Burn Magazine has a new voice for Alejandra Martinez Moreno, a well-known online casino player. As it moves forward with the intention of continuing the legacy of founder David Aan Harvey, which began in 2008, Burn Magazine will also be supported by the newly created Burn Foundation, also read
Six Florida Destinations You’d Love To Place A Mobile Wager… Once Sports Betting Is Legal Again. as soon as Sports betting will become legal again. We plan to maintain current grantmaking while expanding the continuing education, publication and outreach efforts that many online casino players support.
are we supposed to be impressed by how good looking daria is, or by the post production?
just thought i would br “controversial” there. nice picture, but so what? i can find good looking chicks taking self portraits of themselves all over the internet. i expect something a bit more interesting here, especially given that some of the content of late has been really rather good.
yes.. but does it match the curtains ben?
i like it.. and it led me to look at darias webiste.. there are some classic ideas explored in interesting ways… http://1x.com/photos/member/2744/23189/
there is potential here and i would encourage it.. DARIA – where have you studied?
BIG UP NORWAY
:ø)
At first I just recoiled, like I always do when faced with stuff like this. Then I read it’s a self portrait. That felt a bit better. At least it wasn’t a Bruce Testones piece. I still don’t like it but Daria sure is hot! Wouldn’t pass up a stupid date with her.
DARIA…
great job..
Don’t listen to the typical
UN-sexed British men above…
( they hate you .. But can’t ignore you..!!?)
Great job!
Ben: I totally DO NOT understand (other than being ‘controversial”, try again mate ;) ), the ‘cool’ hostility…come on Ben, you;re a smarter guy, better photographer, than having to tweak off work like a coolcrowd acolyte….Yes, this picture, isn’t journalism, and has no relationship to the kind of work you produce or you tend to admire (based on your comments here), but it is strong and imaginative and fits CLEARLY in a specific tradition of self-portraiture and now, a new body of work that uses PHotoshop as a painterly tool. Beginning with Jessica Woodman (who of course did not have photoshop) and moving through Hiromix and up to work by artists like my friend Belkina (from moscow) the tradition of this kind of work is just as legitimate and just as evocative as any that you and i produce. Isnt photography’s power about the relationship it has with the collision between the internal and external world?, and this relationship is ALL about the viewer’s relationship to the viewer….yea, find this kind of pics fey or superficial or too self-obsessed, ok, but in TRUTH, how is any one photographers work less so: choosing to turn camera + tools outward (documentary, journalists) or inward (woodman, michals, belkina): it is still about the photographer wishing to speak about some negotiation of this waning life….yes, for me too, the difference in Emotional, Intellectual and Existential power of laura’s “Survivor” and this pic is hard to match (and in comparison to that image, yes, this photograph cannot possibly register the same impact), but we must be careful about dismissing work simply on our own photographic compass points….I prefer this kind of ‘portraiture’ to that of the frustratingly empty and superficial stuff of richard hamilton and jock sturges…is it the iconography that bugs the shit out of you or the use of photoshop?….for young teenage girls and young adult women, this image might have as much strength as anything you and I gravitate toward….isnt’ this then our responsiblity as viewers/photographers….not to ‘like’ stuff we aint about but to try to understand what makes some photography powerful for others? Doesnt this further open our own eyes and practice and enhance what we do?….I find the off-the-cuff dismissal of photography (whatever the genre) more an indication of the viewer than the work itself….no?…
Daria:
A beautiful, evocative and very painterly image. In fact, for me, the best approach to this pic and all the pics in your website is through painting. But i love the surreal and dark upending pictures that reimagine the ‘beauty’ or pic apart the ‘beauty’ that has so entranced Stupid and Ben ;)))….I also enjoyed your website. And this photograph, as do many of the ‘straight’ shots beckon Balthus, yes? ;)…
BALTHUS’S “NUDE BEFORE THE MIRROR”…..and much of the work reminds me of him, but darker, less ‘observational’ and more scalping….it’s nice to see a reworking in imaginative ways this stuff…
Are you familiar with Belkina? Belkina is a friend of mine and lives in Moscow. She too uses painting and self-exploration as a beginning point. Belkina’s PHotoshop technique (she began as a painter) is, like your own, very very strong and she also uses this technique as a starting point…If you like her, write her and tell her you’ve introduced to her from me. She’s a great person as well.
http://www.belkina.ru/
thanks for sharing….really enjoyed the website…especially the ‘bald head’ photographs
cheers
bob
Daria:
A very beautiful, evocative and very painterly image. In fact, for me, the best approach to this pic and all the pics in your website is through painting. But i love the surreal and dark upending pictures that reimagine the ‘beauty’ or pic apart the ‘beauty’ that has so entranced Stupid and Ben ;)))….I also enjoyed your website. And this photograph, as do many of the ‘straight’ shots beckon Balthus, yes? ;)…
BALTHUS’S “NUDE BEFORE THE MIRROR”…..and much of the work reminds me of him, but darker, less ‘observational’ and more scalping….it’s nice to see a reworking in imaginative ways this stuff…
Are you familiar with Belkina? Belkina is a friend of mine and lives in Moscow. She too uses painting and self-exploration as a beginning point. Belkina’s PHotoshop technique (she began as a painter) is, like your own, very very strong and she also uses this technique as a starting point…If you like her, write her and tell her you’ve introduced to her from me. She’s a great person as well.
http://www.belkina.ru/
thanks for sharing….really enjoyed the website…especially the ‘bald head’ photographs
cheers
bob black
Ben:
I totally DO NOT understand (other than being ‘controversial”, try again mate ;) ), the ‘cool’ hostility toward the picture……come on Ben, you;re a smarter guy, better photographer, than having to tweak off work like a coolcrowd acolyte….Yes, you dont dig this kind of work, no big deal. Yes, this picture, isn’t journalism, and has no relationship to the kind of work you produce or you tend to admire (based on your comments here), but it is strong and imaginative and fits CLEARLY in a specific tradition of self-portraiture and now, a new body of work that uses PHotoshop as a painterly tool. Beginning with Jessica Woodman (who of course did not have photoshop) and moving through Hiromix and up to work by artists like my friend Belkina (from moscow) the tradition of this kind of work is just as legitimate and just as evocative as any that you and i produce. Isnt photography’s power about the relationship it has with the collision between the internal and external world?, and this relationship is ALL about the viewer’s relationship to the viewer….yea, find this kind of pics fey or superficial or too self-obsessed, ok, but in TRUTH, how is any one photographers work less so: choosing to turn camera + tools outward (documentary, journalists) or inward (woodman, michals, belkina): it is still about the photographer wishing to speak about some negotiation of this waning life….yes, for me too, the difference in Emotional, Intellectual and Existential power of laura’s “Survivor” and this pic is hard to match (and in comparison to that image, yes, this photograph cannot possibly register the same impact), but we must be careful about dismissing work simply on our own photographic compass points….I prefer this kind of ‘portraiture’ to that of the frustratingly empty and superficial stuff of richard hamilton and jock sturges…is it the iconography that bugs the shit out of you or the use of photoshop?….for young teenage girls and young adult women, this image might have as much strength as anything you and I gravitate toward….isnt’ this then our responsiblity as viewers/photographers….not to ‘like’ stuff we aint about but to try to understand what makes some photography powerful for others? Doesnt this further open our own eyes and practice and enhance what we do?….I find the off-the-cuff dismissal of photography (whatever the genre) more an indication of the viewer than the work itself….no?…
The butterflies are attracted to the heat and the light – and you know they will be burned. In the same way, Daria’s electrostatically-charged skirt and hair suggests she too is attracted to the ‘Illumination’ while simultaneously realizing via her defensive position that she will be hurt. For me this is a portrait of self-awareness through sin and guilt – and the trip it necessitates.
I am not a big fan of combining duotone and selective colour. In this image it personalizes the woman where I would have preferred more anonymity – which may be a contradictory criticism of a self-portrait! But I hope you know what I mean…
… Laughing..
Nothing worst than wanting something or Someone
Sooo bad but Cant have them…
.. !!
:))))
bob
i wonder why there isn’t a proliferation of semi naked self portraits by ageing male photographers in their mid 50’s?
and if there was, would we all swoon over it?
you know what, i think that particular genre of work would interest me more than this, simply because its not so bloody obvious.
@mr protagoras
i am sure there are “unsexed men” all over the world, and not just in Britain!
for young teenage girls and young adult women, this image might have as much strength as anything you and I gravitate toward
——————————
yeah, but so did R. Hamilton that you dismissed a few sentences earlier, Bob. I am impressed by the use of light in this picture, or use of PS (I frankly have no expertise to know which is what), especially the rendering of the skin tone. I suppose we could say: what’s not to like in this picture, and somehow, you and Ben being 2 different people, and possibly 2 different moods this morning, it comes out from your pen differently. I totally DO understand Ben and I totally DO understand you, Bob…
Obvious. This could just as easily have originated entirely on a computer. A camera may well have been used to generate the template, but it has become redundant here, and amongst a lot of the work on the artists site. As artistic images however they are quite cute.A flip through deviantart or somesuch though reveals a whole world of analogues. But then you could say the same about any genre of photography or art i suppose. Pretty girls doing vaguely angsty self portraits; seems like they are everywhere we look these days….could be worse i suppose; could be fat old men :)
BB homer.”.I find the off-the-cuff dismissal of photography (whatever the genre) more an indication of the viewer than the work itself….no?…” YES ABSOLUTELY! SO WHAT? Are we photographers or social workers?
PEACE
John [slightly bellicose today] Gladdy
Laughing..ben got there before me
Daria…
Checking your website..
I keep thinking of FREIDA KAHLO today..
Man.. You made my day…
Great
Great
Awesome..
Viva Norway…
:)))))
Ah yes, the haterade emerges predictably from this crowd. The roots of which can be traced back to 3 scenarios I say:
1) Photographer who chooses not to use much Photoshoping, convinced that it somehow elevates him on some kind of platform, sees another photographer who does not think the same way getting attention, feels like that photog is somehow cheating. Dismisses it as kitsch to save ego…gnashing teeth….
2) Photographer sees another photographer who is able to use her sex appeal to capture audiences. Bitter photographer is upset nobody wants to see him without a shirt on. Not fair…
3) Elitist photog likes to deride any photo that does not look like it was taken with rangefinder, taken in some part of the earth with lots of dead or dying people, or taken while wearing a scarf. It is his duty to let people know REAL photography is about concocting an elitist persona and wrapping oneself in esoterica, not creating images that move people.
Thank goodness a photo from Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir wasn’t chosen, there would be rioting in the streets.
BEN :))))
NOW, YES, that’s work i could seek my teeth into as well…:)))…and, yes, i agree, but that’s not the pic here at hand….by the way, have done nude self portraits and will submit to burn that pic too, after the summer (breathing time ;)) )…all im saying is that no-one needs to dig this work or particular genre, what im saying is that, however we relate to it, or are bored by it, it’s still strong work: there are 10,000’s of photogs doing this, just as 10,000’s of photogs doing Street, Journalism, Conceptual, so my question is always: is the image/work strong, show good skill, good ideas, and stops me, then, for me, it’s been a success…i once posted a pic of yours truly’s familyjewells/family-stalk close up, big print, got taken down the next day….and here is one pic from a series i did of Men and Women (pre, mid and post coital)…this guy is a painter, 48 at the time (now 52)….anyway….no relationship at all to Daria’s work, but there does exist work out there ;)))…
HERVE/JOHN/BEN:
yes, u r right….i have never implied people need to be social workers or therapists when evaluating other work, especially work that they dont dig….my ONLY bitch is that being condescending toward work (dismissing this picture by essentially fixating on her as a “hot” girl)…why not just: ‘dont like it, dont like the image, the genre, the PS stuff, etc’….what’s the reason to be pretentious about discussing work??…as for Hamilton/Sturges, yes, Herve, u r totally correct…i kind of did the same…ok, so different: their work i find visually uninteresting, photographically and emotionally superficial and slightly (if not more) exploitive: like middle-age’d men pawing over pages of Teen Sports, inc…;))…oh, that’s pretentious too ;))…well, no way to get around it….ok, without pretense: I find the work of Hamilton and Sturges uninteresting, unchallengings and pedestrian. I’d rather take …. ;)))
running
bb
here’s the link to the pic of the 48 year old i photographer with his girlfriend…this is only the man…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/73821181@N00/524790482/sizes/o/
Tommy, why don’t you tell us more about what you see and get from Daria’s submission.
Rather than offering a contribution, You added another negative post on BURN.
well it’s nice to see simpson has found his dummy and is back to full power sandpaper. i like the new and improved name dropping features as well as the new found degree in audience therapy. Anyway, the place feels complete again.
Daria, i like this. it reminds me of the images i woke up to in the dorm rooms of twenty-year old girls when i was back in university. It’s a very pretty picture and in this case i don’t mean ‘pretty picture’ to demean.
i’m certain this is a commercially valuable piece of work and if this is the genre of work you’re interested in exploring than i think it’s great and something to be proud of, i’m sure you will find a huge audience for this work, and i’m sure none of that audience would need therapy to understand why they like it, again, it’s a beautiful piece of visual art.
one thing i started to keep in mind almost entirely through the images promoted on Burn and in particular with these types of images, is that much like the fact that good photographs don’t just fall out of cameras, pleasing images like this don’t just fall out of photoshop. Again, i’m glad Burn has endorsed this as it’s fair game, in-scope, and successful in implementation.
Good stuff Daria.
why not just: ‘dont like it
————————–
That’s pretty much all I read in Ben’s post, Bob. He was kind enough to point to us why.
being condescending toward work
————————–
It’s OK, and won’t make or break Daria’s career. IMO, it’s not condescending. It’s dismissive. A lot of work is dismissed, here and elsewhere. Especially thru silence and not looking. Daria may have a word for Ben speaking up at least. And of course, him doing so inspired yet one of your long eagerly-awaited paragraphs. It’s starting to be rather all positive, no? :-)))))))))))))
HAMILTON vs ENDERSON
—————————
Gee, I don’t know, Bob. Let’s see how Daria evolves, I see a definitive marketable possibility in her work. It could in that process losse some of its poetry by the simple fact of commercialization, but also become manneristic… “Hamiltonarized” too, and therefore…Horror! ;-)….. Best-selling.
What I am saying is that, apart from the picture and intent of Daria, TODAY, there could be ample discussion on the direction such type of work entails, ultimately what is it for, and also who it is for, and who really looks at it and buys it, even though these question may not be, even should not be quite in Daria’s mind today.
PS: middle-aged men do not care if it is sincere or superficial, as long as it shows the “goodies” with the pretense, in their eyes, of artfulness. If Daria has a good PR and publisher, they can sell like pancakes.
It might be helpful to discuss more about how this picture makes you feel instead of focusing on pure aesthetics. Feeling and emotional response are areas where all kinds of photography can overlap whether its fine art or photojournalism or what.
