Eric Kim on the pioneering color photographer Stephen Shore

Ho Hum....zzzzzzzz....

Is this thread of comments on Steven Shore evidence of the reactionary nature of most camera owners and users, world-wide? It's astounding. Whether Steven Shore is a good photographer or not, the level of banality in those arguments put forward against his work is saddening. I feel sorry for dpreview in their uphill struggle to make the world of photography interesting beyond discussions of sensors, glass, pixels, 'street photography' and the worship of the mundane concept of 'professionalism'.

The comments on here just reinforce to me that many of the people who come on here are techy geeks who just want to trash the perceived enemy's gear (see Canon v Nikon reviews - ye Gods) and marvel at techy details, but have no appreciation for photography. All the people saying they could take pictures like Shore. Please. I'll take the views of real photography critics who appreciate Shore's art over some idiots who want to talk about why their Nikon D845 has more pixels and faster fps than someone else's Canon 123D or whatever.

Stephen Shore is great but only when Stephen Shore does "Stephen Shore" not when someone else does "Stephen Shore." Ditto William Eggleston. Try something new people, there's way too many people copying this style and it needs to be put to death.

A photographer’s work often has more to say about the artist behind the lens than the objects in front. Posters to sites like this often decry others, and criticize others work but where is their offerings?
Put-up or shut-up!
Maybe then you’ll have firm grounding for an opinion and some credibility

Excuse me but you people talk too much. Why can't anybody just say "I don't get it" and leave it at that? "De gustibus non est disputandum" period.

Excellent photos. Thanks for the link. Tempted to reach for the book.

I have now looked at Stephen Shore's images at 303 gallery. And I find them boring - all of them. You have to say though that he is consistent ... ly boring. Thats a kind of quality most people cannot live up to. There is often some thing of interest in some of the images. But Stephen has very skillfully avoided that.

Regarding Eric's blog - I still dont understand what it has to do with Stephen's images. Mostly unrelated as far as I can see.

I have also looked at Eric's images. Not so bad IMHO. Not my style really ... but not without emotional reaction from my side. And after that I understand even less why Eric refers to Stephen. I see no relation at all.

Those are hands down some of the most boring, pedestrian photographs I have ever seen. Reminds me of the artist who puts up a blank canvas and everyone stands around ooh and aah-ing over the esoteric statement about the emptiness our our collective existence.

In the 1970s the relatively new Photo Academia represented by the Visual Studies Workshop, Afterimage Magazine, Society for Photographic Education and many relatively new MFA programs--- were struggling to gain Art World Legitimacy. Part of that quest was the embrace of Postmodernism with its snarky cynicism, celebration of the banal, rejection of the beautiful and a compulsion to talk, talk, talk about "images."
It is little wonder that the Pet Rock was popular in that same decade.

These photos are a product of the art-world culture of the time. If these images or Andy Warhol's soup cans were released today they would almost certainly be be ignored unless the artist had a great agent or some sort of publicity. They are interesting from an art-history perspective, if not very interesting to look at on their own. That said, some pretty plain photos sell for a lot of money these days as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhein_II

Wonder if I can dig up and post some of my old images ? Sorry - not impressed, I don't wish to be critical but is this another case of being famous for being famous - then again I'd never heard of him until now so how famous can he be?

Well, I DID take a look at the Abu Dhabi pictures and to say I am underwhelmed would be an understatement.

His pictures from the seventies are sort of interesting in allowing a glance at that time. But then, just about any photos from that period would be similarily interesting.

I do not know for what others consider him to be exceptional in any regard. His Abu Dhabi pictures IMHO lack BOTH esthetics and message.

I don't mind these articles at all. I don't mind Eric Kim either. What I do mind, is that DPreview has been slacking in the "review" part of this website. There are a ton of cameras that need reviewing. Get to work!

I'm shocked that Eric Kim has made it to dpreview. I don't think he is particularly impressive and have no idea how he is so famous.

However, I think people are being overly critical about him. While I don't think his photographic work merits his popularity, people here are criticizing him for sharing ideas that have already been said before or posting photos that aren't particularly good, but what's wrong with that?

A lot of people here aren't that familiar with blogging. But in case you didn't know, ideas are freeform, flexible and transferable. Blogging is all about sharing, and as long as you cite your sources, it's great that there's a whole community of people sharing what they seen, read, heard, experienced, etc

Eric Kim is not a great photographer; maybe he's not even that great a writer. But he's a blogger, someone who's confident, supplies regular material, and shares bits of what he does.

Maybe he's not great, but perhaps his well-done sharing is enough to be famous.

This is crap. I don't know who Eric Kim keeps stroking to get reposted, but if he's who DP Review is turning to to get page hits now, then consider me unimpressed. I've never thought much of his work; he's more blogger than photographer, and after his little "I'm going to be a war photographer/go camping" debacle a few weeks back, I'm convinced that he's nothing more than yet another internet hack who likes to fondle new cameras and write blog posts. But hey, if people were willing to throw money and popularity at me for my contrived opinion, who's to say I wouldn't be doing the same thing? Oh, wait, I'm too busy actually shooting...

Sour grapes? You bet. I'm tired of fauxtographers and art donkeys mistaking internet popularity for talent.

Ho-hum images at best.

I wonder how those photos would be received today.

There was a contest to pick the best designs for a T-shirt a couple of years ago. The winners were the designs that had most positive comments AND the ones that had the most negative comments. It's about the emotion, guys, T-shirts or pics.

Bravo for expanding the scope of DPREVIEW! The art and craft of Photography encompasses far more than equipment reviews, fascinating and valuable though they are. We can only gain depth and comprehension from exposure to articles such as these. I am grateful and gratified to see these areas addressed.

