davidc wrote:Are you not simply using photographic techniques here to pick out the part of the sculpture you find interesting... and that is still someone else's sculpture, in isolation.
I put this image in for two reasons, neither of them because I think it is a particularly good photograph.
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
Rendering the background out of focus has made it less of a record shot and it can be argued that a degree of artistic interpretation has taken place. For some reason, I find it more acceptable to use someone else's handiwork in an image when it was not specifically intended to be a work of art. Whilst clearly it does have artistic merit (otherwise there would have been little point in making the image), the primary purpose of the sculpture is to commemorate the occupant of the tomb. What surprised me is that it seems to be this factor which makes the inclusion of others' efforts more acceptable. It's interesting at what point the dividing lines occur and how the boundaries are blurred.
davidc wrote:I'm not saying you have used "bad technique" at all - far from it, please don't think that
Of course not. This is a debate about aesthetics and what people feel comfortable making the subject of their images. I included the Hands shot as following his talk, I wanted to try Clive Tanner's style of photography for myself and that image was one of the few I had available to show as an example.
davidc wrote:In a weird way I feel like I'm arguing both sides of the argument here
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
There's nothing wrong with record photography, though personally I find little "artistic" to admire in it. I don't log in to amazon to admire the record shots of the products they sell, for example
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
Yet I do think that taking photos of paintings/sculptures/other people's art is just inherently limiting. Even with the technical skill you have used to render your photo above, it's a photo of a tomb and as such it's appeal is limited by how appealing the tomb itself is - you've used your technique to focus attention.
Image assessment is so subjective, with widely ranging opinions, that it is impossible to make a definitive statement on one side or the other. It all comes down to the merits of each image and the particular viewpoint of any given individual.
davidc wrote:
To give examples of how I think both of our pictures could be improved, for mine I often thought that if I could have included more of the surrounding area and caught someone running hard underneath, a nod to Usain himself, it would have added a human element and shown that I as the photographer had added something of my own to the image as a whole. For yours, reframing and capturing people praying in the background, echoing the shape of the hands you've shot, would make for a much more appealing and well seen shot maybe?
Again I've rambled, it's a lazy Friday, but to try to crystallise my position I think that while there's nothing wrong with shooting art in it's own right I just think it's limited in appeal. It can definitely be utilised to make great shots if the photographer can factor it into a wider image. This definitely seems to be at odds with what Gerald thought in that using it in any form was to be discouraged. I've uploaded a shot Rudolph entered to illustrate the point -
The judge scored this higher than other "art incorporating" shots but still remarked that he had used the design of someone else to make a shot and it was more "simple observation". Didn't agree with THAT assessment at all...
I have recently observed another SPA registered judge making a similar comment. Before judging commenced, they stated that they considered finding an interesting location and waiting for something to happen there was not a valid form of photography. When such an image came up as you describe, the entire "critique" was "This is exactly the type of image which I have said I do not want to see". Unsurprisingly, the shot then got the lowest score of the evening.
I am currently in communication with SPA to establish to what extent this is official policy or whether it is individual preference. Suffice to say that I have heard other judges make statements which indicate that they do not find street photography appealling, so such images do run the risk of not scoring well. In my opinion, someone who can dismiss an entire genre of photography has no place setting up their stall as a judge.
Provided SPA is in agreement, I post their response here when I receive it.