For me, I feel a bit uncomfortable – maybe because of the intimacy of the portrait, like is anyone looking over my shoulder as I look at this? And the simultaneous warmth and coolness makes me feel uncertain – is this hopeful or is this sad? I want to know more.
There isn’t a proliferation of semi naked self portraits by ageing male photographers in their mid 50’s because Lee cornered the stupid market.
http://www.mocp.org/collections/permanent/uploads/Friedlander1982_52.jpg
The reason the photo looks photoshopped even to my stupid, untrained eyes is because we, like all good Pavlov dogs, know that all light bulbs in photos-except this one-record as orange.
http://www.itchy-animation.co.uk/tutorials/light04.htm
To me they don’t look like self portraits, rather like they were taken and set up by a second photographer. I can understand people making self portraits, but Daria clearly has an obsession for it. Regardless of how they were taken and processed, they look very well executed.
I really like this photograph. The level of technical skill is way, way beyond me. I love the “light-pull”.
I think that people are having problems with this photograph because it it too perfect – in a sense that life is not perfect: it has wrinkles and blemishes, doubts, fears, regrets.
This is Fine Art and a wonderful medium for the artist to explore life and self. Congratulations Daria: please continue this self-exploration – over years – decades. The result will be fascinating. I am reminded of Jan Saudek. Exalted company Daria! Congratulations!
Mike.
Jan Saudek..
Yes Mike.. thanks..
and Frieda Kahlo.. And Dali..
And none of the above..
Fine Art indeed..
Kinds Too Much for our poor
purists/PJ’s to comprehend or accept..
I bet “JIM” also hates this photo…
Not “straight” enough..
Laughing..
Ohhhh .. Jeez..
How come I didn’t notice that the
Lightbulb is NOT orange???
Now I hate this photo..
:))))
For All of the “Jims” our there:
“did you ever returned your hamburgers
Back just because they were fully cooked”???
I didn’t think so..
But how come you prefer your meal hot but your
photographs “cold”????
:)))
Mike,
You guessed that right..
Daria’s technical skills is
beyond all of us here combined together..
Laughing..
What a gorgeous surprise!!!:)
Thanks a lot everyone for sharing your opinions and having this rather interesting discussion. Really glad that some of you enjoyed my work.
David Bowen
———–
If you mean any photography/PP-related education – no particular schools/courses I went to – I am 100% self-taught :)
Protagoras
———-
Frida Kahlo is one of my all-time favourites! Pleased to hear that my images reminded you of her :)
Thank you for your support and encouragement – very kind of you.
Homer(bb)
———
Thank you, Bob! :)
I’m a big fan of Belkina and I believe her works inspired and influenced me a lot. She is undoubtly a great artist! Never tried to contact her, but since you’re offering your reference – maybe I should :)
I have to admit, I’m less familiar with Balthus. Now that you’ve mentioned him, I will surely check out more of his stuff (curious!)
Jeff Hladun
———–
Interesting interpretation, thanks for sharing!
Herve
—–
The light is mostly PS work – all my images are shot in my bed-room with the light from the window, so if I need something special, I have no other choice but to create it in PS.
Joe
—
Thank you!
“..much like the fact that good photographs don’t just fall out of cameras, pleasing images like this don’t just fall out of photoshop”. Amen to that!
A Photojournalist Who Blogs
—————————
Appreciate your input – always fascinating to read how people “see” and how they interpret my creations.
Mike Halminski
————–
Believe it or not – I do all the work by myself.
Not sure I understand what you meant by me having an obsession. Is it bad?
Nice to hear that execution is on a decent level.
Mike R
——
Thank you for encouraging words, Mike! :))
P.S. A BIG request to David or whoever is responsible – please, correct my last name – it’s spelled ENDRESEN.
Thanks :)
Herve, 2 negatives > positive;) Comments are set up for dialogue, I offered my thoughts on the matter. I think the work speaks for itself, I don’t really feel like it needs my interpretation.
Technical skills only won’t eqaute to Photography (not talking about Daria per se). Just like virtuosity will never replace depth and emotion in a pianist’s hand. Quite a good thing to have if you master it, nut to each its own mastery. For many great photographers, technical skills were strictly pre-shooting, not post shooting. All depends how you approach what you have to say and how best to say it. That’s where the true mastery is.
Panos, remember what you told us (maybe me only, but I think us) about Pellegrin having an assistant “adding the drama” in his pictures (from negatives). But then , here you are all “PS uber alles” (we all think PS is great, cool and a superb tool to edit/create images, btw). So, maybe: fine art+PS, thumbs up, and PJ + burn and dodging, thumbs down? How does this square with the fact that even PJ/docu work is clearly dabbing into fine art photography, and not recently?
Who is the purist? Inquiring minds….
Daria,
It took some self-discipline to be brought into this image. Once I understood some of the obstacles in doing so, I warmed-up to it and understood it better.
Use of Photoshop: This is a social/historical hurdle to jump over. We tend to associate things that are created through electronic circuitry void of having the potential to be true art. Photography had this original argument when first compared to painting, and again when it moved into digital. I will not explore the debate further except to say that once that hurdle is overcome it is quite simple to view this image…as, well, an image. Not a painting, not a photograph…an image. An image that relies on a combination of techniques and is well presented. I have no issue if a photographer uses photoshop, photography or sculpture to present their work. When one dwells on this, one is getting lost in the reeds.
Esthetics: There are no flaws of composition here–photoshop or not. The balance is sublime, the shadowing and play of light reinforce the intent of the picture. The pose is deliberate but fairly contained. One could do far worse than learn from the balance, attention to detail, and harmony in the image and not apply them to one’s own work regardless of individual style, or personal preference for this image.
Yet why was it hard for me to relate and be drawn-in to this image? I consider myself quite open to artistic use of photography–and explore this medium myself in this manner. When I thought about this carefully I realized my reaction lay on two principle points:
a) The context of where the image is presented. It is very different to see this image on the web, vs. hung on a wall, or in a story book, or as a book jacket. If I came across the image in a story book, or as an illustrative support to a story, it would make a lot of sense and I would likely not have encountered the initial misgivings about the image. Actually, the more I dwelled on where i could see this image, and tried to relate it to stories I knew, I recalled Naguib Mahfouz: “A moth overhead made love to a naked light bulb in the dead of the night.” (The Thief and the Dogs). I also imagined something in the vein of “The Arrival” by Shaun Tan. It is not an image I pay attention to on the web or on a wall, but would find it compelling if accompanied by something else–likely within the context of a fictional story. I see this image doing well in the book cover market, and generally something that distills text into visual meaning, say as the illustrative support to a novel, or as a graphic novel —(if the right order of images is presented). Indeed Daria, you seem to offer this through the poems on your web-site.
b) Overturned by unidentified purpose. I am confused with the reason for your work, and with the actual presentation of the images. The presentation of your images jumps from sweet, to dark, to androgynous, to landscape. I wasn’t sure if this was a random collection of personal work, a series, or a university project. Each genre within its framework could work, but all together is seems a bit much and distracted me. Perhaps simple grouping would help more?
There does seem to be a deeper vein of self-absorbed angst that revolves around the poignancy of heartbreak in many of the images. Is this lonely angst a personal expression, or simply theatric use of visual hyperbole? Despite the dark edge of many photographs (including this one) they still feel a bit too “syrupy” or “young”. This is perhaps the strongest reason for my not feeling involved in the image. The melancholy, pain, anger, all seem to come from a person who’s highest degree of suffering is young love and self exploration. Lacking is the patina of pain that comes from involvement with the world and life. It’s all very much, “ME, ME, ME” presented through use of symbolism and excellent composition, and it leaves little space for the viewer to insert themselves in the image. It’s almost as if there is no room to breath.
It feels as if you are in the process of building something and pulling it out of you yet. Best of journeys.
Jan
regardless of how much the image is liked or disliked, Daria has some serious skills and is creating something that most of us could not..my hat: am taking it off.
Mike H
I am as puzzled as Daria by what you mean by “obsessed with self portraits”. It is her style and (I venture to imagine) her way of simultaneously relating more to her work and presenting herself to others more honestly. I would consider this being true to form and consistent rather that “obsessed”. In counter-point, would a photographer that does not have self-portraits be considered “obsessed with NOT-having self-portraits?
I agree that some of Daria’s work seems to be taken by another person, but that speaks enormously well of her ability to master herself in front of the lens, as well as her skill behind it.
Generally speaking…
I think self-portraits are some of the hardest pictures to take, and a very taxing personal commitment to ones’ work. You can never blame anybody but yourself. You are not at the mercy of a model or of serendipity–only yourself, and the shortcomings you have between the vision in your head and how you manage to compose it. Unlike painting where you have a nearly infinite means of beginning an image, with photography –and even more so with self-portraits- you have set parameters from which to build from. Overcoming and yet integrating this raw material (ie. you and what you are photographing–as opposed to creating) is extremely challenging, and therefore most fun for those who venture down the path. It also requires great self discipline from yourself acting as your own model. How you wish to present your features and body, and the esthetic implications of that. eg. Trivial things such as tan lines, hair-cut or fitness (or lack of) all play an important part in the image you want to convey, but perhaps you yourself do not embody that—then how to you transform yourself into that figure you wish to present?
(P.S. enjoyed your Hattersasman essay.)
DARIA…
there are three of us now in my loft all looking at how i spelled your family name in this post and how you say you want me to spell it…it sure looks the same to all three of us…yes, ENDRESEN…that is exactly the way i published…?????????
cheers, david
BEN…ALL
one of my objectives here is to stimulate discussion…whether or not this genre of photography is your cup of tea , has indeed stimulated you and others to write….isn’t that the point??
in this particular case, i also thought Daria just might be perceived as quite the intelligent business woman…these are not sloppy “chic pics” (your term)….Daria has used ALL of her resources quite masterfully…her whole presentation on her website is very very clever (mixing landscapes with self portraits, provocatively hiding the nudes) and i would imagine her prints sales might be better than most within a certain clientele and i have a feeling she knows her audience quite well….
in our brave new world of finding our niche audiences, Daria might well be out there ahead of the game… surely this style of photography is worthy of discussion …
as i have explained to you before , i pull pictures for BURN from pictures the readers submit….i will always welcome all styles, for many different reasons…I would also be quite pleased if you or others pointed me in the direction of photographers you know who may have work i do not know…you also my friend are invited to submit….i wish you would .. i like your work…
in any case Ben, this photograph certainly departs from where we were 24 hours ago…and 24 hours from now, we will go somewhere else…
stay tuned….
cheers, david
Herve..
My “problem” with Pellegrin
was the “mood enhancers” he used in a “pJ”-straight world..
Daria or Dali or Kahlo are
SURREALISTS..
they supposed to use photoshop,
Enhancers or any kind of drugs..
There is no other way..
Don’t get confused..
Paolo is a war photographer.
he doesn’t need photoshop..
But Daria dives into the subconcious..
She has to use PS..
:)
for the record, i never said “sloppy”. and i’m well aware of the technical competence. i guess i’m just unmoved by the intentions..
i have no doubt that this kind of photography will make lots of money and print sales. great. i sincerely wish daria the best of luck.
dammit, i’m not very good at typing without it looking sarcastic. i do, honestly, wish daria (and any photographer for that matter) the best of luck making a living through their art… :-)
whether or not i like it personally.
3 posts in a row. i’m turning into panos. where’s the “edit post” function when you need it?
Wow, Erica, yes, you are right, BUT: there are incredible photo+PS work to be seen on many sites, of which “most of us could not create”. Actually, I am reminded of Jim’s “non-professional/coterie public” argument a while ago. People are totally bowled over by such dexterity. A zillion times over “moment” photography, where technique is to serve not a conceptual idea, but on the contrary, to serve and not to ever overwhelm that moment (That’s Panos, You I believe, Patricia, DAH, etc… loose, straight, or whatever). You take Pbase, flickR, Pnet, artificial creations leave the appreciation of “moment” photography in the dust, so to speak. People are dazzled, and the virtuosity becomes the ART .
I simply do not recognize you (or anyone here if they’d written that), thinking there is a point to be made in photos that dazzle for their technique wether disliked or liked. I mean, yes, that’s nice, that’s impressive, but it should carry no weight(1), unless serving a higher end (which matters a damned lot!).
So I guess it’s the “regardless disliked ir liked” that makes me react.
(1) unless seen as sport. Pro athletes, champions do things we can only dream about.
Daria! :))
Please, write Belkina and tell her I told you to write her. If you’re afraid, drop me a note, and i’ll write an email to both of u to set up a contact….she’s a very quiet person, but loving and approachable…and of course, great artist and terrific person :))….
would be my pleasure to introduce the 2 of you…
cheers
bob
Ben..:)
( smiling/ no sarcasm..)
Turning into panos is not a bad thing!
Again
Big hug:)
Daria,
Are you familiar with Remedios Varo? If not I thought you might enjoy her.
http://www.turingmachine.org/remedios/expo.html
Jan
(cool thread again. Thanks Ben…And Bob. ypu started us up)
PANOS
My “problem” with Pellegrin was the “mood enhancers” he used in a “pJ”-straight world.Paolo is a war photographer.he doesn’t need photoshop..
————————
Said who?
Here’s his intro quote on the Magnum site: Quote: “I’m more interested in a photography that is ‘unfinished’ – a photography that is suggestive and can trigger a conversation or dialogue. There are pictures that are closed, finished, to which there is no way in.”
I think David would be more eloquent than ne to make the point that Pellegrin, even though interested on covering conflict, is not a “straight” WAR photographer. That what got him into Magnum had to do with not being just that. His last sentence, I think this is what is called straight WAR photography: ie. this what I saw, and I shot it so you can see it too and know what is going on. He can do straight, BTW, but that wouldn’t get him into early 21st century MAGNUM, IMO.
I am a bit on your side, nevertheless, about him, and if his assistant is so changing his own images, the work should be seen as dual, him AND her (I think it’s a She)
Last: War is surreal too! ;-)
cmon Herve..
Enough with that photoshop talk..
We exhausted that in the past..
But just for u I’ll bite..
The “unfinished” pellegrin you
Mentioned above was the early Pellegrin..
I was talking about the “latest” pellegrin..
The PS one..
And again I love the guy..
Either with a point and shoot Olympus and no PS
or with a 5D and a PS guru..
I still love him.. I say he don’t need a PS guru..
But it’s fine either way.. I will STOL sleep tonight
believe it or not..
Big Hug!!
:)
i meant to say:”I will still sleep tonight..”
Laughing..
Effing iPhone :)))))
So finally DeviantArt found it’s way to this blog. Another girl with a lack of self-confidence which has to photoshop pictures to reassure her that she’s attractive, at least in the manipulations. How dull.
I don’t dare to call this a photograph. One or a few photographs were merely the base for an image which only remotely has to do with photography.
What a shame to torture the readers with this.
Protagoras-panos-whatever you are called today. You dont half talk some nonsense sometimes.
regards darias image
Interesting set of opinions and camps.
I have no problem with the image as an image[as stated earlier]. It dont do anything for me, but its what it is quite well, and the potatoshopping is good.
but..
In mY opinion
This is NOT a photograph.
It is a perfectly harmless piece of whimsy art that happened to be born in some sort of camera.
This is NOT a SELF portrait.
It is a stylized theatrical still life. It is a clown suit.
j
Angus..
Honestly..
Get the f**k out of here..
What do u know about confidence or girls…
John Gladdy..
What appears to be the problem ?
Where exactly do you disagree with me?
Panos! :-)
No matter how many times I go on the Magnum site, “in motion”, “blog”, etc… M photographers work is the least known from me. David is well aware of that, since that fateful MAGNUM BALL, last year… :-)
“Latest Pellegrin” on google did not give me much to bite on. So back to Magnum, and his 2008/9 stuff there is quite (neo) classic, very film like. I am unable (read ignorant) in seeing how much editing/processing has altered it. The high contrast is superb, does serve the images well. But yes, sorry, I have no idea what they looked like unedited (with PS). I seem to think the final images are pretty close to the vision he had for his pictures when he shot them. I may be wrong.
(hijack over)
Oh Herve…
I know we just talked over
The phone literally , a minute ago..
But sorry I forgot to tell you..
Yes.. You’re always wrong..
:)))
Anyway fly safe to Paris..
I’ll be in Frisco Monday morning
and yes we are Not gonna meet..
Lucky you.
:)
Well, the photo is fine but the discussion just sucks. Really. I mean … it makes me sad and angry and if we were in a room together I’d be throwing a beer in a face or two, which just isn’t like me at all, but then if we were in a room together I’d doubt the discussion would be nearly as nasty and people might show a little human respect and dignity, even a little class. Be real, as in a real person. I’m with Vink, this site works just fine looking at the photos. Sorry David, you really do have the patience of Job. I’m finding these discussions increasingly infuriating in their tenor: often valid viewpoints being made with unnecessary venom apparently based an underlying motivation of overcompensation. And now I’m sinking down that hole myself. Damn. I may become a Ludite yet.
Daria, you do what you do, and well. If you love it and you own it, then just ignore the frustrated little boys. I apologize for my immature rant.
I just realized that, save Erica (but she did not offer an opinion other than applaud the know-how), no other woman has come to make a comment on Daria’s work. Hmmmm….
Hmmmmm…
Herve… please finish your thought…:))))
“civilian” mentioned in another thread that:..
” I wish I was Daria…”!!!
Herve,
Are u saying that women hate other
Beautiful, talented women? ( therefore ignore them out of jealousy???)
:)))
Is it true that also some men hate gorgeous women??
Especially those men that their lust is out of control ?
The insecure ones? The ones that “want” but can’t “have” them???
Laughing..
CoZ, if that’s what you’re saying!!
I might agree with you..!!!
:))))
Maybe this is a guy thing (?) This photo doesn’t make me want to stay. Everything about it is too over the top. Like a cake that’s too beautiful to sink a cake-knife into let alone eat. Bob, you talk about Francesca Woodman (i assume that’s who you meant), and i’ve talked about her before. I can look at her self-portraits all day and all night without really once feeling that she’s displaying her body and good looks for their own sake. She was far too intelligent and had far too much to express to pander to the viewer’s carnal appetite. That some will look at her photos and have a decidedly carnal reaction is beside the point. Which is why, as a woman, i can spend so much time with her photos. Because i am too busy deciphering them, appreciating their cerebral and aesthetic challenge to say, wow, she’s so cute or gee that’s a darling dress. As a woman i feel her pain, i get her conflict. Hers are not photos made for men. They are photos made for everyone who ever wondered where the hell they fit in in the world. And that means men too.
Daria, this is a “lovely” photograph. You are very attractive and undoubtedly have a vision you would like to express. But i honestly don’t feel the draw to dig any deeper into your psyche or the meaning of this photograph. I look at your hair and skirt blowing like there’s a category 2 hurricane coming in through your bedroom window and then i see the light bulb hanging from a cord and it’s as still as if there’s not a breath of air moving. This distracts and perturbs me. The butterflies are so girly sweet that i naturally push back from their obvious symbolism. Pretty is nice, there’s lots who would call pretty pretty damned great. But pretty means very little to me. i need more than pretty and more than enviable photoshop skills to make me want to hang out with a photograph for more than a few moments.
The following is a Francesca Woodman self portrait that “reminds” me of yours. And in this she’s even naked. And might conceivably be called pretty, sexy, whatever. But i look at the powerful emotions playing across her face, her open mouth which are very strong and arresting features of this photograph, what do they mean? Is she in a state of bliss or horrible suffering? Then i see the harsh, almost skeletal ridge of her rib cage and the strong cord extending from her ear to her clavicle, the taut nipples, lifted arm and beautiful underarm hair and gleaming hair piled on top of her head. I look at how she turns her head away from the light as if she can barely bare looking into it, as if she craves the shadow, the dark side and i gasp at her breathtaking fragility. I’m in awe and empathy and admiration of this woman with so much to tell us.
http://archivio.panorama.it/media//028001010681.jpg
Ben and Angus both make strong points, however crudely expressed. I am not sure they should be diss’d because they do not appreciate this photograph the way others seem to. I don’t appreciate it the way others do either. I think the photoshopping is excellent and maybe i’d find much to like in other work done by Daria but this is the photograph that’s published and this is what i am looking at. Daria forgive me for my critical review. You are quite skilled…i am envious of your talents and applaud how much you’ve taught yourself. I wish you the greatest success. You have a great deal going for you and i’m sure your future is bright.
best:
kathleen
Homer (bb)…i posted ONE link and got the dreaded yellow moderation band…grr!!! go figure, huh?
Nope, Panos, not talking about the men. We came in and gave our word. Ok, my opinion about Daria’s work has not been given. I have none, really. I said it before, I have not acquired a taste so far for Fine Art photography, or if you prefer, sur-realistic photography.
My hmmm really means exactly that. I am perplexed. I only remember that when Rafal said he chose to show his wife’s fleshier side, he was called on it harshly.
Do they find Daria’s skin showing a sure shortcut to the “appreciation” of her art (especially to a male public). Do they find the technique awesome but the art facile, or too adolescent? Is there photography that could rather be NOT for women? Did Erica speak volume when she said “wether you like it or not”? Was it an hidden critique? Maybe today, few felt like “burning”, and tomorrow, they will speak in droves? Maybe they are tired of the negativity, insensivity and flaming? And maybe, we could ask the woman in us, the anima, what she thinks. You know…. Panosette, Hervette…..
:-))))))))))))
oh (wo)man, i REALLY want to hear Panosette and Hervette’s “feminine” reactions to this photograph..heh..now THAT would be something..so??? How about it :)
Having only caught snippets and glimpses from the crazy thread that has unfolded (and seemingly kind of vomited) on us, I will choose to comment without any further influence from the mostly male-skewed arguing.
I think the image is lovely…it’s mixed media feeling with painterly qualities hints from a combination and collection of sources…in Daria’s work in general, I feel the presence of Francesca Woodman, Cindy Sherman, the painter Susan Seddon Boulet, illustrator Julie Verhoeven, and Brian Froud and Amy Brown (faerie illustrators)…that is to say that some of Daria’s work made me feel the same way as the work of the aforementioned artists makes me feel. There is something sad, beautiful, fantastical, scathing, dangerous, mortal, light, dark, and ethereal about the work. And to throw oneself in the spotlight (i.e. in front of the camera lens) for further examination, catharsis, or questioning is a noble move. Being creative in examining yourself through imagery is difficult…to share it is a crusade.
I love the light and hints of swaying that the image provides. Is the idea behind the image that we walk among beauty, but we can’t see it? Or that we can’t accept it? That we emanate beauty but yearn for more? An image that asks questions is a powerful one, and I find success in this one because it certainly does.
KAT-
Hervette and Panosette? You are too damn funny…
Carrie, you are such a wonderful writer, girl! You make me re-think what i wrote in my comment that’s still awaiting moderation apparently. I will give the photo more thought in light of your comment though i don’t think i can come up to your level of appreciation. Still, you have very eloquently voiced your reaction and i liked what you had to say. Guess it’s sort of like God. Some of us get it and some of us don’t.
haha, it was Herve who came up with the Hervette and Panosette..i’m STILL laughing!
take care, Carrie :))
kat
You know, i think what i need here is some contradiction..for example: the long brown sweep of hair that’s being tossed by the wind. When i put my hand over that unlikely mane, i see a somewhat exotic androgynous look that suddenly snaps me to attention..it also makes her look young, maybe too young but that’s also intriguing..is she? isn’t she? Maybe if her bangs were lifting in the wind like the rest of her hair that lower part of her hair would make sense (no that’s not the sort of contradiction i meant)..Carrie, i wish i felt what you feel when you look at this..i see ethereal, i see fantastical, i cannot see scathing or dangerous..i don’t feel Woodman (more tortured) or Sherman (more sarcastic)..i absolutely agree that self-portraits can be a catharsis for the artist but i guess it depends a lot on how much of yourself you’ve photoshopped right into history. Yes, the image IS lovely and yes, it does possess painterly qualities..i love the color but…..
best
kat~
Thank you, Kat. I appreciate your appreciation :)
Ok, Kat. Gotcha. I meant all of those adjectives to apply to the body of work that Daria has on her website. Some of the work was a bit far-fetched and photo-shopped for me, but I think that using our resources for mixed media work is relevant (I used to actually have a major problem with this, as I was solely a film shooter for the longest time). I think what I really liked about the image was her sadness, light, and femininity…I felt like I could relate. I don’t know, sometimes it’s hard to put a finger on what it is about an image that I like. She is beautiful and sad, and I’m left asking questions. That’s why I think it’s effective. And we are still talking about it, so whether the observers here like it or not, the image is effective because we are thinking about it and debating it, loving and hating it, blazoning and elating in it.
Ohhkay. I’m getting a bit lofty and wordy now. It’s past my bedtime.
Car’, yes, i hear you..i didn’t look at Daria’s body of work so i can see where that could make a big difference in your appreciation of this photo. We all see into photos differently and i think Daria’s been very successful if you have reacted so deeply to this self-portrait. And besides, as you said, her photograph has provoked a whole raft of comments and discussion and that’s just plain good.
goodnight..sweet dreams..
xoxox
kat~
Daria,
Found your website. It’s much more coherent and does your work better justice than the link you’ve provided here. The eclectic, androgynous, sudden landscape transforming into sadness–something that threw me off originally was avoided in your site with the inclusion of categories and titles. Why did you present 1x.com?
The top two rows of Visions and Dreams are your strongest work in that collection. Looking from bottom to top it seems you are moving from experimentations in technique to story building. In most of the two top rows there seems to be unifying theme. Seeing some of them back to back and next to each other there is almost a story emerging. I’m not sure what it is, but now I curious to have you tell me a story in your style.
You capture a similar essence in your Seascapes/Landscapes as in Vision and Dreams and I think that speaks strongly of the path you are on. Whether through technique or vision your “fingerprint” is evident on most of your images, and that is very hard to develop. I would nonetheless encourage you to decide on either a black and white or color version of some of the images, but not present both. If you are undecided, choose one and present something new–that is usually better than a new interpretation of something you already have.
cheers
Not something I would seek out, but God is she beautiful — that’s my first and only real reaction to this…. maybe I’m seeking out the wrong kind of pictures. :)
:-)))
Laughing
Jared….
:)
Yeeep!
i have looked at Daria’s other work. She’s quite complex and conceptual, far more than this photo suggested to me at first look. It doesn’t really change my mind about this particular example of her work. But she is quite imaginative and accomplished and has an inner vision that she is making an enormous effort to express. I understand Carrie’s and Bob’s references to Woodman. I now see where that came from. i personally prefer the latter’s work to Daria’s for the organic quality of her photos and the incredibly intense vitality of Woodman’s personality and physicality as it is expressed in her work. Daria’s work is, to my taste, overly smooth, flawless, completely unrealistic. Which is of course the whole point.
It’s a bit like David La Chapelle. His early books were shot in film and limited to analogue tricks of the trade. His last, “Heaven and Hell” are largely digital constructs (as far as i know..could be wrong). The difference is not just heaven and hell but night and day. Both are great. It just depends on what lights your solar flares. I prefer the grit and somewhat less plastic qualities of his film work. It’s less fantastic, more urgent, more credible (if that’s a word one could associate with La Chapelle).
best and out of here..
kat~
Daria
I absolutely love your photo: “Sömnen”. I would proudly hang that on my wall..kudos!
kat~
Daria,
Going back many comments, I did not mean obsession in a negative sense. On the contrary, it becomes a driving force for your creativity.
JAN:
Thank you very much for the extremely interesting insight, I really enjoyed reading it.
Regarding the context – I can agree with you on that, and I usually try to include some words along with my images. I’m currently working on a book where my works are going to be presented as a story and I’m planning to have some text accompanying them. Maybe in that case “connection” with the viewer will be better (at least I hope so).
Concerning presentation, I obviously made a mistake. The site I linked to is not my personal page, but a photocommunity where I’m just one of the members. The images are presented without any particular sequence and that’s why they look like a general mish-mash. The other site that you found is my “sketch” web-page which needs updating, and half of the shots beg for deletion, but in the sense that they are at least organized, it would probably be better to have given this link instead.
Again, I’m currently working on a new homepage which will have everything needed to give a decent presentation of what I do, but unfortunately it’s not finished yet.. *sigh*
Thanks for R. Varo – absolutely stunning work!
ERICA MCDONALD:
Thank you :)
DAVID:
Name problem solved – thanks!
Funny that you mention my presentation as clever – as I’ve said to Jan above, it’s a random collection of my shots on a photocommunity, and hiding the nudes is actually the site’s policy :)
BB(HOMER):
I know it might sound very childish or even silly but I am actually a bit afraid :)
Tried to find any of your coordinates but I failed – is there any way I could contact you in private?
YOUNG TOM:
Thank you. I’ve been posting on the web for quite some time now and I’ve heard things much worse than those spoken out loud here. The best response is to ignore – just as you say.
KATHLEEN FONSECA:
Thank you for taking time and sharing your view – I can appreciate any feedback, negative included, as long as it’s not a quick spit in the face, but a thorough analysis and constructive critisism.
It’s a pity that I failed to reach you and the image leaves you with “over-the-top” feel and nothing but “sweet prettyness” – that wasn’t the point of course. My intention was to tell a story and all the post-processing and symbols are here just to help, not overpower.
F. Woodman is a fantastic artist, no doubt about that, and the way she expresses herself and connects with the viewer is truly amazing :)
Thanks for checking out my other works. Glad you enjoyed “Somnen” :)
CARRIE ROSEMAN:
Thank you so much for the wonderful reply, you just made my day :)
JARED IORIO:
Thank you :)
MIKE HALMINSKI:
Thanks for coming back. Nice to hear that you meant obsession in a positive way :)
¨self taught…¨
fantastic daria.. keep on it.
david
Photoshop is evil.
