined your vision and the worth of other work by your ‘40 years of experience”…..and not only that, augmented your discussion of ‘value’ by reminding us of your 350 acre ranch….nothing I have ever written to you should preclude you from voicing your opinion. I just find it stupidly elitist and empty of you to preach about your journalistic and editorial background and then continually besmirch work with which you have not affinity for or background to judge. Yes, most people in the real world (sorry jim, i live in the real work, not just with photographers) are not photographically ‘elitist’ and most of the people i meet (non-photographers) have very straightforward reactions to photography, including both ‘conceptual’ work and journalism. I wonder, really, increasingly, i wonder what kind of relationship you have to photography or the photograhic world or those who earn livelihoods. the non-photographers that I meet (subjects of work, purchasers of books and prints, models, friends, fans, people who read the paper, go to museums and galleries and purchase books), are NOTHING AT ALL as you describe.
I am just so damn tired of your holier-than-thou attitude about what constitutes how to be successful. I would say, again as a working photographer, that your reality (as you’ve described it here over the last 2 months) does not square at all with the reality i experience, or the reality of my friends and colleagues: both in the newspaper business (yes, i have lots of friends working as fulltime and freelance for papers here) and the ‘art world’ business…
Im calling your ‘down home’ elitism the most nefarious kind….only because of all the garbage you’ve couched your critiques in…
the irony is that EVERY PHOTOGRAPHER I KNOW is working their ass off to survive and your kind of continual dissmissive and arrogant preaching is just so removed from the realities of working photographers that I cant believe that anyone listens to this stuff anymore…i jsut spent last friday with 6 photographers from 3 newspaopers and their working their butts off to spread themselves, reimagine work, cause you’r idolized ideas just aint fitting the bills, my friend….maybe, just maybe, your large ranch has removed you and you cant see that for the landscape…
sorry noah…my apologies..
BOB…JIM
now Bob is definitely NOT elitist…and Jim is most likely a pretty decent guy…and both of you have wives of great resolve and strength otherwise how would they put up with either one of you!!!
so, both of you and your lovely brides are invited down to stay at my old beach fishing shack on the Carolina shore (which i am going to be repairing forever and coulda shoulda been a “better” house had i been more commercial) to sit on the porch and have a cold beer and maybe do some surf fishing which if we are lucky can be our dinner which i will cook up..oh yes, maybe Jim does not eat fish..well, i will have fresh tomatoes and cucumbers too…..anyway, i will do this ONLY if we agree to talk about anything but photography!! can do???
now a cold north wind blows down here shaping the dunes by the hour…damn, where in hell is spring?? i do have a good fire going and will hunker down with some contact sheets to edit for the afternoon….when i am here , i do not miss New York, or anywhere really…although i am looking forward to shooting in Spain for the rest of this month during Fallas de Valencia…
gentlemen, i think we can agree on one thing…photography has allowed us a special place in life..to have the luxury of quibbling over what one kind of photography has over another or whether or not we appreciate one picture or another is, well, a pretty thin line of “disagreement” in the big picture of a world which for most is a more life and death matter…let’s please appreciate to the fullest this opportunity to share, exchange, and yes, to disagree….
so, come on down (and up)…i see a BURN meeting here at the beach a brewing…maybe we can just all get along???
cheers, peace, david
David, Bob and especially JIM,
I would like add some of my thoughts to your disscusion…. if I may…
Jim, I like people with claws like you are. It is good that you have a different point of view than me. That way we became friends with Panos. But for me Jim, as we say in Poland, you are walking on thin ice…
Visual art, no matter its “real Art” or just photojournalism (still visual art) it is very difficult stuff. Theory of visual arts it is one of the most difficult thig I know. More complicated than Physics or chemistry because there no exist real answers (in physics also but anyway…). I mean you can read one or another theory and then another and it will be just theory taken from air. There is no
mathematical model to say this art piece or this photography is good or not. And you are always writing like you know this strange mathematical model. Did you get this supreme knowlage? Do you really know what is good or not… excluding good or not for you…
There is no problem when someone don’t like this or that photo, but for me your argumets many times are shallow. It’s like with child arguments… “spinach is stupid and bad because I don’t like spinach”…
You wrote “If I had never held a camera in my hands, would that preclude me from making a judgement about a photo?”
yes you can… but you have to know how to keep balance on it… you have to know what you are talking about… and I have impression you have not many times…
I am oposite than you, I try to be modest in my opinion, because I am not the greates photographer on the world… I am not God also…. and the longer I try to understand photography or the art the less I know.
Maybe some day I will know nothing… who knows…
peace and keeps disscusion my friends
bobblack, why haven’t I drawn your ire when I’ve praised a number of essays and single photos since Burn has been up and running? Doesn’t my down home, hokey, holier-then-though attitude make my praise as suspect as my critique? My clear incompetence in evaluating photography invalidating each equally? Perhaps it would be simpler if you posted the correct response to each photo or essay at the top so I could react appropriately.
