Photography bashing courtesy of gizmodo

That's pretty sad to be fair. Those images are not breath taking at all that are displayed on there, what they do need is constructive criticism and not for a pathetic attempt in crushing their hope in becoming something in life........ What a d**k you are Diaz!!!!
 
Gizmodo are a complete bunch of wan**rs - basically a bunch of wannabe journalists who wouldn't make it in a mainstream publication due to their lack of journalistic ability and zero integrity.

I've had some interesting Email exchanges with Diaz in the past - and eventually voted with my browser and went elsewhere for my tech news (Engadget).

Gizmodo are the 'Daily Sport' of tech blogs - they deliberately foster sensationalism, promote flame wars etc - it's all about the clicks and subsequent advertising revenues.
 
well there we go!...
I might not see anything i like in those images, but i wouldnt make such a big deal out of slating them without any constructive criticism...
Its just rude eh?

this is a bit far
[h=1]These "Photographers" Should Be Judged For Crimes Against Humanity[/h]
Click to expand...


I quite like the lomo style shots of the youngster holding a pregnant belly... they are just made a little less tasteful by the way they have been put together
 
I initially followed Pete's lead and intended not to open the link. Then, being unfamiliar with Gizmodo, curiosity got the better of me. Pete: Your instincts were right.
 
I'm not a huge fan of Gizmodo either, but in this case he was really just passing on a link to a blog featuring very, very bad photography. I try to be supportive of my fellow photographers... especially those just starting out. I would never dream of making fun of photos from amateur photographers (well, at least not publicly ;) ). But the photos featured on the blog that Gizmodo linked to are pretty bad and are fair game, as far as I'm concerned, because they are on websites for people who are advertising their professional photography services.
 
I get your point, but I'm more of the live and let live view ...
At the end of the day, if they get booked, and people pay them, then in the eyes of the person who has booked them and revived the images they must be good photos!
If you don't like it, don't book em! Some people must like it...
The general public are just as likely, more so in fact, to have bad taste than the creator!
Who are we to question other people's taste??
To us they demonstrate bad taste and lack of skill...
Take away the understanding of the skills you are just left with taste!
This bashing of other people's photography by other photographers IMO is just rude ...
I'm not saying I haven't done it, when Ben was last round here we had a giggle at a few shots, but it's behind closed doors and not nearly as malicious as what gizmodo are promoting
I always say, a photo as as good as the creator decides, if they like it, an in this case if the customer also likes it ... Who cares if everyone else On the planet thinks it's ****.

I had a client, as mentioned in another thread, who thought my photos were shot because they were mostly out of focus, as I said, it was just narrow dof on the subject. He didn't understand that that was the point. He may well have liked some of this sort of stuff ... It's all about taste!

"If you book an artist, make sure you like thier work" would be a more appropriate angle on this IMO "because if you don't, you might be left with something very much not to your taste"
 
All fair points, Hamish. If they are able to be successful in their field, all the better, I suppose. Unfortunately, most of the population probably doesn't even really see the difference between the photos on that blog on what you or I would consider "good" phoography - in the same way they don't see a difference between snapshots they took from their iphone or a portrait you would take with a professional camera. Perhaps the real education is better art education in schools!
 
Who's to say they don't see a difference... They might appreciate the aesthetic of iPhone images etc
Education, arguably, is just making people aware of conventions ... Who's to say the conventions are right?
Who's to say that what you like is right for everyone?
Breaks in convention are what lead to new artistic movements ... Have you seen the episode of the Simpsons where homer smashes a BBQ. It becomes "outsider art"! I could imagine some arty folk latching on to this and giving it a title "trash art" or something similar. All of a sudden it becomes legitimate ... You and I might continue to look on in horror, whilst others see something else in it!
Look at Tracy emin, damion hurst et al ... Load of old toss, mostly completely lacking in taste, yet carries huge credibility for some unknown (to me!!!) reason ... Just because I feel that about it doesn't mean everyone does, I have a right to an opinion, a right to be critical, but I'm also human and as an artist would treat thier art as I would expect them to treat mine!
I'll always remember a trip to italy with my school, we were in the stunning village, beautiful architecture abound. Yet nestled between churches, contained within shops made of beautiful architecture were piles of the most hideous catholic parafonalia - holographic images of Jesus etc. Not just 1 shop either ... A lot of them, enough to make you realise that trade in tasteless catholic parafonalia was booming! We chuckled at it, but would never dream of telling the shop owners or buyers of this dross what we thought of it to thier faces!
Different culture, different education etc make people like different things! These people aren't asking us to like it, they are merely offering it as a service to those who do... What right do we have to ask them to like what we like?
As with any art, it has as much right to exist, be enjoyed and be criticised as anything else ... It's just of my opinion that if it is criticism that is going to be given, it should be done politely and without mockery!
 
I guess you're right, Hamish, but I'm reminded of something a smarter person then I once said: "when everything is valued, nothing has value". It becomes the equivalent of giving every kid in class a blue ribbon- it becomes meaningless. Granted, I get what you're saying and agree that artists have been rebelling against conventional interpretation of art for centuries (only to become 'conventional' themselves, in the eyes of the next generation. And I certainly have no right to call myself the arbiter of good taste. But if quality, technique, and taste are no longer valued at all, where does that leave us as a society?
 
I know exactly what your saying, but don't think im trying to take away the right of people to express criticism of what they don't like! I'd agree that these people could probably do with a little help to achieve something a little more!
If an artistic movement did come out of this stuff I'd likely be horrified... In the same way I am of most of what Tracy emin does
The most of what I'm trying to point out is that there is a right and wrong way to approach trying to "help" and the way gizmodo have is in fact significantly more distasteful than the images them selves IMO

That all said, I still respect people's right to produce and sell stuff I don't like if there is a market for it, you intelligent friend certainly has a point, but it doesn't take into account that every single one of us has a different idea of value! 'One mans trash is another mans treasure'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Julian Tanase
Ghosts on my photo
Replies
6
Views
509
Pete Askew
Pete Askew
Julian Tanase
A hike with Leica IIIC and Fomapan 400 Action
Replies
14
Views
756
Gary R. Smith
Gary R. Smith
Pete Askew
Nikon Optiphot
Replies
6
Views
442
Gary R. Smith
Gary R. Smith
Pete Askew
Relio
Replies
4
Views
2K
Rob MacKillop
Rob MacKillop
Chris Bennett
Spotmatic F
Replies
14
Views
2K
Chris Bennett
Chris Bennett
Back
Top