Celeste…
:))
..so is God then…
.. He created it….
( as we say in the South:”ohhhh Lord”)
:)
Good morning y’all from the ugly San Jose.
Last day today
Wonderful discussion, wonderful photograph.
The negative reactions are not un-expected. Thankyou David Alan for again trying to expand the minds of the community of photographers out here.
There are a lot of factors which complicate our reactions to this photo.
First, it is beautiful. That in itself is enough to cause some to dismiss it. Easy enough to slot it into the “postcard, poster, consumer fluff” category. Some will feel they are much too sophisticated to appreciate such stuff.
The photoshop thing. Good grief, more purists out there. There has been enough said here to address this. I love the comment “good images don’t just fall out of camera, or out of photoshop. Photoshop is an incredible tool. Digital imaging is the re-invention of photography. (I guess it IS the end of the world as we know it)
Darias enormous talent and skill is evident. “Too perfect?” I once attended a critique with photo students at Emily Carr college of art in Vancouver. All the students prints were up together. Some of the students were dismissing a particular print as being “too slick”. Could it be because this particular print was gorgeous, and made all the rest of them look muddy, poorly concieved and boring?
The elephant in the room is the incredibly beautiful, incredibly sexy, partially undraped very young woman. Anyone, man or woman who thinks they are not reacting to the sexual dimension of the image is, I believe, fooling themselves. Reactions seem to vary from fascination, sexual attraction, to hostility and jeleousy. Too easy to dismiss the image as merely titillating soft core fluff.
Daria. Bravo. This image is exquisite, as are many others on your site. I see you celebrating your beauty, your sensuality, and exploring your own private universe with your art. Your work has a “young, feminine look” so it should, it’s who you are. You clearly have faith in your vision. You are also clearly very very bright. I’m very impressed with your work. Put me on your book list.
Gordon L.
Gordon,
You are indeed very honest..
I wish I could write like you..
Great self portrait indeed..
You nailed it..:)
Gordon/All Yes good discussion, and it has stayed mainly about the work on hand as well.[which is nice]
What I find odd is that the supporters of the image mainly seem to feel that the ‘faults’ are all with the detractors [jealousy, purism, envy, etc]. By the same token would that mean that a detractor of say the Aushwitz picture was somehow anti-semitic? An opinion is an opinion, and applying ‘cod’ psychology to that seems a bit puzzling to me. I dont like a picture of a pretty girl therefore I am jealous and envious of her prettiness and my inability to ‘have’ her. …Please.
Oh John..
That was a joke..
Just seen your portrait ..
You’re a cute guy…
You can have anyone you like..
:))
You actually remind me..
Antony Q… You know..
the mighty ZORBA THE GREEK..
big hug!
Hey Panos. Big hug too.
Could be worse, I could remind you of Demis Roussos The greek…Now that would be a tragedy :)
PEACE
john
John g:
“What I find odd is that the supporters of the image mainly seem to feel that the ‘faults’ are all with the detractors [jealousy, purism, envy, etc].”…
first, let me say Garlington and his mad-hatter bus rocks (as do his pics)…happy to see someone here at Burn mention him….believe it or not, he also has a flickr page (who the hell doesnt, right)….
second, im not sure i get the “what i find odd is that the supporters…”etc…at least for me there is NEVER fault in people digging or not digging imagery, the fault lay in the description of the image….what is ODD to me is that when people look at pics, they often react to pics through the prism of their own experience/life/context/aesthetic, etc….I’m not drawn or inspired by this genre, but i do not see it as less legitimate form of photographic expression (“photoshop is evil” bullshit), plus don’t we have a certain responsibility (i use this word very very lightly) when evaluating/dining upon/reacting to pics to also take in context the photographers background/age/culture etc, as best as we may?…in order to shed light upon, not whether or not we dig something or gravitate toward it, the value of the work?….the only thing which annoys the hell out of me is that, often, people translate their person ideals upon the judgement of the worth of work and then speak upon that using a language honed from that….
an opinion is an opinion is an opinion, no doubt…
a young girl who metaphorically shaved off her hair, cuts off her nipples and trap-door boxes out her inside is working the same territory as a guy growling from the seat of wheelchair, baring nicotine stained teeth and knuckles garnished by the detours of life, only most dont see that, cause we’re too caught up in our own snarls…that is what i find funny…..
it’s all only pictures, and those pictures will not be remembered just as we shall not, so why do people, let’s cut the bullshit, ape themselves allover the place in judgement over others…..
funny as shit, in truth….just stupid human grumbling….nothing more important…
some of the ‘supporters’ of the image who did the same piss-off pyschology are just as twined…no doubt….
Daria:
i’ll send u and belkina a note later in the week….
running
b
I love this image. I think this is a beautiful image. And I don’t use the word ‘beautiful’ in any derogatory way.
With due respect to everybody’s opinion, I must say that I don’t understand the ‘controversy’ here that people are trying to read ‘motive’ behind the guys who didn’t like this image. Quite obviously, this may not be everybody’s cup of tea, but to look for ‘motive’ would be to demean ourselves in return. And the ‘controversy’ regarding Photoshop seems not only to be unnecessary but also uncalled for. If Daria thinks that Photoshop (or whatever) suits/helps her work, who are we to object! Photojournalism (where it seems Photoshop is a complete no-no) is only a part of the whole world of photography that is being done now. Photojournalism is not synonymous with photography. Let’s put things in their right places and move forward. Well, that’s my take.
By the way, I miss Jim Powers a lot! Where is he? I loved his straight talk, although at times I did not agree with him entirely. I miss his comments.
Demis Roussos..
Ha ha…that was funny..
Damn .. You made me laugh..
Ok.. Gotta go to work now..
Soonest..
Peace..
Interesting discussion. I’m a little saddened by the fact that we are critiquing a photograph with so much of our ourselves involved in it. If we are critics, shouldn’t we leave ourselves out of the equation? I mean, obviously this image isn’t intended to work the way an image of, for example, victims of war or marginalized members of society or even disturbing yet oh so thoughtful nudes of other young pretty girls so why are we judging this based on what we think it should be? Why not judge it on what it is? Are we faulting it on the characteristics of what this image should be strong on? This image is too pretty…well, isn’t that the point? The girl is too pretty…well, isn’t that the point? This image uses photoshop…well…you get the idea…
It may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but what photo is? It is a very good image of its kind and I’ll just leave it at that, but I do find the tone and hostility of some of the commenters to be very confusing and strangely unecessary.
2 problems here are:
1)too many easy dismissals of a picture for what it SEEMS to be about or come from. There are some forums where that goes easily, here, it just provokes offense and the need for the dissenter, the black sheep to be aboslutely corrected and enlightened (I do not talk about the eventual flaming jerk). Best not to say we don’t like a shot, lest we be ready to go in depth why we don’t like it, beyond the “SEEM”.
Also, I am really amused by the comments that leave a door open like: I did not like the pix, but now that I see the website I like it better….. Come on!!!! Easy to fix, now look at the website first everytime, ahahaha.
Bob, I am used to your writing by now, but it still gets me that your opinion has to prove someone’s wrong. Why the need to be the public defender? yes We need to defend artistic expression, against philistinism, but that’s outside BURN, outside our “community”. let’s give credit to evryone here that their regular participation, even just reading, on BURN shows they are as much defenders of artistic expression as you and me. A gut reaction against a shot here should not give way to theorizing upon that reaction. It just adds assumption to what was probably already too quick an assumption on someone else’s work.
PS has nothing to do with fine art, surrealistic photography. I mean, no more than a darkroom did. PS is a new darkroom with many tools as a darkroom has. If anyone is against PS, they might as well be against processing films. Just doen’s make sense.
one problem only, btw! ;-)
Wow..the negatvity in this thread is even more pervasive than normal. And interestingly, much is directed against those who are less than blown away by it. Which makes me wonder if there’s a bit of natural “male protecting helpless young girl” going on..hmm..
PANOS:
Just one of your many comments here that i found particularly intolerant:
“Don’t listen to the typical UN-sexed British men above…( they hate you .. But can’t ignore you..!!?)”
Really, this is a shameful thing for you to say! (if they’re so unsexed, how do you account for their thriving population levels?)
Tommy Hyunh:
“Bitter photographer is upset nobody wants to see him without a shirt on. ”
Your entire post was so nasty and personal it almost doesn’t even bear saying.
GORDON:
“Reactions seem to vary from fascination, sexual attraction, to hostility and jeleousy.”
Perhaps fascination but i assure you my reactions did not stem from jealousy, hostility or sexually attraction.
BOB:
“caught up in our own snarls”, “Stupid human grumbling”?
You ask viewers to consider a photographer’s background, culture, age, experience etc. then you seem to discount the cumulative effect these same influences have on the viewer’s interactive experience with photography. I agree that the context of a photographer’s circumstances must be considered when evaluating a photograph. But often this context is largely unknown. When i realized that Daria lives in Norway i considered the effect of long periods of short days, perhaps difficult weather conditions much of the time, etc and wondered what i might do under those circumstances. It is possible that i might dedicate myself to honing my photoshop skills to a fine edge as well. Photoshop is not evil. Far from it. I often wish for PS’s excellence when i’m trying for example to deal with Excel! And just because i am not a fan of overly processed photographs regardless that they are authored by Daria or John Wall and regardless that they are the work of a 20 year old female or a 70 year old man and regardless of their country of origin does not mean i disregard them or that i do not respect their skills, creative talents or contribution to the art of photography in general. In fact i go out of my way to buy their books to understand and learn from them. But to ask a viewer to entirely discount their own life, experience and context when they engage with a photo is impossible. Like saying, “leave your individuality at the door”. And i have read about a certain famous art critic who got started with nothing more than a BA and a strong ability to interact and write about art personally from the heart.
LUNG LIU:
I likewise find the “tone and hostility of some of the commenters to be very confusing and strangely unnecessary but unlike you, i see this negativity from both those on both sides of the critical fence.
ALL
What the hell is going on here? Can’t some like and others dislike this photograph without being attacked? The reactions to this photo really are so startling. Herve, you have been a model of decorum and cool analytical discussion. Also, Jan as usual. But Herve, i really admire your interaction with both hot and cool heads in this discussion. I am paying close attention. i really like your points and counterpoints.
best to all
Kathleen
Herve
I’m glad i amused you :)))) Reall! But please don’t talk about me in third person. Kripes it was after 4:30 am when i went to look at Daria’s website. Perhaps i was not clear in my reaction. After looking at Daria’s body of work, i better appreciated earlier references by others to F. Woodman. I also perceived Daria’s convictions, vision and voice to a much greater degree then i did when i saw this particular self-portrait. It did not change my opinion about this photograph or this type of work which i do not personally gravitate to. Except for “Sömnen” which, though heavily processed is a very organic, ambiguous and powerful image for me.
best
kat~
But please don’t talk about me in third person
———————————————–
Just being a gentleman, Kat. For this thread, there has been enough finger-pointing like that. But yes, I had you in mind ;-))))
Hervette is in the kitchen and says hello, btw!
Kathleen..:)
Check Monty Pythons movies..
John Gleese ( someone please spell this right please:)
Had 12 kids.. and had sex 12 times..:))
I take all my information from
the mighty Monty Pythons..
Am I wrong???
:))
KATHLEEN:
“but unlike you, i see this negativity from both those on both sides of the critical fence.”
Hmm…I didn’t touch upon that because I get the feeling that after the initial statements, it didn’t become an argument on both sides of the critical fence regarding this image specifically, but of the merits of varying genres in general and it almost seems as if Daria’s image is lost as merely an excuse to voice conflict. Then the discussion becomes not really relevant to the image and at that point the saying, “those who live by the sword, die by the sword” kicks in. They can attack and criticize each other all they want and that’s all good and fair to me, but really it’s the comments directed at the image itself that should be of concern to us, yes?
If someone here were to say, “Yes! I love this image and this type of image. All other types of images, especially documentary images and photojournalism, are horrible and should be immediately dismissed because this is the only valid type of photography in the world.” Then it would be an issue for me. It would also be an issue for me if someone were to be attacked for not liking this image but taking the time to give an honest and thoughtful critique of it.
“male protects helpless young female…”
Hmmm..
Now I know why TARZAN was always my male stereotype hero..
Laughing..
You made my day..:)
… I also like KING KONG..
the most sensitive of all my Heroes…
:))))
Had 12 kids.. and had sex 12 times..:))
————————-
:-)))))
Kat, let’s not go too PC, OK? I can dig racial joke. Because they’re JOKES, remember? It’s just too crazy here in USA, how people bend over backwards, and still end up “feeling” guilty about just anything, for a lousy joke. Then I go to Thailand and I hear: Now chocolate man president….. You want to take on the thais too?
what is ODD to me is that when people look at pics, they often react to pics through the prism of their own experience/life/context/aesthetic, etc
is it just me, or is it odd to think it would be any other way? what’s the alternative?, quickly perform a web search and pawn off everything google kicks back to you as your own enlightened thinking? i find that quite phoney actually.
i don’t know, i think people should have an open mind, but if you don’t know first what you like yourself, no amount of artistic snobbery is going to get you to like something else, quite the opposite, it’s actually kicking a bucket of mud on the art that’s being preached about, undermining a future appetite.
people grow different tastes, not better taste, but they never want to be force fed taste or be told that their own taste is a product of their own little misinformed microcosm called experience/life/context/aesthetics.
but maybe that’s just me.
JOE…
I totally agree..
That was the silliest thing I’ve ever read too..
I just didn’t wanna bring it up..
HERVE..
I totally hear you..
No way to make a lousy joke anymore
without being labeled as a racist, sexist.. Etc..
But I won’t give up.. Don’t worry..
:)))
( I love British people by the way.. But I ain’t
Gonna go down that road of “defense” right now..
Whoever gets it get it…
All that..)
“people grow different tastes, not better taste,”
And I like my coffee very dark with no sugar! :-)
Hervette
*pinches your ass*
How do you put up with that guy on the compu out in the other room?
Panos
Oh, ok, now i see the source you’re quoting. Well i have to say, you can’t trust anybody anymore, not even Monty Python. I know for a fact that it’s a lie about John Cleese. One of those times he had sex was actually with me and another time or two was with Jamie Lee Curtis (that bitch!) and he might have even gotten it on with Wanda who’s such a tease. I SAW her flipping her fins at him!. But ok, you’re off the hook this time but…hmm…i’m watching you, boy!
