Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/12/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It seems to me that photography falls into the following genres:
Documentary:
Events
News
Sports
Travel
Landscapes
Cityscapes
Street life
Portraiture (individuals and/or groups):
Formal
Studio
Environmental
Candid (generally also environmental)
Fine Art:
Conceptual
Experimental
Artsy:
HDR, iPhonography, and other special effects
Scientific:
Astronomical
Macro
Micro (including electron microscopy)
Heat, IR, UV, etc.
Illustration:
Opinion / Editorial
Fictional narrative
Advertising:
Fashion
Product
Archival:
Family Snapshots
Museum Catalogs
Archeological records
Etc.
I may be overlooking a genre or three; and invite suggestions.
Within each genre the history of photography has high-water marks; examples
of greatness.
And each of these genres can of course overlap.
An advertising concept, portrait, document or scientific image can reach for
and achieve Art.
A documentary image may reach for and achieve op-ed, humor, irony, etc.
As we consider photographs within the various genres
we can compare our, and other's, work with the high-water marks
and evaluate on the basis of:
Socially
extremely important
important
neutral
unimportant
Historically
extremely important
important
neutral
unimportant
Aesthetically
gorgeous
beautiful
pleasing
bland
weak
Emotionally
extremely moving
moving
inert
Conceptually
profound
outstanding
fresh
derivative
weak
Technically
superb
well done
adequate
weak
So
I may think of Howard's recently posted "Vancouver sunrise pano" as a
travel, cityscape, document;
historically important, aesthetically beautiful, conceptually derivative and
technically superb.
or
Ric's body of work documenting local street life
as socially and historically important, aesthetically beautiful,
conceptually fresh and technically well done.
or
his musical performance archives as socially and historically extremely
important
aesthetically pleasing, conceptually derivative, and technically adequate.
Regards,
George Lottermoser
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist