3 ms·

I think rather than "a similar metric for beauty" that the art of taking photos for retouching and posting on the internet for strangers is such a generally sta

by sneak 3y ago

I think rather than "a similar metric for beauty" that the art of taking photos for retouching and posting on the internet for strangers is such a generally stale and predictable form. I'm a visual artist and I'm so over the standard "internet photographer" look. Who takes pictures of lighthouses? It's so boring. It's always people in the same demographic doing it, too. Give me some variety. Formulaic art is uninspiring.

Arainach 3y ago
Claiming that only unique or original things are good is toxic to growth and the development of culture. Saying "who takes pictures of lighthouses" is like saying "who writes their own [editor/operating system/firewall/whatever], there are already dozens of great ones". People get better by doing, and if they never did anything that had already been done they'd never be any good at all. Besides, Lighthouses are cool and pictures of them are pleasant.
- sneak 3y ago
  It's the same demographic that builds an abandonware single user text editor as a hobby that takes the 400th identical photo of a new england lighthouse. As a middle aged white guy myself (who codes and makes visual art) I am constantly reminding myself of the context in which my creations exist and reminding myself to actually be creative when doing so. The millionth photo of something out of the Uffizi with an expensive camera and lens are not things I tend to publish. They're vacation photos, not art.
  - Arainach 3y ago
    These photos are independent works of art. They take skill to select the angle, to set up your equipment, and to be ready in the moment. They are absolutely art. A lot of wedding photos look a lot like other wedding photos. That doesn't make them not art or not worthwhile. Someone trying to exactly recreate a shot may not be art (trying to find exactly where Ansel was, etc.) but can still be a solid technical exercise in developing skills. This is not that - it's two people creating something new and independently who happened to have similar results.
demondemidi 3y ago
It’s like Fry said: “ Clever things make people feel stupid, and unexpected things make them feel scared.” You’re right, but no one likes to be told their taste is banal. And that’s like 80% of the population.
superhuzza 3y ago
"Who takes pictures of lighthouses? It's so boring." Claiming that a particular subject is boring is extremely uninspired. For example, landscape photography is "boring", but aren't Ansel Adams's photos creative and high art? Didn't Van Gogh take landscape painting, a very old subject, and elevate it? I could just as well claim that taking photos of people is boring - It's been done a billion times before. Reducing a work of art to just the subject seems to miss the point of what art is.

by sneak 3y ago

Arainach 3y ago

Claiming that only unique or original things are good is toxic to growth and the development of culture. Saying "who takes pictures of lighthouses" is like saying "who writes their own [editor/operating system/firewall/whatever], there are already dozens of great ones". People get better by doing, and if they never did anything that had already been done they'd never be any good at all. Besides, Lighthouses are cool and pictures of them are pleasant.

sneak 3y ago
It's the same demographic that builds an abandonware single user text editor as a hobby that takes the 400th identical photo of a new england lighthouse. As a middle aged white guy myself (who codes and makes visual art) I am constantly reminding myself of the context in which my creations exist and reminding myself to actually be creative when doing so. The millionth photo of something out of the Uffizi with an expensive camera and lens are not things I tend to publish. They're vacation photos, not art.
- Arainach 3y ago
  These photos are independent works of art. They take skill to select the angle, to set up your equipment, and to be ready in the moment. They are absolutely art. A lot of wedding photos look a lot like other wedding photos. That doesn't make them not art or not worthwhile. Someone trying to exactly recreate a shot may not be art (trying to find exactly where Ansel was, etc.) but can still be a solid technical exercise in developing skills. This is not that - it's two people creating something new and independently who happened to have similar results.

demondemidi 3y ago

It’s like Fry said: “ Clever things make people feel stupid, and unexpected things make them feel scared.” You’re right, but no one likes to be told their taste is banal. And that’s like 80% of the population.

superhuzza 3y ago

"Who takes pictures of lighthouses? It's so boring." Claiming that a particular subject is boring is extremely uninspired. For example, landscape photography is "boring", but aren't Ansel Adams's photos creative and high art? Didn't Van Gogh take landscape painting, a very old subject, and elevate it? I could just as well claim that taking photos of people is boring - It's been done a billion times before. Reducing a work of art to just the subject seems to miss the point of what art is.