Lung Liu
I think this thread is very complex. I wish there had been greater discussion of the technical and aesthetic merits of the photograph. I agree it would probably be great if human beings came in here and discussed the photo at length with calm equanimity and with their heads screwed firmly onto their necks. But our critical faculties and verbal expression can be notoriously compromised by our more, um, human needs, the late hour and even our mood overall. What concerned me this time was that more than normal and for somewhat different reasons, people were criticized in an ugly way just for not liking the image. The insinuations of jealousy, wanting what they can’t have, etc. etc. were pretty unnecessary to me. They could have been accused of just diss’ing the photo without substantive reason but because they were jealous? No. that’s from out in left field.
I agree the photo took a relative back seat to people talking at each other instead of articulating their reactions to the photo itself. And those comments that did address the photo in specific ways received no answering discussion. But it’s like that a lot here and i don’t see anything wrong with that. Burn threads are like a bunch of people sitting at a table and having a discussion. There’s the central theme, there are quiet side conversations between one or two people, there are a couple of big mouths, some voices raised and others practically talking to themselves but we’re all at the same table ultimately discussing the same photo and to me it’s all good. To the extent that a photograph or image generates discussion, controversy etc, and even if that discussion wanders a crooked path back to the photo and even wavers from it entirely is stimulating, interesting and dynamic. I just would prefer people not get so personal and aggressive, whether pro or con. That’s hurtful like crazy. But hey, if i had to choose censorship over rants, quarrels and insults, i still would not choose censorship.
Now, i really MUST leave!
take care, Herve, Hervette, Panos and Lung!
kat~
.. and JOE..
you right.. you nailed it..
“…If you don’t know first what you like yourself..”
Then.. Then… Then.. Why even bother…
Herve
You are preaching to the choir! the USA s very disturbingly PC..am i being too PC? Yikes!! next time press the PC buzzer and zing me one..k?
Joe
YESYESYES!!!!
kat~
Ok.. Kat,
Thanks for checking me and letting me off the hook..
Phew…!!!
Big hug..
:)))
Panos
*wink*..pinching your ass too..
kat~
And I like my coffee very dark with no sugar!
———————————————-
Aw, this is so wrong. Wait til’ Bob reads that, Robert…..
I love British people by the way
————————————-
You are a strange man, Panos….
That’s it for me too, running, leaving, going, packing, sending (taxes), next news from FRANCE (That’s where we have sex 12 times, and still no children, ahahaha)!
Kat,
“wink” back…
Herve ,
I was about to say..
U gonna miss your plane..
Fly safe..
JOE…
truer words were never written….
cheers, david
ok, a quick note. i wish Bob hadn’t delivered those words for me to pounce on as it may seem more like i’m laying low for Bob than rising to more above-board ambitions.
that being said, i’m certain i would have pounced on those words no matter who delivered them.
in Bob’s defence, i don’t think Bob really meant ’Odd’. i’m going to put words in Bob’s mouth and say he meant ’frustrating’. Bob, probably like all other teachers, likely wants us to expand our thinking, to make paradigm shifts, to wake up to the possibilities. He goes about it in a funny way and i think his approach gets in the way of the mission, but it’s an important mission and certainly an ambitious one.
i don’t think i’ll surprise anyone when i say that what i think first, i think is correct. a habit of the alternative behaviour would really slow things down, you wouldn’t walk out the door today if you didn’t think you were correct that it was safe out there today, just like it was safe out there yesterday.
this is why i think Burn’s promotion strategy is so important, it’s essentially an endorsement of an image and more often than not a challenge to what you thought was correct about images yesterday.
if your thinking collides with a promoted image i don’t think you will ever be disappointed in checking these things out: experience/life/context/aesthetic, etc to see if they are constraining not necessarily your ‘appreciation’ for the image, but constraining you from understanding other humans that might appreciate it or why the heck the artist even bother to create it.
that reconciliation effort won’t suddenly make you gobble an image up, but since we all appreciate talent and since we all agree that the image-makers promoted so far on Burn certainly have talent, it’s really just an effort to understand your peers, not necessary an effort to change your taste.
I’ve always found it more difficult to get into the more “art style” (for want of a better term) type of image. But I like this.
To me this image expresses a sort of vulnerability and engenders a feeling in me of wanting to “protect” the subject. Maybe that is because of my age (46), that the image brings out a fatherly “protective” perspective.
For some reason, this image being a self-portrait makes the sense of vulnerability seem greater to me. Why? I’m not sure, and am still pondering that fact. But if this image was not a self-portrait it wouldn’t seem as strong (to me).
But like some of the other comments, I do wonder if the subject was anything other than a very pretty girl whether the image would work?
As for the use of PS, who cares? It’s not photojournalism or documentary, so pretty much anything goes.
Congratulations on this image.
Herve:
I am NOT the public defender….and I am NOT interested in convincing anyone…what i am interested in (the majority of the audience here mouth-open yawns, hoooooo-hummmm, i know ;)) is in the discussion OF PHOTOGRAPHY. I am not antagonistic to anyone’s dislike of work, what got my dandruff up was the language in which some of the people here dismissed (in rather stupidly male-twatter ways or photoshop-is-evil nonsense) the work. What is funny to me is how easy it is to dismiss work of which we feel nothing…that’s the work: to try to see work that doesn’t speak to us, as possessing photographic worth and maybe, yes maybe, can also instruct us on our own way of imagining photographic intent and practice…that’s all…funny as fuck to me, cause David talks THE SAME SAME to his students…and yet, i get my ass ridden all over all the time…funny how that works…..and you’ve never seen me one time dismiss the worth of work or the worth of a photographer, even if im not done of the image or essay or practice, yet it happens tirelessly here and when i try to write something critical of disdainful attitudes, i get pummeled….go figure…
Kathleen: i did NOT say PS was evil…in fact, i find that argument incredibly empty-headed, and alluded to it as such….i said it is important to take into consideration a person’s age/cultural/background (as best as possible, or as best as we can glint from information provided to us) in order to come to terms with work…this doesnt mean that understanding that a photographer is of a certain age/culture/inclination is going to allow us to like the work, but is sure as shit can allow us to have a more reasonable understanding or rather appreciation for the motivation behind certain imagery…as for Woodman…yes, i actually know her best friend, the man who had to clean her loft up after she lept out the window. i met him in Rhode Island where he was teaching at Risd (where my brother attended art school), and he introduced me to her work (in 1988), before the monographs and the fame, and she, yes, she, was much more complex and complicated (particularly with regard to her ideas of her identity vis-a-vis eyes, mens eyes) than what most people give her credit for…she wrote aobut this too in her diaries and to letters to her parents…..see, that’s the thing that DRIVES ME CRAZY….and is also the difficulty of making images/writing whatever….the mercy of the viewer to gather what they wish……
enough…from me…
all the best
bob
one possibility…
cause David talks THE SAME SAME to his students…
———————————
Sorry, Bob, but we are not your students. And see David’s stance. it is always inclusive. He never minds the language, and never paints someone into a corner where he’d decide himself that’s where they belong.
i get my ass ridden all over all the time…
———————————-
wrong again. Paranoia on your part. Very few dare disagree with you (me only (1), usually, and I don’t disagree really, I just find your stance, sometimes, unduly lecturing and patronizing), and most love everything/how you write.
Please, stop denying that you are very much refuting someone else’s opinion and painting them into a corner where obviously they don’t look good. If not, you could say what you have to say with the simple mention that you are disagreeing with some that has been said, adding moreover: IYO (very important). But if we decide to take on a precise opinion, a orecise poster, we should do it in explaining how we differ, not how wrong they are.
(1)That’s the bright side: there is only one like me…. :-))))))))))))
PS: oh my God! I did a “Bob”, saying running, but actually running back….. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! ;-)
ok, herve: i meant that, since the entire reference about Burn is David (i used his real-life discussion about work: that is what MAKES a photographer’s discussion/thinking about work is get outside of your own work and try to come to terms with work you dont like), I used david NOT as a comparison of me to you, but as a point of reference…im not talking to u or anyone else as a student, but as a colleague…and tell me, some one tell me for god’s sake, please, when did this constitute discussion
“are we supposed to be impressed by how good looking daria is”….
sorry, that’s just plain pompous bullshit….and when i question photographers, yes photographers, who use such idiocy to discuss others work but trump around their own photographic knowledge, its that, ….and no, i’m not paranoid, that would be the guy stalking me ;))….the lecturing is the pain of talking on the web, but fuck that shit….i busted my ass last week for 3 Burn people to help them, help them in real life…not by spinning shit over a blog, but real life…and you think im a patronizing prick, fine…
how many times herve to we have to talk about my style of writing…ok, done done done…
if you read everything/anything i’ve written here over the last 3 years it is not about the correctness of opinion but about the importance of approaching work that doesnt sit with what one likes…
long ago, when i use to try to write, precisely about what it was that differs between opinion, that got slogged…but ok, ur’ right herve
LOL ….
How many laughs… In just one day…?
Bob..you didn’t even read what i wrote to you. Or if you did you missed the point. But the point was not about Photoshop. And it was not about Francesca Woodman either.
Hey, here’s a thought..why not relax and let this all go? I read your words–annoy, frustrate, DRIVES ME CRAZY, fuck, shit, prick, busting your ass, getting your dander(dandruff?) up..it’s like you’re so busy reqcting to what you think is being said that you become a victim of your own excitability. And i know what that’s like because i’ve done it here also. But you do that and you lose all sense of proportion. It isn’t worth it. It’s just a picture, that’s all :))
shhhh…calmete..come back to this later on when you’ve had a chance to catch your breath..it’s just not important enough to get this upset.
best to you, Bob
kathleen
Hey Ross
Would this photograph work if Daria were not so beautiful? Of course not. It is a celebration of beauty and youth. It’s all light and butterflies, with a little hint of dark overtone. The more I view it, the more I like it. My 50+ non photographer wife had a look at it and remarked she’d love a print of it on the wall.
Kathleen and Y’all. yes Kathleen, you are right, it is just a picture, We all need to chill. Deep breath, ushhhh,whoooooow, all better now.
Gordon L.
Gordon;
Please don’t get me wrong, I really like this image!! :-))
maybe tonight, I’ve missed the party…
wow,
lots of comments,
have yet to read…
I like this photograph…
soft,
feminine,
a hint of mystery…
hair
and
skirt
blowing in the wind..
dancing with
the butterflies…
love the shape her body makes…
beauty
fear
and
mystery….
**
Kat, lighten up, let’s not take ourselves so seriously yeah?
To Gordon’s point, nope this photo would not work if Daria wasn’t so attractive, just like Woodman’s photo would not have worked if she looked like Daria. And isn’t that the point everyone is missing? They are different photos, belonging to different genres, taken for different audiences. Nobody has to like it but to dismiss it because it doesn’t suit *your* idea of what a photo should be is rather self important, IMO.
i think the attraction to this whole enigma is that this is a self portrait.
if this weren’t a self portrait, i think the critique would turn this way and that
not down this road it’s gone.
wendy as is daria, you both are poets :)))))
to daria, i am jealous at how free you are in daring to make these self portraits.
this is something i could never do. you truly are beautiful. yes, flaunt it.
i like the whole concept and was even more interested when i saw this was you!
thanks for calling me pompous, bob.
http://www.humanfiles.com/dah_selfportraits/
just for context – this is the selection of 170 or so self portraits which road-trips readers came up with.
have not read much of the comments above as they again seem to be getting twisted..
:ø/
ben: sorry ben, i wrote the statement was pompous, but i apologize.
kathleen: i read entirely what you wrote and understood what you’d written. from our convictions is the only place from which we can begin to do anything, but to understand that our convictions tarry others convinctions and therein lie the difficulty.
joe: the only place in which we can begin to evaluate anything is through the prism of our own beliefs, of course. i was trying to suggest that the judgment of quality of others work, however, cannot necessarily be arrived through such an orientation. To wit: the world and the mess we put ourselves in.
clearly written language is doing nothing here but being disruptive. i’ll take responsiblity for my own:
i shall not go on.
“clearly written language is doing”
should have had an appostrophe….diction and syntax is everything, so an edit
“Clearly, (pause, pause) written language is doing nothing..” and i should add the possessive pronoun:
“Clearly, my written language is doing nothing here but being disruptive.”
ibid
paka irl…
b
DAH said “Daria just might be perceived as quite the intelligent business woman..and i have a feeling she knows her audience quite well….in our brave new world of finding our niche audiences, Daria might well be out there ahead of the game…” and that what I was trying to allude to in my short post.
HERVE, your reaction “thinking there is a point to be made in photos that dazzle for their technique whether disliked or liked. I mean, yes, that’s nice, that’s impressive, but it should carry no weight”..what weight are we talking about? Of course it does carry weight, that Daria can express herself through her technique, she can probably touch many people with it, she can illustrate with it, and she can also probably pay the bills with it. That’s a lot of weight. But as to it “unless serving a higher end”, what are you referring to? My guess is that it actually serves as Daria would wish it to..her aims are likely to be different that mine or yours.
Some observations:
1.Your squabbles are entertaining at times, but are also very sad in their desperation and childishness, especially when you consider that most of the people squabbling here are middle aged or older. Tragicomic. What is it about this forum that tends to infantalize the participants?
2.The childishness of the comments here may have the effect of keeping adult-level conversation out. I for one would not comment here as it would be an embarrassment, if not career-icide, to be associated, by proximity, with this level of behavior. By pushing away adult-level conversation, you continually strengthen the walls of the bubble you are in. Congratulations, I guess.
3.If you think you’re being revolutionary, I’m sorry to say you’re not. The issues you discuss here, when you get around to photography, are old and grizzled, like many of you. Your collective and complete ignorance of the ongoing discourse concerning photography is really stunning, and only compounded by your tenuous grasp on the history of the medium. Would doing some homework be that onerous?
4.Finally, this squabbling does not seem to be fitting thanks to the photographers who contribute here, or to Mr. Harvey and his efforts. It’s selfish.
You’re welcome.
AFOTW
Can you share with us this place that those conversations take place in the demeanour and calibre that you describe?
Your claim seems a bit empty without mentioning this place, don’t you think?
fly..now you are sounding dramatic. just step over the crap and make a worthwhile contribution in the light of the history of the medium. that would be welcome..
and..if one’s career is that fragile, I’d suggest focusing on righting that instead of being concerned with the juvenile antics of others.
ALL
hmmm…Ok, imagine this photograph was published literally anywhere else. A magazine, book cover, ok, deviantart, framed poster, or it as in a featured exhibition at a gallery..imagine that YOU saw this particular photograph anywhere else other than Burn. Imagine you did not see Daria’s website or know even that it was a self-portrait. All you do is see this image. How many would REALLY like it, would be compelled to know more about this artist (and men, please try to think objectively here), would seek out more of Daria’s work? And for what reason?
