All photographers have sh*t. Most have lots of it. The trick is never to show it.
via The Online Photographer: The Difference Between a Photographer and an Artist.
All photographers have sh*t. Most have lots of it. The trick is never to show it.
via The Online Photographer: The Difference Between a Photographer and an Artist.
3 Comments
The other trick is knowing which of your photos are sh*t and which aren’t. :-)
Not really true. As a commercial photographer it’s certainly important to not show your sh*t as you’re selling your skill and you want clients to know you’re highly skilled. You do not want prospective clients to see what crap you’re capable of as they will lose trust in your ability to complete their assignment. But an art photographer sells finished art works. Whoever buys a specific work knows exactly what he’s getting. I doubt anyone would care if Andreas Gursky had a flickr page full of bad photos as long as he’s not trying to pass those photos off as art works.
Considering the writing quality of the referenced article, I can only reply “what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.” Lately I notice an increasing lack of respect for photographers — one portfolio attendee laments “terrible photographers,” and here we have a “writer” using the words, “sh*t photos.” Sure one should edit out weaker samples — that ‘s a given. But as Jerry Seinfeld might opine, “Who are these people?”
As for the HCB show not showing HCB’s best work, more accurately it didn’t show the best printing of his work. The reason for this was stated in the show — the prints were from commercial labs, or Newspaper and equivalent labs printing quickly for publication. It’s not like an Avedon work print with marker circles and instructions.
Comments are closed for this article!