A few comments.(posted 8642 days ago)(Wayne) in response to mike dixon: my primary complaint with jeff's approach to photography as art, represented specifically by this posting, is that it is so easy to do
I don't think it's particularly easy to do. I visited the site of this photograph at least thirty times, and photographed at least ten of them. I have over 100 shots (taken mostly with a non-pinhole camera) at this location. I visited at every time of day, shot in the rain, in bright sunlight, and sometimes just walked around and absorbed the energy. It's a strange and trippy place, currently mostly abandoned and waiting for demolition.
For quite a while, I had envisioned the concept of the boy with head turning (not just from Meatyard's photos, also from the film Jacob's Ladder), it was something I wanted to do. I tried it at a number of abandoned buildings I visit without finding what I wanted.
When I purchased the pinhole camera, I realized it was the right vehicle for this shot. Putting the location, the boy, the camera, the movement together happened. This particular photograph, rather than being a casual experiment, took a long time to happen. Maybe you could do it very quickly, but I found it a long (and interesting) process.
(Wayne) observe the work of kertez, or cartier- bresson, or many others of similar style: the work is striking in its beauty, and obviously a matter of selecting the precise moment in time that forms speak to us in a musical vision, a unique moment, unstaged, devoid of artsy fartsy pretense
And this is where I really have problems with what Wayne is saying. "Precise moment" photography is simply one way of taking pictures. Many, many photographers don't work in "precise moment" mode. Many, many photographers stage shots. Does that make them all "artsy fartsy" and "pretentious?" Or do you just happen to not like mine (which would be much better, as far as I am concerned)?
(Larry) My interpretation of intended symbolism is just that mine, right or wrong, it needs not match what you wanted but at the very least the photo kept my attention for a while.
And I couldn't agree more. I don't necessarily think anyone should interpret my photos the way I do. For me, they're all wrapped up in certain internal visions and I doubt anyone else has exactly the same ones. I feel I've succeeded if I can generate some reaction.
I think Mike's work is quite wonderful, valuable and worth seeing. I'm not sure if he has a website, I have seen quite a few of his photos and highly recommend them.