I am asking this because i am trying to see if all things being equal, if this photo was published anywhere other than Burn would it have been taken as seriously by this particular audience? I would like to know if it’s ‘safe’ or acceptable to actually not like a photograph that’s selected by DAH for publishing. If he likes it or maybe doesn’t even personally like it but decides it merits publishing, must we all like it or recognize its merit? Just because it has some value, is executed well, and there’s nothing clearly wrong with it does it mean that photo must therefore have value to us? All of us? And if someone is dismissive does it mean that person has a closed mind, refuses to consider other genres or dosen’t appreciate work that might be the result of processes that he doesn’t particularly acknowledge, endorse or respect?
Likewise, if a person does not like a photograph and is very sure they do not like it and is not going to change his mind then is it ok to make a simple statement to that effect? Or does one need to write an essay and then have it ripped to shreds and have to spend the rest of the day defending a point of view they are not going to change anyway? And if someone initially does not like the work or respect it but digs deeper as the result of all of your responses and begins to understand the work a little better, though not actually like it any more than he did at first, then (Herve) why is that person amusing just because he concedes to a greater understanding, i.e to have actually expanded their thinking through this discussion?
I’m confused..
BobB
“from our convictions is the only place from which we can begin to do anything, but to understand that our convictions tarry others convinctions and therein lie the difficulty.”
I’m sorry..not being deliberately obtuse, but i really don’t understand what you’ve written here. I really want to understand too..
Tommy,
That i found the tone of your post nasty and bitter means i was taking myself too seriously? ohhhhh…okkkkk….
“but to dismiss it because it doesn’t suit *your* idea of what a photo should be is rather self important, IMO.”
See? this is what i mean by what i wrote above..why is it not ok to dismiss a photo that is not “our” idea of what a photo should be? Do we come to art a blank slate to be written on by just any old thing that happens to have value for someone else? Even if that someone else is only the artist himself? I would think that all humans are equally qualified to be discriminating, to have their own taste and opinion and be able to make their own judgments, for better or for worse without being called self-important. We all come to art bringing the sum total of our experiences, education, exposure to art, tastes, desires, needs, drives, age, culture, background to the table. I want to know why it is apparently wrong to decide art is not for us, whether we do that quickly, slowly, take the time to painstakingly write it out or just post one sentence, wham, addressing the reason for our discontent briefly and pointedly?
best
kathleen~
erica
RIGHT ON!!!
Bob..
I see no reason for u to apologizing..
The reason I read you is because of you..
Being you..
You are being too nice reffering to plain
retarded, jealous, mean,”GAY” comments simply
as pompous..
:(
Joe..
Now u just giving lots of power
to our usual silly “UFO-troll”…
Panos, fair enough, i’ll bite my toungue. Thanks for showing me the futility of it.
“Can you share with us this place that those conversations take place in the demeanour and calibre that you describe?”
Can’t speak for the FLY but personally I hoped it would be here. If in fact it does not exist elsewhere, which I assume is the implication, means nothing. I’m happy to step over, or even in, the occasional pie on the ground for the sake of greener pastures but in any situation in my life I ask, what am I learning here now? Specifically, what am I learning about photography from these discussions?
Joe..
:)))
Big Hug..
Keep writing….
Gotta drive now..
But I’ll check in an hour..
“You are being too nice reffering to plain
retarded, jealous, mean,”GAY” comments simply
as pompous..
:( ”
really, panos, this doesn’t even deserve a response….
erica said:
“My guess is that it actually serves as Daria would wish it to..her aims are likely to be different that mine or yours.”
i think this is a good point. it’s not going to change my feelings toward the actual photograph in question, but i would never begrudge and artist their right to self expression…
all good fun anyway, but probably not worth wasting much more time over this one…
Go Erica!!!
:)
Big hug Ben…
I’m playing with u coZ I know
you are sensitive..
By bad..
:)
Again, Big Hug..
I meant to say.. My bad..
driving..
:)
No, there are many other reasons why I wrote that. For me to enumerate them though, would just make this another “nasty”, “bitter”(eh? projection?), and “personal” post so I’ll just leave it at this: You have your opinion on the matter, however I see it akin to somebody who likes classical music lecturing a jazz musician on what he did “wrong” in his performance (oh and in this case, lectures the audience on proper etiquette also). I find this presumptuousness more offensive than mean words. Sorry if that sounds “nasty”, I just don’t know how else to say it.
I know you think I’m trolling, but I’m really trying to help. I think the collective infantilism is the Achilles’ heel of this entire enterprise, with (willful, self-satisfied, and proud) ignorance a close second. I’d hate to see the effort ultimately fail because of it. Then again, maybe I’m totally wrong, and what the world needs is a place for ill-informed, middle-aged, middle-brow blowhards to ventilate themselves. Go for it, it’s quite a bubble you have going for yourselves.
A couple more while I’m at it:
Stating whether you “like” or “dislike” something is a meaningless. Nobody cares, but it does make the discussion polar and is the first step in starting a pissing match. Answer the question “why” and you might think up something interesting. Maybe.
You are all beginning to repeat yourselves to the point of absolute, brittle boredom. Please, for the love of God, save yourselves and find some new axes to grind. Cardinal sin.
You have turned middle-brow sensibilities into hard-core ideology here, which adds to the stifle. Look up occasionally, the high-brow won’t hurt you (though you seem pretty scared of that bogeyman Ed Rusha), and you can look down as well… you’re missing out on a lot of really fantastic photography. Your loss.
That is all.
buzzing (off)….
Fly:
u are funny dude…..
by the way, Rusha was raised right here, i offered him as an example for Adam Smith to bite upon for fun……
you seem to have had not only a marginal but selective reading of what’s been written/discussed here….
please assure us that u wont get unstuck from that vertiginous wall of yours and stick around…there will be photographers and work here that crack over those mid-brow floors you fear….
about about group collectives as one photographic identity…bringing that to to Burn this spring…and im not talking about agencies (a la magnum, vu), im talking a group of photographers, conceptual photographers, that lay their stake as 1 identity….that’s what im pushing Burn to bring….
“Your collective and complete ignorance of the ongoing discourse concerning photography is really stunning, and only compounded by your tenuous grasp on the history of the medium. “…
that’s funny….u see the Starn bros new ‘photograph’ (sculpture) at Beacon??….
spare us
drip drip drip……
i meant by spare us, spare us your lectures, cause you’re sounding as doltish as I…, and that’s pretty bad……..
and yes, the Starn boys sculpture/photo is magnificent…and that’s part of pushing: images that are not images, but corporal embodiment of a photograph….
running,
bob black
The photo is well executed, I like it. Women photographing themselves is viable form of self expression. One of my son’s fellow art students was a young women that would photograph herself nude. Her photos were nowhere near the caliber of Daria’s image. I used to kid around and say that she should kick it up a notch and wear clown makeup,and that has probably been done! :-) Someone did mention a clown suite here.
Here are some Critiquing Tips for your kind consideration:-
1. State WHETHER you (like/don’t like/ are indifferent to) the image/essay…
2. State precisely WHY you (like/don’t like/ are indifferent to) the image/essay…
3. State any SUGGESTIONS, if any, from you how the image/essay could be improved…
4. Any other RELEVANT REMARKS regarding the image/essay which you think is going TO HELP the photographer in future…
These may sound a bit robotic and a blow on freedom of expression, but I think since we are trying to help each other here, keeping these general points in mind while commenting here would be helpful for everybody.
Thank you, Bodo.
peace
Patricia
I would add to Bodo’s suggested Critiquing tips a most valuable tool called the question. In addition to stating our opinions, asking relevant respectfuul pertinent questions of the photographer can open doors rather than close them.
Patricia
Yes! Thanks Patricia for your suggestion. I am sorry that I forgot to mention this. ‘Question’ is undoubtedly a valuable tool so that we get some insight/thought from the photographer himself/herself about the image/essay.
This line of comments has been particularly painful to follow. It is really unpleasant (to put it mildly) when people are trying to stifle opinions that differ from theirs by shamelessly attacking the character and personality of their adversaries, through pseudo-psychologizing and name-calling. This was the method of Goebbels. And it becomes even more egregious when this kind of fascist censorship assumes the guise of progressivism, in that the opponents are, on top of everything else, accused of being not only undersexed, repressed, gay, etc. etc., but also BENIGHTED in their supposed aesthetic CONSERVATISM. Just because they happen to not share the same opinion as the gentleman whose namesake is now surely spinning in his grave.
And then, even more shamelessly, instead of the name-callers at least having the guts to stand behind their expressed slanders all the way, there are retractions and the lame excuse (that could only convince a 5-year old with a less-than-average IQ) that all was said in jest, for fun, so no harm done.
I am pretty sure that my own personality is now next in line to be summarily executed, for being such a stickler and not knowing a harmless joke when I see one. However, perhaps DAH if no-one else should take into account that this kind of “dialogue” may appeal to a few people who are interested in engaging in some kind of fake group therapy over the internet, but is surely turning many away. And this is a huge shame, because burn can be, and has been, such a great forum for a really productive exchange of ideas.
BODO…PATRICIA…
yes, good ideas….things here should be like the discussions i have had with both of you….Patricia first on line, then in person…and with Bodo on Skype and hopefully sometime in the future, in person…as i have said many times before, i just do not understand the “anger critique” factor when commenting on photographs …sure, not everyone is going to like everything, and i often post work that i know will bring controversy, but “anger”??? and it is very hard to respect someone writing who is not showing at least a modicum of respect towards a particular photographer….the freedom of expression inherent on the net brings in mostly very good comments pro and con…however, i think we are just often a bit shocked by some whose “online personality” is so revealing of some personal inner conflict which manifests itself in often cruel missives towards others….when reading the words of iconic critics, even when they “shred” a body of work, they do not personalize it to the degree we often see here….if they did, they would lower themselves, lose cred, in the minds of their own audience…on the other hand, all of us here who do participate in the discussion, owe it to ourselves and 95% of the readers here, to rise above the chaff and not get caught up unnecessarily in some weird “ego battle” with some who seem to be subconsciously fighting feelings of inadequacy…
cheers, david
GORGIAS…
we posted simultaneous and so i missed your comment….i agree with you completely…..i am curious to your suggestions on how to keep comments open and yet not be dragged down some muddy road that i do not want any part of in my life….controversy and disagreement totally welcomed of course…..that is part of a healthy discussion…but, to read the words of some who are just “venting” and having little to do with the work represented, just is not a “pretty picture”…..
the only answers to this so far suggested are: (a) close comments period…have a separate blog, but comments closed on essays and singles (b) have an editorial monitor as almost all sites have…someone who screens out the UFO’s and the “rants for rants sake”…this is tricky however and will give rise to cries of “censorship”…..
what do you think?? how should we do it???
cheers, david
I’m not Gorgias but would like to respond to your question, David…
As you know I’ve long been a proponent of posting comments directly under the selected photos and essays. It generally worked at the start, with the few exceptions of course. But things seem to have deteriorated to the extent that I have little hope of the tone of critiques lifting out of the mud into which they have slid without some major overhaul. For that reason I’d suggest eliminating the comments option from selected photos and essays, at least temporarily, and trying what you’d originally suggested in terms of keeping comments solely under Dialogue and perhaps, Works In Progress.
Burn is first and foremost a platform for sharing photographs and essays. It is too important a resource to lose readers because of comments like we’ve seen here of late. And, dammit, you and Anton are busting your butts on this project. Let’s give it the chance it deserves to be first class!
Patricia
David
I have a suggestion to the questions you have asked to Gorgias. It’s just an idea and is subject to others’ approval of course. I think this way we can reduce the menace.
Here in burn, under the ‘Leave a Reply’ here, we have four boxes with 1. Name, 2. Mail, 3. Website, 4. A general box for comment. I would suggest further divide this 4th box into five separate boxes (if possible) something like the following:-
1. State WHETHER you (like/don’t like/ are indifferent to) the image/essay…
2. State precisely WHY you (like/don’t like/ are indifferent to) the image/essay…
3. State any SUGGESTIONS, if any, from you how the image/essay could be improved…
4. Any other RELEVANT REMARKS regarding the image/essay which you think is going TO HELP the photographer in future…
5. QUESTIONS that you may ask the photographer on the image/essay…
Note: A person may leave one or more of these boxes blank if he/she chooses to do so.
In addition to this, put a General Critiquing Tips somewhere under Submissions on the right hand column.
This way, (I think) we may have certain benefits:-
1. It will remind the person putting a critique what general points he/she should keep in mind while commenting.
2. It will also remind the person to put his comments which are not related to the image/essay at hand at some other specially designated place on burn.
3. Close comments period should not be an option because everybody is not available at all times and the photographer may be deprived of a valuable comment just because the person critiquing was away when the image/essay was up on burn. My suggestion may cure this problem.
4. I would also say that moderating comments is also not good option because it surely amounts to ‘censorship’ (which is not healthy for any discussion) and it will cost you guys a lot of time reading all the comments awaiting moderation and then decide which to keep and which not to keep. We don’t want to waste anybody’s valuable time. My suggestion may also cure this problem.
Just my thoughts though…
Cheers
Bodo
Oh…just an addendum:
In the general discussions/comments page (unrelated to the image/essay at hand), ‘Leave a Reply’ rows could be kept as it is now…
I don’t know how much it is possible in this site though. Need some technical guy to confirm.
Bodo, Patricia , trollers..
Ok.. I agree ..
We need moderation here ..
All my respect but I think I should
Be the Responsible Moderator here if you all
Agree..
I will do the sacrifice of 3 to 5 hours per day
to approve or disapprove comments..
I should be the “Saergent of Ethics”…
Let’s vote..
I want to contribute and keep this place “CLEAN”..
I will sacrifice my time for ALL OF YOU..
what do you all think???
:))))???
David, thanks for asking for my suggestions. As the matter is really serious, let me give it some more thought before I reply. Bodo has certainly offered some very interesting ideas.
As to the latest posting by panos, so generously offering us his services as moderator, I honestly don’t know what to think. Can he possibly not have realized that a lot of this mess has been created singlehandedly by him? It seems he is not capable of accepting responsibility as an adult even for once, instead of keeping playing the clown. Let’s see how much more distasteful he can become. (note also the oh-so-subtle charge of censorship he again has the nerve to insinuate, in classic fascist-populist fashion, in talking of the “sergeant of ethics”).
Ok then.:)))
How about “governor or Archibishop of ethics”..???
I don’t know.. I don’t know..
“chief of ethics” maybe!!
Help me out Borgias..
We can scratch the “saergent” off
We need to..
It’s ok with me..:))
Big Hug!!!
Dear Mr. Harvey,
The Civility Elvis has left the building long ago… he’s now back at Graceland, whacked out on Percodan and Southern Comfort, shooting up the teevee, smearing peanut butter and bananas all over himself. Drooling. Tomorrow, when he wakes up, it will be more of the same. Sad, isn’t it?
You know what I’m saying… because the foul and angry comments have been going on for so long, without so much as a hint of consequence from you, it will be very difficult to raise the bar, to unring those many bells.
Some suggestions:
1. Though you must be loathe to do it (or you would have already), establish commenting guidelines, coming from you, the patriarch of the tribe, and the only one that people would listen to. Delete comments that are in violation (rather than moderate… less work) Setting limits or ground-rules is not censorship, just good parenting.