DAH, sorry, I’ve become a disruptive force here that is taking attention away from the photos. I’ll keep in touch via email and hold you to that visit down here in the summer!
David:
:))))….the OBX shack is on our radar screen….and i will definitely drink with jim (or anyone) and have a great chat…and yea, all the real credit goes to Marina: who is stronger, wiser and most resistant…and the real anchor in the family :))))…and I totally dont have anything against Jim on a personal level, hell i tried to write some positive words about his reactions a few essays ago…but i do think that it is critical to separate disagreement about what is ‘good’/bad from worth and especially how to pay the bills…something that cuts very close to the bone at the moment and my family works incredibly hard to pay for the pad in an increasingly difficult economic time :)))…
and anyone that things Magnum has ‘lost’ something doesnt know much about magnum: it’s a major source of brilliant work and i dont think i know any photographer that doesn’t find the work you men and women make continually inspiring….and including how ingenious their re-assesment has been…although a large group, magnum still serves as a brilliant example of how to operate in this climate…and the work, fundamentally, kicks ass :))
ok, gotta run…shit to do…
hugs
bob
Is there such a thing as ‘bad photography’? Sometimes when I read the Burn posts I find myself believing that there is no such thing, that photography is selfish self expression that doesn’t need to move an audience other than the photographer… and then I move slightly towards Jim Powers in creating the dichotomy between ‘art photography’ and ‘journalistic photography’ which is completely ludicrous because accomplished photojournalism is art and art photography can capture emotions and feelings in an almost journalistic way. Isn’t every photographer, art and journalistic alike, capturing moments that are both emotional and visual and what defines what is ‘good’ is just the poignancy of that moment.. a bit of a ramble..
Hi all,
Just one more comment about the technique. I thought I was clear enough, but I guess not. I may be young (25 years old), but I work very hard to ensure that my darkroom (or whatever darkroom I am using at that particular time) functions properly. There was no light-leak in either the developing tank or the tray. I think the confusion about the image stems from a scan that I guess looks funny on some people’s monitors (everyone’s is different), people not being familiar with what can be done with a traditional print, and the lack of context.
To provide a little more context, I exhibited this group of images (in varied form) twice while I was in Korea (here is a link to one of the galleries: http://www.gallery-now.com/html/ex_list.html?nList=57). Since I have been back in the States, I have been lackadaisically trying to exhibit them here.
It really is interesting for me to follow these discussions (not so much the more personal ones, but definitely the photographic ones). Keep them up.
-Noah
jim: my objection has never (not once) been to whether or not you like a photo (or anyone else’s reaction)…but to the way you dismiss work and much more importantly the pefunctory, way you dismiss a way of living/working as a photographer (time and time again you iterate this stance) that does not square with your own…….anyway, it’s clear you’re more succinct and wiser and wealthier than i….have a blast…all the best, bob
Kathleen …..
Ohhhhh… you made my day
( yesterday & today )…
:)))))))))))…
I feel like a million dollar bill!!!!!
Jim, Don’t be off-air again; without you we would be down to about 5 comments per post! I for-one value your comments and I can see the sense in what you say. I don’t always agree with you but I can see where you are coming from. I looked at the work you posted here previously: good, solid, bread-and-butter work and THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. Pays the bill, buys the ranch. I could never do that sort of work even if it were offered me. I don’t have a ranch. I’ve had some utterly boring jobs: sometimes well-paid but BORING!!!
My world has been one in which I seem to be the only person who “lives” photography. It is total love. Here at Burn I’ve found that I’m not alone.
I’m 58, Jim and I presume we are of a similar age? Remember Jim, many of the people posting here are young; they want to fly. The photograph we see may be the first time that they have been published. What they need is not faint praise but genuine comment and advice, Telling them that their photograph “wouldn’t even make page 9 in the Crawford Gazette is not helpful: at least not unless you tell them WHY NOT.
You’ve been around for a good-few years Jim and I’m sure that you can do better. Even photographs that you don’t personally like must remind you of similar work by a more established photographer – even if you don’t like that work either. Putting a link to the established work is helpful. The new photographer follows the link and says to him / herself “Wow, how did he / she do that”? They have grown. It’s all thanks to you. Positive vibes Jim, positive vibes!
I asked you on the last post (i think) do you like the work of Pep Bonet of Noor photo agency? I’d like to know what you think Jim. What’s your favorite photo book Jim? O.k. too tough a question; name 4 books that you admire?
Anyway, how did you manage to get a gratis invite to a DAH workshop AND a beer at the beach house?
Stick around,
Best wishes,
Mike.
