geetee1972 – Member
Oh apologies buddy, I worded my original sttement poorly because I didn’t intend to suggest that landscape work doesn’t also comment on the human condition; far from it, I think it’s one of the most powerful, evocative and accessible ways in which we can do this. I referenced Constable earlier on this page/thread and ‘The Hay Wain’ is perhaps a great example of this (does it squeak into the Romantic period?)
Heehee, didn’t take it as though you’d dismissed landscape – just highlighting (perhaps obviously) that image makers coming from two totally different places can have similar concerns even thought their aesthetics diverge totally.
[qoute]Yes that’s also very true though I think the reason that people like Bailey and Liebowitz are so well known is because their subjects are. Sadly I think that speaks more about celebrity culture than it does talent.[/quote]
Totally agree. The point I was trying to make that you put much more succinctly.
mikey74 – Member
If you don’t mind, allow a rather poor, part-time photographer to add his 2c: I think photographs are very much like paintings, in that you should allow the viewer to attach their own emotions and meanings to the scene. This is the reason why photos where the meaning behind them have to be explained, don’t do it for me.
I know it’s not always possible, but perhaps a subtly place artefact may help guide the viewer, but still allow a certain amount of interpretation.
Landscapes, cityscapes, abstracts etc. work on many levels because they are essentially Rorschach tests, allowing the viewer to find, and apply, their own story.
IMO etc etc/
Don’t want to derail the thread too far away from the images themselves, but I love this stuff. If you think the meaning of an image lies with the viewer, what becomes of the artist’s actual intentions? Would a camera strapped to a cat taking pictures at random intervals create images that were just as valid?
Conversely, if the meaning of an image comes entirely from the artist’s intentions, how can a viewer ever work out what the image means?
It’s clear (to me) that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of those two extremes – without intention the image would never be created in the form it is, and without an audience to add their own spin to the image’s meaning the image has no ‘life’.
Beard stroking over. Let’s get back to the photos!