Funny, I liked the article, I've been thinking of a project of doing photos of my corner of the planet, as it is today. It would for sure be boring *today*, but I think it might have a value later, I like looking at street photography from another era, of an area that I know of today, seeing buildings that don't exist anymore, or other interesting facts ?

As they say in the gaming world:

"Haters gonna hate."

Thank you for the read, DPR.

What I learnt from DPR comments: People are stupid.

I enjoyed this article and applaud DPR for bringing it to the attention of its readers. More like this please!

Hmmmm ... seeing the posts here I wondered ... what shall I write?

I didnt want to write yet another "depressing post", but ... I cannot say I appreciate the photos. And I dont understand what Eric Kim's text had to do with the photos.

A short summary: I have read it. Now, I shall read something else. Take care!

Stephen Shore is not a street photographer by any known working definition.

This is fine. Even in Japan, people take vacations and with Photokina coming up there isn't much news. I personally think Joel Sternfeld blows the doors off Stephen Shore for this type of photography but Shore has been around much longer, and to each his own.

2 weeks from the last "kind of review", 3 weeks from the last real review. It is getting really boring here. Are you on vacations all at once?

One of my favorite photographers of all time. His most well known work is "Uncommon places":
http://vimeo.com/35837480

I'm finding the majority of comments really rather depressing.

While the quality of the article isn't the greatest, I applaud the fact that DPR has spent some more time on the process of photography and the results these days and not just on equipment reviews. Unless you are a serial equipment buyer, you likely spend far more time behind the viewfinder than buying equipment.

I think there's still some tuning to do on the selection of articles, but I'm glad an effort is being made.

If you only want reviews, just click the "Filter News" option on the front page and choose "Reviews and previews".

Wow - I hope you guys at dpr are making good money off this site, because based on the thankless comments, it can't be worth it otherwise.

I might find some of these more recent posts trivial, but others less so. I love being exposed to photographers I've never heard of. (In this case, I'm slightly familiar with Stephen Shore - I've even signed up to hear him speak at Photoplus Expo in October). Point is, there are lots of dpr readers out there and if a blurb about an article on Stephen Shore isn't interesting to some, don't assume it's not interesting to others.

Know your audience, users/customers typically go to this site for a few reasons, or expect a few things out of this site. And following links to someone else's commentary isn't one of them.

Eric Kim is like the Kardashians- he's famous for absolutely nothing. He's not a pro, just some guy that can talk himself up a lot and has some disposable income from somewhere to masquerade as a pro photographer

Shore aside, who is this Eric Kim guy?!

If there is no photography news, I'll give you one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2185996/Never-seen-lacewing-discovered-photographer-posts-pictures-Flickr.html

THIS!

With the high performance cameras of today, even down to the tiny P&S pocket rocket... taking a picture is not that hard anymore.

The important thing is YOU ARE THERE.

Just click it!

.

This is not the first photography forum to feature a comment fueled series of debates about the merits of Erik Kim, it will not be the last. But like him and his photography or not, he is getting people engaged, out shooting, exploring techniques. I can only hope that anyone interested in learning photography is willing to explore more than a currently popular photoblog, whether it be Eric Kim, Zack Arias, or Natsumi Hayashi.

But our choice to share the thoughts of Eric Kim is purely driven by our interest in seeing photography where it is today. Reading the comments is actually a fascinating look into the passonate and personal investment we all make into this artform, and we'd be disappointed if our site was not a platform for that reality to be put on display.

The word 'snapshot' is utterly redundant. Even more so when shooting a 10x8 view camera!

Shore and Eggleston pioneered the use of colour film as a serious art form. Up until then it had mainly been used in an exaggerated way by advertisers.

The lack of a 'core' or clear message is exactly why I find Shores work interesting. If you have trouble with his work please don't look at his recent Abu Dhabi project shot on a D3x...you'll most likely have a fit and die.

Pretentious nonsense and most likely you'd get arrested and put on the sex offenders register for the one shown here...

Without falling into the 'I'm just as good as him' trap that a previous poster did, I too am the same age as Shore, born in 1947. Pioneering color photographer? I don't think so, given that Kodachrome came out in 1935, 12 years before either of us was born! Influential certainly, but hardly pioneering...

Complete Wais of Time.

For me DPR is loosing it's value and interest by not doing what it supposed to be doing - Digital Photography equipment Review, which was the main reason for me to have DPR listed in my "Favorites" for several years.

Late or skipped reviews, abandoned "lens Review"... by the time DPR publishes something that might be interesting - I already got the information long ago from several other sites.

Some tested current models that got significant firmware updates - are still tested, evaluated and show sample photos which are... irrelevant and missleading.

As an active contributor of several technical forums in my country, currently I rarely reference DPR anymore. As a co-editor (not payed but volunteraly) of "Technical News" forums - I do not remember whaen was the last time that my source for "news" was DPR. They are either late or insufficient in details.

The onli point of interest left for me here - are the forums. Sad...

Art lays in the eye of the viewer.

I think it's out of discussion, that some of the pictures are a good handwork: right exposure etc (like the one shown here on dpr).

But I miss something special about the photography, too. Especially the pictures of streets - if they where mine I would have deleted them, because I couldn't find a trigger in them. They are just pics from the street, to much things in them to look at. You don't know where the core of the picture is, what he want to tell us with it. A picture of a half eaten burger with fries? The pics look like snapshots, just taken without thinking.

I don't like them, but if you... why not?

From looking at his sample photographs there is nothing he can teach me about street photography .
the samples are just C**P.
I just think DPR should spend more time on getting out reviews then endless no sensical articles on the front web page.
most here dont care about this stuff we just want honest reviews and tests of equipment and then most if not all head straight to the forums to see whats happening.

total waste of web space.