Panos:
well you damned well should..i don´t say that kinda stuff everyday!
kat-
Panos:
;);)
MATT..
good question….some photographs move us, others do not…all very subjective and hence the discussion here….the intent of the photographer does not matter in terms of whether or not the picture “moves you”…however, there are some schools of photography that suggest that “emotion” is a negative and other schools that suggest just the opposite….studying the various “schools” and understanding clearly the history of photography (a short one indeed) and its relationship to painting and it’s role in communication will help…in the end, it is just your personal taste….but, this taste can change with time as it does in all of the arts….the more you see the various kinds of work done by the various masters in each “school” the more you will be able to discern “good” from “bad”…or at least be able to know where a photograph “stands” in relationship to what has gone on before it in that particular discipline…
cheers, david
KATHLEEN…
no Sig Harvey??? hmmmmm, let me see where we can find her…i am flat out surprised she is not on Google…give me a little time, i will track that woman down!!!
(one minute later) MY BAD…..it is Cig Harvey with a “C”….sorry…check her out…..
cheers, david
David:
Okkkk, now i found her..will check her out later..thanks for clearing that up! oh, btw…i thought all night about self-portraits..couldn´t get it out of my head..when you´re ready, i´m on!
best
kat-
JIM
now wait a minute!!! you can’t just up and leave now…nobody said you are a “disruptive force”..i only said your comments led to interesting discussion….i did challenge you to make sure you had all the “facts” straight, but that is fair enough i think and all part of the discussions you have fostered…we have all written so much based on your often blunt but provocative comments…i sure as hell have no problem with that, and if you do “push buttons”, so what???
come on back…we are ready and waiting….
cheers, david
HEY JIM,
C’mon hombre, stick around! Some of us find your bluntness refreshing. You are no more ‘disuptive’ than several other frequent commenters I can think of… including me! In fact, I have enjoyed a bit the fact that you are taking much of the flak from the defensive guns while I have lately been slipping under the radar… not that I agree with a lot of what you say, but I do agree with some of it… and I like the balance it provides (and I like watching the sparks fly).
Now, if on the other hand you find following this site an energy drain and waste of time because none of the photographs or points of view excite your interest, or because interacting with the callow, artsy, and occasionally self-righteous bloviators here is unpleasant and unproductive… then so be it, and I FOR ONE CAN DIG IT! But there’s an online community here that’s rare, and often the discussion rises to substantial heights… where else can you talk photography with this much élan? So maybe you should hang out… no need to jump on every new post if you don’t feel like it, but when the spirit moves…
Cheers,
I agree with Sidney..
Jim , please don’t go..
:))))))
..and Jim,
Marcin is right…
We became best friends after long
Fights and tons of controversy..
for ALL:
Cig http://www.cigharvey.com/
for Jim:
well, my contentious comments were never meant to suggest that you are ‘disruptive’ nor would i have ever written if the intention was to see you vanish just as sure the intent for you to write was never to share in agreement. Loss of anyone who brings themselves to the dance floor (or rodeo ring) is a loss, and one no one wishes, no matter how wide or thin the Pecos….
-bb
SIDNEY…
you are right on…after all, this is a discussion…a discussion on a topic that arouses passion just as it should…i love the fact that we are able to fly free form in all of our varied opinions…and i for one love to play “devils advocate” right from the get go…does anybody think that i put everything up on BURN because i think it would look great on my wall at home??? is it not obvious that i publish some things just to excite the kind of conversations that we have??? wouldn’t it be boring if only one kind of photography was represented here??
i will be rolling into the northwest in April…i hope this will be our chance to meet…
always good to have you here Sidney…and if Jim does not come back, then “tag”, you are it!!
cheers, david
I am blown away by Cig Harvey’s work!!! Thanks so much, David, for bringing her to our attention, and thanks, Bob, for posting her link.
Patricia
David,
Regarding Cig Harvey. If anyone ever looked around their suburban home and whined that there’s nothing there to shoot, has she ever proved them wrong. At first i was not too excited. Very stylized, i thought. But i made myself stay and study..what a color palette, what light, what a humble presence she has within the frame. She is not the point of the photograph. She uses her body to make her point. This is what i like. Her portfolios at first glance look like they’d be advertising linens. And they could do that. But they have carefully constrained claustrophobic middle-class madness going on. Yum. There’s no madness like middle-class madness because absolutely no one knows or cares beyond your own front door. Sell those linens, sweep those floors but don’t anybody drink the cool-aid.
thanks, David..more fuel for thought, you devil ;)
kat~
Kathleen,
It’s not too often that great photographers are also great teachers, but this is the case with Cig. I took her Exploring the Personal Narrative workshop at the Santa Fe Photography Workshops during the summer of 2007. And it was the most transformative, photographic experience of my life. If you are interested, she’s teaching this summer at The Workshops.
Cheers-
Krissy
thanks for the reply, David. I find quality of photography such a hard concept to grasp. I have my prejudices in composition and subject matter- but some photography is completely impulsive.. im sure a large percentage of highlighted Magnum photographs (as well as other esteemed works of photography) were snapshots in the most literal sense and the real magic of photography comes down to editing. Out of curiosity, what schools find emotion as a negative?