10
They're blowing up the Kodak plants, but don't worry, we've still got our cellphones. Kate Taylor explores an art form undergoing a revolution ...Read the full article
This conversation is closed
- Skip to the latest comment
-
John Smith from Ottawa, Canada writes: margaret lindsay holton from Waterdown, writes: Enjoyed Ms.Taylor's article as far as it went... however, was a bit disappointed/surprised that no mention was made of the 'alternate' photograghic movement - 'pinholing'.
And this is a delightful science. Some of the results can be truly amazing. Then again, most photos shot before 1850 were done with some form of pinhole camera. I built a modular roll-film pinhole camera with a 35 mm film container, the end cut off and replaced with a piece of shimstock with a 1/16 inch hole. Then with plaster I fit a 126 film cartridge (remember that?) and I was good to go! The results were terrific. Thank you Margaret for the information. I hope that you get good traffic in your exhibit.- Posted 03/05/08 at 11:19 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
Kevin Dooley from Canada writes: I'm frankly surprised that anybody would think that the art of photography has anything to do with the medium of photography. The art of photography is all about capturing the subject of the photograph, about framing and lighting, foreground and background, about action and repose. How does that change if you swap film for a CCD chip?
The medium changes in all arts. Bach's keyboard music is most commonly played on modern pianos these days, which are completely different from, and I personally think vastly superior in all ways to the keyboards of his day. The medium changes, and many of the techniques change. The *art* remains.
In the end, it is only the art that matters. The medium is not the message.- Posted 03/05/08 at 10:49 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
al bell from Canada writes: In the end, it is only the art that matters. The medium is not the message.
Well said Ken Dooley.- Posted 04/05/08 at 4:30 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
Robert F from Canada writes: Interesting article and I wasn't aware that Contact was now the largest show of its kind in the world. What troubles me as a photographer is the German artist the article mentions who 'lifts' images from the internet. No mention of whether or not the artist receives permission from the originator to use the images. No mention of the highly possible violations of copyright. That's very disturbing.
- Posted 04/05/08 at 10:22 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
smelter rat from Canada writes: People are always confusing digital images with photographs. They are not the same thing at all.
- Posted 04/05/08 at 8:49 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
Jason Robbins from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Kevin & al: I'm not sure I agree that the medium and the art are so easily separated. The world captured by photography is different and dependent on the paper or film it's printed on as well as the process that is used to develop it. A painter's choice of wood panel, canvas or bond paper and acrylic, ink or oil make all the difference to the art. And, I'm sure you'll agree that Bach's music does sound different when it's played on instruments from his time. I wonder if there would be a difference if he had written those pieces today. Or, if Duchamp or Picasso could work with digital photography?
Now that I've laid those out, I do agree with the broader point of the medium not being the message. Artists will continue to work with the medium available to them today to record, reflect and project life as we know it.- Posted 04/05/08 at 11:43 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
Able Bodied Man from Colony of Van Isle, Canada writes:
I looked through the Contact photo selection and was surprised at how many pics are little more than 'snapshots.' I've been doing much the same thing for years. Most of what is called 'photography' is obviously simple recording. The original copyright in scenes of nature, whether captured on digital file or emulsion film or in colour or black & white, belongs to Mother Nature.
While Ansel Adams is rightly celebrated for his abilities with equipment, his patience with light and his impeccable timing, he cannot claim to have created the Teton Mountains or the river flowing past them. Therefore he is a recordist and craftsman, superb and accomplished, and worthy of full credit for his talents.
The beauty of the scene belongs to Nature.- Posted 05/05/08 at 2:25 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
Able Bodied Man from Colony of Van Isle, Canada writes:
A black & white image is a technical step closer to art. But it is a technical interpretation of reality and not the reality itself, which is in colour. Art enters in a limited fashion the Contact image of the father & son overlooking the canyon, because both the foreground and background are soft focus, while the midground where the subject is is sharp. There was an interpretation, a manipulation of reality and of senses in the photographer's mind.
Let us not call a shot of a Mercedes Benz with a man and a goofball anything more than a snap. Same for the shot of people on a conveyor belt.- Posted 05/05/08 at 2:35 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
ariel lenjanr from United States Outlying writes: Ken Dooley spouts nonsense while trying to be clever. It never ceases to amaze how the second rate in music can alter the original concept to suit their modern ears and show us how "clever" they are. Can one imagine the outcry if you wanted to overpaint an El Greco etc. to suit contemporary taste.What Bach heard in pitch alone is quite different from a hundred "Goulds " bringing their version to the public.\ on a modern piano . It might excite ,but it is not Bach as the old man heard his music. Photography is the "art form of the second rate" from the post cards of Ansel Adams to the latest hot shot ,hyped by the dealers out to make a fast buck .True artists create their works,a snap shot is not creating ,iit is always a "shot" with added hype as to lens camera , f stops used and.on and on and of course social meaning to give it some heft . If a Goya etching and a photograph were offered free for the taking ,guess which would be taken up in a flash ? Photography has yet to become "art'' whether digital or chemical .
- Posted 05/05/08 at 9:16 PM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
-
Robert F from Canada writes: The comments by Able and Ariel illustrate why and how the appreciation of art is an entirely subjective matter. Ariel's comments further illustrate a complete ignorance of photography and the process of making a photo. Ariel, just as the painter creates his/her work so does the photographer. The choice of ISO speed, lens choice, aperture choice, shutter speed choice, the choice of black and white or colour, the choice to shoot at a particular time of day, processing choices, printing choices all contribute to an end result that is "created" and not merely "snapshot". By combining these different elements in different ways, an entirely different result can be achieved and an entirely different story would be told.
- Posted 06/05/08 at 8:16 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment
Comments are closed
Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.
Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff
close
Alert us about this comment
Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.
Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.
