Photographers on Dirty

[MikeyC]

Originally Posted by kid cue

who do you like besides Araki? i'm really into Daido Moriyama and (more recently) Rinko Kawauchi and that guy who photographs the Tokyo underground tunnels.

moriyama is without question THE photographer i respect most. he and leonard cohen are the only two famous artists that i have ever wanted to meet and just have a talk with. his work in both style as well as content hit so close to my own feeling on many things. i had always been attracted to work that dealt with this sort of helplessly futile view on life ("100 years of solitude" and "on the road" for instance. "on the road" of course being a major source of influence for moriyama himself.) and so seeing moriyamas photographs for the first time (stumbled upon while looking through the japanese work from william klein, who is also a favorite), they just felt instantly familiar to me. sort of "this is what it looks like in my head."

aside from moriyama im a bit all over the place. and it also depends as very few photographers consistantly do work i like. so it is pick and choose.

takuma nakahira is amazing. was in the provoke group with moriyama. was working in the same bure boke style as moriyama was at the time, but eventually began shooting much more color and "regular" pictures. though i really enjoy that work from him as well.

anton corbijn is a big inspiration for me. ive always hoped that hed somehow end up shooting underworld. he would be my personal fav commercial photographer. his lith prints and blue prints are gorgeous.

william klein as earlier stated. the man who sort of kicked off the whole notion of not trying to get sharper clearer images but instead going for the feel of the scene and the energy in it. his new york book is fantastic.

i like a lot of robert franks later work where he began working in film and doing collages of photos and others materials. the book "storylines" is really beautiful if you havent seen it. i think its much more interesting than "the americans."

the native american photos from edward curtis. they have a similar feel to the work of corbijn. he was working with his own methods of printing and the results are really nice.

and then of course "the ballad of sexual dependency" from nan goldin was THE book that made me go from liking photo to becoming obsessed with it. her later works gets a bit blah.

but aside from moriyama i actually think that the writings of leonard cohen inspire me more than photographers do. occasionally they make me want to kill myself too.

Originally Posted by kid cue

how do you see this as being good for photography? i'd love to live there ....

i suppose id boil it down to the place has a huge energy to it. and i think a good deal of that energy comes from the push and pull in the culture. and then simply that theres such a large number of people in the cities. any time you have something like that, for me at least, you cant even put the camera down for more than a few minutes. new york is the same way. every time i go there i come back with a good bit of work.

ive gotten carpel tunnel and no work done today from all the typing on here.

[crank]

I love that i asked a simple question and got pages of responses!

You can't really have a discussion or review work, portfolios, or just browse snapshots if you don't know the rules of the engagement can you?

Your photographer, the one who said he wasn't a photographer and yet IS/ WAS(?) is just being modest probably.

I don't have much time right now (i have too many projects that need to get out the door) but I wanted to throw a couple of pennies into the ring.

crAnk.
PS Karl prob. wouldn't refer to himself as a photographer either. but he IS.
anyone is a potential photographer. but here's a thought: how often can you do it well? a 10 year old can have one amazing picture and then not take his next great picture until he's 20. does that define him as a photographer?

Just because i pick up a brush and put paint on it, and put paint on a wall doesnt make me a 'painter' anymore than one who shoots pix casually is a 'photographer'

definitions are critical and crucial because the playing field isn't the same

[MikeyC]

Originally Posted by crank

Your photographer, the one who said he wasn't a photographer and yet IS/ WAS(?) is just being modest probably.

he did not say he wasnt a photographer. he said he considered himself to be an amateur photographer. if you are doing work out of personal reasons rather than finance, even if money does come from it in some way, then you are by definition an amateur.

Originally Posted by crank

PS Karl prob. wouldn't refer to himself as a photographer either. but he IS.
anyone is a potential photographer. but here's a thought: how often can you do it well? a 10 year old can have one amazing picture and then not take his next great picture until he's 20. does that define him as a photographer?

doing it well does not come into it at all. we could both look at the work of one "photographer" with you thinking it is amazing and me calling it trash. so if by my saying that the person does not have a single decent photograph, are we to simply say that the person who took the images is not a photographer? if you shoot pictures, again by definition, you are a photographer.

Originally Posted by crank

Just because i pick up a brush and put paint on it, and put paint on a wall doesnt make me a 'painter' anymore than one who shoots pix casually is a 'photographer'

i am going to sound like a prick saying it, but i dont mean this in a rude way. the people who come to your house and put paint on the walls are called painters. they paint. you do however have to judge them with a different set of criteria as it is painting in a different realm. the same is true in looking at the work between a professional and amateur photographer. both are working with very different goals and that has to be taken into account.

i think a major problem is that people often take "professional" to mean good... and "amateur" to mean someone not as skilled and learning.

[crank]

nope, doesn't sound rude at all.
you made my point for me (although i skimmed)

but a painter who paints portraits: artist
painter who paints walls: craftsman.

are there terms?
Does it matter?
photographer who photographs for a living: prof. photog?
photographer who's an amateur: amateur photog?

are there any rules? sounds like you are basically saying everyone is everthing all the time. no?

[Sean]

New pictures up of some pellicans and sea lions the wife and I saw on our bike ride this morning.

http://www.tabblo.com/studio/stories/view/326028/

[lloyd]

I'm rather fond of this one. Taken with a 35/135 3.5/4.5 nikon on the D70s
http://www.flickr.com/photos/70641975@N00/1347621983/

It's the Belgium Singer Arno, he used to be in TC Matic (of an underground cult anthem) but has gone solo for years already. Sings in french and english. Best song? .

[Chicane]

i'm not a prof and even don't have an expensive camera... but anyway you can check this out www.chicane.kiev.ua

[sockman]

...Wondering how I missed this thread. Some great stuff here.

I've been doing landscapes for the past 7 years.

Linky: http://www.southwesthorizons.net

&

http://www.flickr.com/photos/benparker/

[Sean]

Originally Posted by sockman

...Wondering how I missed this thread. Some great stuff here.

I've been doing landscapes for the past 7 years.

Linky: http://www.southwesthorizons.net

&

http://www.flickr.com/photos/benparker/

Damn dude....

[m.g.]

Originally Posted by sockman

...Wondering how I missed this thread. Some great stuff here.

I've been doing landscapes for the past 7 years.

Linky: http://www.southwesthorizons.net

&

http://www.flickr.com/photos/benparker/

These photos are simply magnificent.