2. Create user accounts to prevent people like me from commenting. Use the loss of privileges (temporary to permanent) as leverage to enforce civility.
3. This would be fun: establish a separate “doghouse” blog where nasty commenters would be banished to duke it out, in public, for our amusement. What a hoot. Oh, and then we could wager on the outcome.
4. Use shame. On second thought, that’s just a quaint idea at this point. Sorry.
Or, yes… make Panos Generalissimo of Ethics and Chief Shit-stirrer In Charge. Priceless. Maybe he can wear a little hat, too.
buzzing (off)…
“generallisimo”…
That’s the word I was looking for..
Thanks Troll-boy..
:)
Biggest hug.
(.. Just between us.. If you vote for me..
I’ll let u uncensored..:) who loves u know!!!??)
“generallisimo”…
That’s the word I was looking for..
Thanks Troll-boy..
:)
Biggest hug.
(.. Just between us.. If you vote for me..
I’ll let u uncensored..:) who loves u know!!!??)..
Fly – all of us have at some point been flies… just like you.
You of all should know not to fly into the box. You should fear the BOX.
Btw.. The only “fly on the wall”…
I know is Dead.. It was Henri-Cartier-B..
Henri.. Is that really you???? or just another wanabee?
I wonder who needs a “hat” now..
Laughing ( .. Driving..)
:))
David, I could not agree more with Fly on the Wall’s suggestions (as well as his pessimism as to the value of the currency of shame these days – just look at the latest comment by the inimitable Protagoras).
I don’t think comments should be closed, or made part of a separate blog (with the exception of the “doghouse” blog that Fly is proposing, which may be a great idea – but then again, even though this would be fun for the rest of us watching the action, part of burn would be running the risk of becoming reality tv). And even though bodo’s suggestions are obviously very thoughtful, they might end up being too restrictive. My suggestion, then, is simple: ANYTHING goes, as long as IDEAS are challenged, but PEOPLE NEVER ATTACKED as people. True, if one is a rotten character, their ideas may also be pretty lousy; but then, I would assume that LOUSY IDEAS ARE EASY TO CHALLENGE AND DEMOLISH AS IDEAS, WITHOUT HAVING TO RESORT TO CHARACTER ASSASSINATION re their originators. So, yes, “civility censorship” by all means: just delete comments that are disrespectful of others and of the concept of DIALOGUE as such. People who can only engage in that kind of commentary deserve no better.
Having said that, of course, I realize what an added burden having to play censor will be to your time and attention; even as it is, I am infinitely impressed that you so generously devote so much time to burn.
by “the latest comment by Protagoras”, I meant the one immediately following Fly’s posting
Borgias:)
Is that a YES?
r u voting for me?
U C I’m driving and
The only word I could clearly
read from your latest comment
was ASSASSINATION..???
Super big hug..
:) please vote for my
“generalissimo” position you offered me
earlier…
I’m begging u:)
When DAH posted recently about angry comments and the fact that if it became claustrophobic here he was off, prompted me to write a post that was, unfortunately, lost (probably because I posted to often). It went something like this …
I remember watching a BBC television programme which coincided with the launch of the Magnum book “In Our Time” (before you joined Magnum, I believe, David. I remember a specific scene where the head of Magnum, New York, shows a dummy of the book to a magazine editor (I think). “Here it is” he said, “It’s got blood all over it!”. In another scene, two new members are accepted into Magnum. One of the new members is approached by another Magnum member: “Welcome to the argument” he said, “I disagree with you!”. The point is, that like all families, the Family-Burn will disagree, sometimes explosively and usually over something said that, if it was said by someone “not-family” would be disregarded as someone-else’s-opinion-so-what.
People here have noted that the blog is not always the easiest way to understand someone’s intention – you can’t see their smile.
To specifics: the comments below each published photograph or essay are what make Burn special. The fact that the comments eventually wander onto other things is what entertains so many people (think Panos and China).
As photographers (and human beings) I think that we should be polite to each other. We don’t have to like every genre of photography; we may even consider some genres (choose your expletive) but we should at least say WHY. Jim Powers raised the blood pressure of a few continents with comments such as (choose your Jim-comment) (come back Jim; my blood pressure needs you). By this I mean that he would say “don’t like it” but not WHY!
I sometimes post on Leica User Forum (but very rarely) and Burn. Burn is special. It is an intelligent place of education. For the young photographer, just starting, it is a place to see quality photography from genres that they didn’t even know existed! It could take them years to stumble around in Sticksville before finding themselves.
Let’s remember what a great resource we have here and respect what we have.
Best to all,
Mike.
Mike…
I second everything u say..
Places like the Leica forum are
like old governent radio..
We are the new Sattelite radio..
without charge.. Free.. Uncensored..
Entertaining…
What we are doing here NOW..
our new, revolutionary style..
People will COPY US..
someday even BURN will be another STANDARD..
just like Leica forum or old tv..
And that will be my last DAY here..
Maybe 10 or 20 years from…
But till that day… No worries..
I’ll be here doing my late night show..
As long as the flame keeps BURNing..
I’ll be here..
Thank u Mike R..
Peace and big hug for my good
friends in BEIJING..
Gorgias –
you bring up a good point but you are not defining what an attack on a person is? Calling names? Disagreeing in a certain “loose and not so eloquent” manner? How can one know what makes me or someone else feel attacked – can you define that? Can David, or anyone else in charge define a proper censorship such that it, by itself, does not constitute an attack towards the person that is “disagreeing”?
It’s a circle. I would better learn to get attacked if it feels as an attack and respond properly within myself rather than confining someone else to be what (s)he is not. Let it all loose – internet is an anarchistic environment since there are no fists involved. That is very well defined and is pretty mature.
cheers
Be good, do good.
Thank u Haik for trying to educate the attention seekers..
Don’t worry though.. They’re not
Really offended..
Bull…
They just want a piece of the PIE..
but they bring nothing to the table..
Except police and church old used up rules..
They’re not offended..
A little attention they seek..
… but with the wrong way..
Instead of going out there and shoot..
They’d rather sit here for hours reading my
bullshit…!
Laughing..!
Erica I agree..
Tell the trolls to take their cameras
and go out and shoot..
Why reading my stupid comments and then try
to change me and convert me?
To all Trolls..
Just ignore me.. It’s that easy..
( but no, they won’t do it.. Not because I’m interesting..
No, no.. But just because they are lazy..)
FLY…GORGIAS
first of all, thanks for taking the time to think this over…i occasionally will jump in and disagree with something someone says, but you are right , i have never really admonished anyone….for one thing, i am not always “on” and usually see a string of comments long after they have been written…and i suppose also my aversion to censorship runs stronger than my ability or desire to monitor…i did say some time ago that i would delete inappropriate UFO’s….you FLY are a UFO, but not inappropriate….there are several writers here who choose to remain anonymous and most of the regular ones often add some real insight as do you…
MIKE R…
thanks for this…and it is in this spirit that i keep going….
cheers, david
DAH
“…and it is in this spirit that i keep going….”
good to hear this. I have to admitt that I was starting to worry a bit…
But then again … I worry all the time, don’t I?
:-)))
David A H…
Lassal…
Thank u ofcourse
“wink”…
:))))
Daria …
I think you invested a lot of work into this piece and you did a good job with it. It all speaks the same language and fits together smoothly. I especially appreciate that you transformed the butterflies into moth like beings … Which I cannot imagine happened accidentaly, as probably nothing in this picture happened by accident.
What I notice is all the space around the elements … But yes, it works for your composition and for what I think you want to convey.
Only one suggestion from my part – and this might not even be necessary due to the fact that you probably did this for print and we are seeing a very, very small version of it: the hair! Specifically the (how would you call this in English?) the “ends” of the hair. At least here it looks too solid, too heavy … as if you have taken your portrait laying down on your bed or floor or maybe you pasted this part in later. I think if you worked a little on the ends of your hair, if you made it looser, more realistic in a way, and at the same time … I mean it is in a way gong into the butterfly-moth area, they are flying into the light … I think you could visualize this a tiny bit better and then this image would be perfekt!
:)
Haik…
what I mean by “attacking”? Take a look at Panos’ latest comments. Instead of really accepting other people’s opinions as equally valid as one’s own, and trying to engage with those opinions on the level of argumentation, the smear campaign goes on. If you dare disagree or express some criticism, you are an “attention seeker”, a “troll” who is “too lazy to pick up a camera”, etc., etc. That’s what I mean by attacking other people’s personalities instead of their opinions. This kind of laughable, crude, infantile pseudo-psychologism. Unfortunately, but understandably, I am guessing that it is even harder for David to censor this kind of unproductive input when it comes from people whom he is fond of (I mean it’s probably harder over and above your stated aversion to censorship, David). Too bad for the rest of us, who have to put up with these angry and rude ramblings.
“This kind of laughable, crude, infantile pseudo-psychologism”
Panos, I think you have a new description ;)
Seriously…@ALL
While the number of rude/inappropriate/justplainstupid remards are regrettable, I personally feel that an informed, caring, intelligent community will self-police. I think moderation in forums leads to vanilla comments and mediocrity. Even if comments are not blocked/removed, people will be more conscious of “oh, I can’t say that, I might offend someone….”. Sometimes hard truths offend. Sometimes people are better at conveying hard truths so they don’t come across as offensive. And sometimes, people who are just jerks will comment just to offend. My opinioin is that we should reward/encourage those who can speak their truth with least offense, try and guide those who see their truth but may present it in less than acceptable ways, and ignore the jerks. Sort of like high school ;)
I also do not like the idea of “pre-formatted” responses. First, not everyone writes in that way, and while those are all important components of a review, I don’t think the comments should be foreced like that. Secondly, even if they are forced that way, anyone who really wants to “stir up flames” can still simply write whatever they want in the boxes….and if we say “oh, well, if you don’t write the right thing in the box, then your comment isn’t posted….” we’re well down (again, in my opinion) the slippery slope to bland vanillaness created by moderation….
We’re all grown ups (sorry panos, try as you might you’re still a grown up ;). While there have been times I have felt that perhaps the photographers who’s comment section gets somehwhat muddled have every right to be mad/feel violated/etc, it seems that each time they step in and calmly dismiss the crass “noise” and thank those who have contributed positively. If they are ok with the way things are, then what are we all griping about?!?
Anyway…I value the community that is burn – and trust that simple respect of each other and the calling out of the “jerks” will lead us in the right direction…
Twice before I’ve quoted the excellent description of dah’s “house” that was road trips….I won’t post it again..but those of you who were around then know what I’m speaking of, and I think it’s that spirit that will continue to keep us on track….there are all sorts of things happening at once. Isn’t that the idea?
Daria, I am sorry to have put this lengthy post in a place that should be all about your work. I have to say that I admire your craftmanship, and your skill (self taught! I need to know how to do that!), and while this image is not exactly my cup of tea (a bit too romance-novel cover-ish for me), I have to admit that I did come back to it several times and say “almost….but”. And several of your other works from your web site I like muchly. No matter my opinion, you are most certainly a skilled artist.
My best regards to all, and especially to bob b and Mike B who I hope to see whilst I am here in toronto…
good light, all
A.
and erica, I think you summed up my feelings in those four words….bravo.
ANDREW B….
hmmmmm, you seem to be a sane man and diplomat to boot……thank you….
cheers, david
It is you who deserve the thanks, David, for being the fire behind burn….without the fire of your passion and your generosity of time and spirit, it simply would not be.
I very much look forward to meeting you at LOOK3….I actually tried to rearrange my flights to get to NYC yesterday, but was unable.
And as I have offered before, if there is anything I can do to be of some little assistance here, please let me know – you have my email and my skype info as well. If not, let me know and I will forward it post-hastily.
Now to sleep in this snowy, northern city…
good night-light, all.
A.
Andrew…
( love u man )…
U called it right ..
Community police.. Call the TROLLS out..
Or ignore them…
Then tell that overweight Borgia fatso to prove his
Bad breath attacks with photos..
Then.. and only then I will totally accept his
Stinking Foul Breath…
Not joking!
Cmon Borgia..
My name is PANOS SKOULIDAS
And my work is about filthy VENICE BEACH bitch!
What is your name?
And what is your WORK????
that’s all I’m saying!
You called my name a thousand times the last 24 hours..
Here I am “naked”…
Rape me…!
As I predicted in my very first posting yesterday: “I am pretty sure that my own personality is now next in line to be summarily executed”. Thank you so much, Protagoras. QED.
i am extremely unhappy and sad to see that things are coming to this!!!
did you honestly expect anything better from panos?
PANOS…BEN…GORGIAS
c’mon boys….testosterone works for some things but damn it sure does make for some rough riding here…now, i know very well that if you three were all having a beer together, this would not be happening..it just would not…my suggestion is please take it easy …calm down….blame it all on me or something….now, look at it this way…i have invited ALL of you here to my space so to speak….and surely you know by now that i welcome all of you with your disparate points of view, station in life, whatever…i mean we are talking about pictures for heavens sake….there are ISSUES “out there” , but surely we should be discussing a subject we all love…we all practice….we all share…personal attacks seem out of place in a forum about something as esoteric as photography…Panos does play the protagonist at least on the surface, but would be the first to make both of you, Ben and Gorgias, comfortable in a “real life” situation(almost all of the Panos fans here all know him in person)….all three of you are capable of saying something which might “trigger” the others to say something you just would not say if standing in the same space…am i right about that??? in any case, i would suggest that rather than be dismissive of each other, you might try to just find some common ground or go silent….no no no, you will never like the same kinds of work…and maybe yes, you would be standing at opposite sides of the room at a party..but if all of you would be kind enough please to just make THIS ROOM a bit more comfortable for everyone else, i would most appreciate it….thank you…
cheers, david
David
I’m sorry but I don’t really want to be compared to someone who is incredibly erratic and insulting to people who he has never met. Maybe with Panos it is all “tongue in cheek” – but it is becoming increasingly tiresome. did you see the first 5 posts on Peter Tonningsen’s image? I felt for Peter – having the thread taken over by someone’s self centred drivel. While I can be blunt in my critique, I’m pretty sure that I don’t use obscenities and insults towards others.
Ben
I would like to say great retouching, nice feel to the image and good thought behind it, but it’s not my cup of cha.
and now I must apologise for going off topic….
DAH
you have a great way of cutting through the B/S without being condescending.
BEN…
you are quite correct and i did not mean to compare you to anyone in the sense of the WAY you use language….you have never been insulting nor do you use obscenities…being the astute man that you are, i was hoping that you would simply see that i was making a plea for peace….
cheers, david
David, I will also take exception to being put in the same bag as Panos. This is really unfair. I have been trying to make a plea for exactly the same kind of civil ability to disagree that you also are advocating. If you look at all my posts since yesterday, you’ll see that I have been consistently trying to argue a point, and did not insult anyone by calling them “bitch”, “lazy”, “overweight with stinking foul breath”, etc. to argue my case. Forgive me for saying this, but it would seem that you are letting your personal feelings for Panos cloud your judgment regarding where responsibility falls for this.
