I would like to discuss the aesthetics of photography...

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 20,866
Like?
Are you saying...
In reply to Jack Hogan, 11 months ago

Jack Hogan wrote:

panos_m wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

...based on this post:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51516317

Particularly, this paragraph, and particularly the portion I highlighted in bold:

I had a recent (very successful!) gallery show of prints up to 20"x30" from the E-3. Got many comments about how "natural" the prints looked. Several people said they didn't realize at first they were photographs. They used terms such as "relaxed, smooth and inviting" to describe them. Several, including other photographers, thought they were from film, though the photographers said they were puzzled by the lack of film grain. They were surprised to hear they were digital. Several, including buyers, said they generally don't like prints from digital cameras because they are too "self-conscious" in that they have too much unnecessary detail, too obviously photographic, and too unpleasant to live with on the wall, even if initially striking.

What do people think?  It's a very interesting observation, in my opinion.

Is this a question on realism?

Panos is right: having looked at Bob Cole's site, I think this is a question of the signature/stroke/style of the artist (i.e. realism vs cubism vs impressionism vs ...) rather than the nature of the capture medium.  Different styles come, get overdone and tiresome then go.  Perhaps now after a decade of the digital see-every-pore look we are ready to swing back into a softer look.

I like Bob's impressionistic look, I think I've been gravitating that way myself of late.  Many of my current favorite one-a-month prints of my meticulously technical captures are actually willfully not that sharp - and printed on fuzzy canvas.

...that the comment I quoted was based on these photos of his:

http://robertcolephotography.com/landscape_impressions

as opposed to these photos of his?

http://robertcolephotography.com/landscape

If so, then wouldn't the comments about "unnecessary detail" mean that the people who made the comment represent a minority opinion of those that pursue photography?

Oh, by the way, yes, I absolutely think his photography is outstanding, impressionist or not.  I just don't understand the the comments highlighted in bold above.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
4MPNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow