Can anyone take a good photograph?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Tom Hudson, Dec 7, 2004.

  1. Are you for real?

    I mean - if it is the ultimate rule that you shall
    break the rules. What happens if you break that
    rule? I.e. if you follow rules?

    Roland Karlsson, Dec 30, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tom Hudson

    casioculture Guest

    It's just silly. "Art IS breaking the rules" is just silly. Art "IS"
    *not* about "breaking the rules". I find it impossible to agree with
    such a general statement as "Art IS breaking the rules". It's just a
    silly catchphrase.
    casioculture, Dec 30, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tom Hudson

    Tony Guest

    I know from past discussions that you are not very bright, Roland but you
    have outdone yourself with stupidity this time.
    Get a job in accounting, son. You will never be a photographer - a
    writer, a painter, a sculptor, or even a greeting card artist. You are too
    rigid to even know when you've been lampooned. (CLUE - YOU ARE THE ONE
    Go forth and add up columns of numbers - they have no sense of adventure,
    happily obey strong rules, never contradict anything even on the most basic
    level and don't ever argue with your assinine prounouncements. It's a good
    income too.

    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    Tony, Dec 30, 2004
  4. Tom Hudson

    Don Lathrop Guest

    My money is on Roland. You lampoon yourself.

    I see Roland plugging away, working at his craft,
    learning the ropes, doing well.

    I see Tony sitting in a Starbucks smoking unfiltered
    Camels with a copy of Rochefoucauld's essays
    open on the table, talking to an adoring teeny-bopper,
    while his hard drive is full of pretentious mundane
    French-angled archi-shots that rigorously follow
    the rule of thirds because that's as far as he got,
    waiting for the muse to dance because he thinks
    he's an "artiste," straining to live true to the ideal,
    not realizing the word has no meaning.

    "Art" is making salami with pig guts,
    if someone says it is.

    If Mortimer Snerd draws pictures of doodie
    in his Composition Book and calls it "art,"
    then that's what it is.

    If I want to write newspaper headlines sequentially
    for 18 years in a notebook and call it "poetry" then
    it's poetry.

    "No it is not! It's this, not that!"
    Cried the critic with bells on his hat.
    "You're keeping a journal,
    Not penning eternal
    Verses with entries like that!"

    "It's magic with words,
    Not journalist turds
    That go in the Norton collection."
    So I waved my wand
    And shat out a sonnet
    And flung it in his direction."

    You can quote me on that, Mssr. Artiste.

    Or as my hero, Ebeneezer Scrooge, once
    said, "Art is humbug." You, Tony, place
    too high a value on doodie, pig guts and
    humbug. You'd do well to illustrate greeting
    cards yourself and put away the pretense.
    Don Lathrop, Dec 30, 2004
  5. Well - thank you.
    One tries to do the best.
    Now --- please tell me o almighty

    Is it a rule thet you shall not follow rules?

    I really want to know.

    Roland Karlsson, Dec 30, 2004
  6. Tom Hudson

    Confused Guest

    Those breaking artists are rule making.

    (just a bit doesn't have to be art any more)
    Confused, Dec 30, 2004
  7. Tom Hudson

    Confused Guest

    Hmmm...I'll bite de'art:
    The rules breaking without art, there is not.

    Sense may make it, and it reverse.
    I lost my rule book... anyone have a spare?
    Goody... I'm a Painter! I'm a painter!
    And to become a Picasso one must suffer from visual migraines.
    Picasso painted, sculpted, what he saw.
    His life was one huge headache.

    Jeff - Not as confused as I was a few minutes ago...
    Confused, Dec 30, 2004
  8. Tom Hudson

    Mark² Guest

    Thank you...Yoda!

    Mark², Dec 30, 2004
  9. Tom Hudson

    Confused Guest

    I guess Picasso proved there was no line between trash
    and art. Some of his best work came from trash heaps.
    What is "creative acceptance"?
    Translation, please?
    If that is the definition of art, then there are NO rules.
    (this should be interesting)
    If there were *one* rule it would be balance.
    You're not a musician, huh.
    But, what is the rule?
    But, what is the rule of painting?
    No thanks to what? You have mixed confusing statements, creative
    verbalism, drifting subjects, obfuscation, jiberish and a bit of mumbo
    jumbo into one post. It must be art!

    Confused, Dec 30, 2004
  10. Tom Hudson

    Confused Guest

    RPD Jeopardy

    Jeff: I'll take RPD for $100 Alex

    Alex: One who take this thread seriously.

    [que music]

    [time passes]


    Jeff: Alex, What is ...

    > One who can't tell the difference between
    > an artistic rule and a technique or style.

    Confused, Dec 30, 2004
  11. Tom Hudson

    Jan Böhme Guest

    This is the Romantic view of art. It is definitely not the only view
    of art that exists. It was unheard of before Romanticism and its
    apotheosis of the Lone Artistic Genius, who in addition preferably
    shouldn't be properly understood by his own contemporaries. And by and
    large, this rather conceited view of art has caused more harm than
    good since its inception.

    A musical master like Johann Sebastian Bach created great work - just
    as great as Mozart's - by strictly abiding to all the rules of
    composition that he learnt in his youth. His composing sons thought
    that the old man was frightfully out of fashion and not up to the
    times. And Mozart

    Still, it is his "oldfashioned", rule-abiding, music that has
    survived, and very little of Carl Philipp Emanuel's, or Wilhelm
    Friedemann's or Johann Christian's.

    Art isn't primarily about either abiding by rules, or breaking them.
    It is about creating life. Whether you manage to do this within a set
    of established rules, or by creating new ones is immaterial. The same
    goes for hackery. These days, you will find just as many hacks
    cluelessly breaking rules as there are hacks cluelessly abiding by

    And at least in music, the real innovators rarely made great art
    themselves. It took others to perfect the new rule systems that the
    innovators had established. Mozart, whom you mention, is a case in
    point. He wasn't much of an innovator himself - at least not up to his
    last works, where he starts to experiment quite boldly with long
    sequences of dissonances. The rule-breakers, whose rules he abided to,
    were people a generation older - for example the brothers Stamitz of
    Mannheim, or his own father Leopold. He used their rules. He simply
    made better music than them. It was only when he felt that he had
    exhausted the possibilities of the old rules that he started
    experimenting himself.

    Please also realise that for every great artist derided in his day as
    a wacko, there are hundreds of derided wackos in their day who are
    regarded as nothing but hacks today - if they are considered at all.

    Innvation per se is certainly no ticket to artistic greatness.

    Jan Böhme
    (a newbie in this group, and a relative newbie in photography, but
    with reasonable experience of most aspects of music)
    Jan Böhme, Dec 31, 2004
  12. Tom Hudson

    nick c Guest

    That so? What trash heaps did they come from?
    What you like, you like.
    Doesn't need one.
    There are rules, but you have the option not to recognize them.
    Don't know much about dancing, huh.
    I play Clarinet. Judging from your comments you're not a musician. Huh.
    Hey, who else holds your hand during the day. The rule of literature
    requires a subject.
    As I said before. Oh to burst self-made images of sophistication.
    nick c, Dec 31, 2004
  13. Tom Hudson

    Confused Guest

    I do have my moments, Luke. May the force be with you.

    Beware the light - follow it not - a trick it is.

    Confused, Dec 31, 2004
  14. Tom Hudson

    Confused Guest

    Yes. That is so.
    Where ever he found one, and the heaps came
    from other people's thrown way stuff.
    There are no rules for that. ;^)
    Ahhh... artistic writing...
    Perfect usenet comeback. Edumacated mumbo-jumbo.

    No, you don't. One cannot have rhythm without balance, so if there is
    "a rule" then balance must take precedence over rhythm.
    [insert woodwind joke here - point made ;-]
    Bzzzzzzt. Wrong.

    (I never would have thought a musician would define THE RULE of music
    because there isn't ONE rule.)

    Time and scale are independent. The concept of a single "rule" for
    music is a false concept. Encompasing time inside the structure of a
    scale is false.

    If there is a rule for any specific piece of music, it would be

    "You either like it or you don't."
    I *thought* you were simply trolling.


    Confused, Dec 31, 2004
  15. Tom Hudson

    Tony Guest

    Tony, Dec 31, 2004
  16. Tom Hudson

    Tony Guest

    Tony, Dec 31, 2004
  17. Bye Tony.

    Roland Karlsson, Dec 31, 2004
  18. Ah, the season of goodwill to all men!
    David J Taylor, Dec 31, 2004
  19. :)

    Seriously - Tony starts name calling etc when people here
    does not agree. And then he makes the remarkable argument
    that it is not art if you follow rules - you must break them.
    OK - that might be his own definition on what he think
    is art. But then he refuses to admit that what he just made
    up was a rule. So ... this is a Catch 22 situation. You cannot
    follow this rule if you always shall break rules. Therefore -
    nothing is art. All thinking beings understand this - and so
    do Tony. But instead of a smiley and some explanation what he
    really meant, he calls people idiots and aholes and plonks them.
    Strange behaviour.

    BTW - my own opinion what is art is what an artist makes.
    It has nothing to do with if it is good or crap, if it is
    new and ground making or just the old booring stuff. Sometimes
    you can also in retrospect declare some other man made artefact
    art, e.g. buildings or furniture ... But mainly - art is made
    by artists. If someonen makes something and not calls him/her-self
    an artist - it is not art. But - as I said - it migh be declared
    art by someone else - and then it is art - at least for all that
    respect that persons opinion regarding that issue.

    NOTE - this is my belief/opinion. If you believe otherwise
    you are free to do so. If your belief/opinion is contradictory
    or just strange - I might comment on that.


    PS. The season of goodwill was rather disturbed by the Tsunami
    catastrophe in Asia. The latest figures was 100,000 dead in
    Indonesia alone. And the latest figures for missing Swedes on
    vacation in Thailand was 3,500. And the figures are still

    2004 ended rather badly - lets hope for a better new year (when the mess
    has been sorted out in Asia).
    Roland Karlsson, Dec 31, 2004
  20. Roland Karlsson wrote:
    I note your comments.
    Indeed yes - it seems that those destinations are more popular with Swedes
    than Brits at this time of year. I remember visiting the memorial in
    Norkopping to those lost from the Estonia, including the old folk from
    Borlange (excuse spelling). I wonder where the next memorial will be?

    David J Taylor, Dec 31, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.