Having said that, I second that you are an incredibly gracious and cool-tempered host who has welcomed us all in this forum, and I hear your plea for peace. I also wish nothing more. Please keep in mind that I did not have any disagreement with Panos about Daria’s photo to begin with. I only stepped into the discussion yesterday, because I could no longer put up with the insults Panos had been throwing at other discussants, and thus spoiling the discussion for many of us who had been following it (even if some were not actively participating in it).
All:
just a brief (promise) offer of a white flag. In truth, I feel partly responsible for the original momentum of the discussion here. I fear that some of my original comments might have misconveyed my reaction to those photographers who disliked or were uninspired by this work. When i write at Burn (as I did at Road Trips, Lightstalkers, ArtPost, foto8 or Magnum), I have always over-written, to the point of incredulity (my wife) and dismay (the readers, colleagues, fellow commentators). Partly because I am a writer and often writing here quickly typing between other work/travels, but also because my life as an artist and writer has been born out of conversation/dialog/dicussion/philosophy. Sadly, i often bring to bare here the training (poor as it may) of argument/dialectic/grapple (were it only grappa! ;). When I challenged Ben originally, i NEVER meant to insult him or his point of view, nor any other viewers/photographers who did not see the same value or merit of the work. I feared (and still fear) that much of what i wrote did a disservice to the discussion.
Ben is an intelligent guy and an intelligent photographer and while i dont always agree with him and i do sometimes find his ‘blunt’ treatment of work too quickly observed (then again, my own writing is too fucking ham-fisted), i do respect him as a photographer and contributor to burn. He also happens to be friends with or knows my best friend Arantxa Cedillo and so, he cant be all that bad ;)). And Ben, if you ever meet Arantxa, you’ll know im nowhere near the overly didactic, pompous emotional drama-queen probably people thing i am, based on my posts.
I have often failed, here at Burn, to couch my triestes in a way to make ALL viewers comfortable, challenged but unthreatened. I think ideas MUST challenge and we are nothing, in truth, without thought and attention and discussion: discipline and attunement. I meditate and the first lesson of this is to build toward equanimity and awarness: awareness above all and our connection to ourselves and to others. Often, as i did this weekend, i wrote ‘unmeditatively’ ;)) and probably angered people who i never intended to anger (Herve, who knows exactly which of my buttons to push ;)), but of whom I still have great great affection for, Joe, who i respect even when we disagree on 99% of the discussion, Kathleen, etc) or upset. I think I am partly to blame for my emotional and incendiary and long-winded ‘arguments’….I have never ever intended to make anyone feel unwelcome, nor have i ever intended to vitiate anothers’ point of view. As Herve has reminded me often enough, my written language here tends to appear as if i’m trying to prove other wrong or to ‘teach’ …that’s never my intend…discussion is essential, we are sentient communicating creatures…and we need language as much as we need fowl, beast and farm…we’re framed by it…but, let us still remember that photography IS NOT so important, and that ideas of intellect are not so important as to inflict hurt and disdain…
i’ve been an emotional drama queen at times, but that’s all about web communication…in real life (yes Andrew, see u manyana), im pretty relaxed, and laugh alot more than one might think…i actually never lecture or harrangue…i save that for burn ;)))…
and even David and i have had our ‘moments’ and yet he and i are pretty close and consider him a member of my family…and in the end, that’s all that we have to remember…it’s just a stupid, innocuous and anonymous web and what really matters is that we do respect others and do allow for dissent and do take responsibilities…
we are nothing without one another…
and so, as one of the blowhards who tossed the first cannon ball over the bow, i want to say that I am sorry if anything i wrote about ideas flamed up any of this shit, i am sorry. long after all of this is gone and the web has morphed and each of us are toothless and wobbly, they’ll be others spitting and ranting and how funny and how silly they will seem to us….
I dont mind seeming absurd to others, but i do not wish others to think absurdly of themselves and so, i hope that all viewers and all commentators can come to this beer/chai/vodka/whiskey/weed/wine/soda/soy stained party deck, and enjoy the air…
god damn, life is too rich and people too essential to bog it down…
ok, someone, pass me the _____________________ (fill in the blank)
running to meditation
hugs
b
Bob/Homer:
you should not be apologizing at all. Strong as your opinions are, you always take the trouble to argue them exhaustively, and never resort to insults and expletives. Without creative disagreements, we could never move forward. I have been arguing against personal insults and character assassination PRECISELY because such intimidation tactics leave no room for real disagreements that could dialectically move us forward.
call for peace…
( when the Trolls reveal their “real” names then yes..peace will prevail…:)))))))))))
but until then:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCS14PoQc2M
:)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
And here are the lyrics….
Rape me
Rape me, my friend
Rape me
Rape me again
am i the only one .IIIII [3x]
am i the Only one…
Hate me
Do it and do it again
Waste me
Rape me, my friend
am i the only one .IIIII [3x]
am ithe Only one…
My favorite inside source
I’ll kiss your open sores
I appreciate your concern
You’re gonna stink and burn
Rape me
Rape me, my friend
Rape me
Rape me, again
am i the only one ?, IIIII [3x]
am i the Only one?…
Rape me! (Rape me!)[9x]
Rape me!
oh man………
i just realized that the Troller Borgia HAS JUST REVEAL HIS REAL NAME…
ok then… i agree… HE IS REALLY REACHING OUT ACCEPTING THE “PEACE OFFER” THAT DAH & HOMER…offered…
so now its my go…
Mr. DIMITRIOS MELLOS…
I JUST REALIZED YOU ARE GREEK… a brother…………
Oh… now i remember the greek civil war…etc…
As Arnold once said in the Terminator movie…
I’m programmed NOT to harm humans… same here…
my greek mother programmed me NOT TO FIGHT WITH GREEKS….
i just visited your site and NOSTALGIA filled my soul…
So since you’ve a bigger man and opened up & unTrolled yourself…
then i have to admit that now i feel disarmed..
No more Civil war between us my Greek brother..
Lets all meet at the CIVILIAN’S greek home and have a beer…
or two… or OUZO……..OR TSIPOURO…
(Homer, thanks again for the WHITE FLAG… i just didnt notice on time that
mr MELLOS revealed himself finally…
i just cant talk to Trolls.. thats all…
and to be honest all this time i thought that Borgias is also the Fly and also..
someone i know very very well……..
:))))))))))))))))))))))))
biggest hug
That nasty Greek man from LA
Rants all night and all day
When he’s done spanking his monkey
He’ll say something funky
Why does he call everyone gay???
Remember, Mr. Harvey, Panos’ homophobia reflects on you and Burn.
Mr. Panos, I have a question for you:
If Burn would be more successful if you didn’t verbally harass people here, would you control yourself? Or are you so selfish that your need to hurt others is more important?
A question to everyone:
Why do you condone his behavior?
… and for Ben..( not ignoring you )…
I know you hated me and my VENICE BEACH work since the first day it was published
here on BURN… so trust me i do feel safe around you…
As DAH & HOMER noticed we disagree about EVERYTHING AROUND PHOTOGRAPHY…
which is fine….. just like JIM…
When for example JIM and YOU hate on a photo i immediately know it must be a good photo…….
:)))))))
but its all about taste…….. and yes i will stay on the other side of the room not only because
you insulted my venice work numerous times and my “ugly” venice book as you said earlier…
but since i’m here at DARIA’S “ROOM”….
I have to admit that you brutally insulted DARIA…
and you made me act “overprotective” as Kathleen noticed…
You woke up the KING KONG protector in me BEN… thats all……….
Again though… although we disagree ABOUT EVERYTHING…
as DAH said earlier …. yes i would still move my ass from the other side of the room…
approach you………. bring you a beer of your choice………. and give you a hug……..
trust DAVID ALAN HARVEY ON THIS ONE…HE KNOWS ME BETTER THAN YOU DO……..
so… peace flag to you too……….
now i have to go on with my “show”………
( ANDREW B..:)))))))))))) SEE WHAT YOU DID TO ME LAST NIGHT??????????????????? )
BIG HUG….
fLY..:))))))))))
Still seeking attention through me??????
Am i so important to you…….
Listen, ok…
i WILL also bring you a beer but you have to promise to UN-TROLL YOUR NAME…
please dont stay outside … come in with us…
many empty seats….
until then though… listen to the Nirvana song above….
( again baby… its not that hard… tell us your little name… or maybe you cant???????
Why do i still have a feeling that you are somebody I ( we ) all know???????????
Again… step in… reveal your cute little face……
big hug to U2
:))))))))))))
er, no. I didn’t brutally insult Daria. ridiculous comment.
and i don’t hate you either panos. I just find your ranting tiresome. there is a difference; we don’t all love and hate – there are shades of grey.
shades of grey…
ok.. agreed!
…& Ben, thank you for responding…
no sarcasm… it means a lot to me!
:)
…and last one for Ben…
you know what is the PARADOX i see between me and you…?
Although we disagree in “everything”……..
check this out…..
I totally dig your photography… and once again i agree with HOMER that
you are great in what you do!
see the paradox?
How come our tastes are so extreme opposite although we both like your work????????
I have no idea…….
Anyways……..
big hug
Esteemed Mr. Skoulidas,
had you not been so busy ranting and insulting me (among others), you might have noticed that I had already revealed my real name since 3:53 yesterday (April 6th) afternoon. Even after that, numerous attacks from you kept pouring in my direction.
By the way, the nom-de-plume Gorgias was not an attempt to hide my identity, but a joking pun – as you may not know, Gorgias and Protagoras were the two famous sophists of antiquity.
and by the way Panos, you should not be offering me an olive branch and promising not to attack me just because I also happen to be Greek. You should extend the same courtesy to all participants in this forum, even if they have the audacity to disagree with you. It’s elementary human decency and good manners, if nothing else.
……. funny thing also … i was reading Borgias instead of G…
one more thing in common…
not only greeks but also Sophists….
:))))))))))))))))
Welcome in… grab a chair…
and lets keep on disagreeing…….
big hug……..
… also sent u an email…
just in case u wanna keep the misunderstandings behind the scenes…..
peace out
:)
There has been no misunderstanding on my part, Panos. I do and will condemn your intolerant attitude and terrible temper toward people who happen to disagree with you – even if we are fellow greeks.
… sweet… nothing wrong with that….
be u… im not trying to “convert” you…….
but please please Do the same…….let me be me……
Ignore me if you wish………
I aint “changing” either……..
lets find some common ground…..
lets just “ignore” each other……..
nothing wrong with that……
stay out of my “case”….. and i will stay out of your case……
promise…!
ok……. back to my late night show now… and lets hope we wont hear from each other
ever again……
no hug ( this time )
:))))))))))))))))))))))
FLY….
you wrote:
“Remember, Mr. Harvey, Panos’ homophobia reflects on you and Burn.
Mr. Panos, I have a question for you:
If Burn would be more successful if you didn’t verbally harass people here, would you control yourself? Or are you so selfish that your need to hurt others is more important?
A question to everyone:
Why do you condone his behavior?” end quote..
my response:
Mr. Fly, i always like your comments here, but isn’t that just a wee bit extreme??? somebody writing on an open forum where there is no censorship could not possibly reflect on the forum itself except to show its democratic openness …unless, of course, we censor/edit/ moderate the comments, in which case you would be the first to go since you are a UFO….but, that ain’t happening…i welcome you and you know i do….and i totally understand your point…but, the opinions and language and overall behavior of others should not be construed as “mine”…this is unfortunately the tricky part of the net…..and, believe me, i am not “sold” on the net entirely….
first off, i personally do NOT condone Panos’ behavior at times….but, i do know who he is, his work, and his background…he is right out front with all of it…..says what he means, means what he says, and PHOTOGRAPHS THE WHOLE DAMN THING….there is a photographic record of all of his BS…some of this record will someday be a matter of record i predict….sometimes, yes, he does not know when to stop while driving around stoned blasting from his iPhone, but i will lean towards anyone who is actually WORKING/PHOTOGRAPHING all the time even if i do not like what they are SAYING/WRITING….
ever hang around with Bill Allard or Bruce Gilden???? damn , i do not condone the behavior and/or language of many of the photographers, musicians, and artists, and dentists i know…some whose behavior i absolutely do not condone are my friends…do i WISH Panos were as polite and demure as Patricia?? maybe, but THAT would not work either…would it???
we have an open forum here where the intellectuals like Joe can write and the tortured souls like Panos can also write….probably cathartic for both…actually, i could just have mis-spoken because Joe just might really be the tortured soul and Panos might be the intellectual….we all know that BS cuts both ways….anyway, perhaps you get my drift….
long before your arrival, and continuing now, i am the “tortured soul” over the comments in general…i have bent to the ways of the net by allowing comments at all under essays and singles…since i grew up in print, commenting on pictures etc just is not my instinct..however, the one day i tried to close comments and have everyone move over to Dialogue for purposes of discussion, the civilian mass audience here kicked my door down!!!! even my girlfriend was on my case!!!
there is another very very interesting phenomena…..commenters here account for less than one tenth of one percent of the daily readership….there is an incorrect assumption that the commenters comprise the whole of BURN….the other non-writing, non-commenting, 99.9% hang out for a long time here (8 minutes average), which means they must be reading the comments or going through the archives…hmmm, are the commenters entertainment or education??? i do not know….i suspect both
Fly, i am open to suggestions….but, please please do not hold me responsible for what everyone or anyone says here…please look at the big picture….if we were to edit the comments after the fact (which we will do for the book or year end print issue) then all of this “mess” will look like it looks backstage before a play….BURN on line is a daily journal reflecting on the readers here and on my set up for the whole “book”…in the “big picture” i think we are doing just fine…
in any case, your suggestions are welcomed….
cheers, david
… what do most magazines or newspapers usually write on the bottom of every article…?
(someone help with the free translation…)
something like… “…the personal opinions of the above author does not necessarily reflects the whole magazine…blah, blah…… etc…)
laughing…
me? homophobic?
Now thats the “gay-iest” thing i’ve ever heard…
:)))))))))))))
lol
….. and again.. read the Nirvana’s first verse of All Apologies… below:
“…What else should I be
All apologies
What else should I say
Everyone is gay…”
If Kurt Cobain was homophobic… then count me in..
;-)
Dear Mr. Harvey,
First of all, I have a lot of respect for what you are trying to doing here.
The only reason I am speaking up is I think Burn has great potential, but also has a monstrous problem… I think you see yourself the increasing level of commenting that falls somewhere in the spectrum of insensitive to cruel.
I don’t think anyone deserves the harassment and hazing I have witnessed here, and I am writing from a position of empathy of the targets rather than a friend of the perpetrator. When I see unnecessary cruelty going on, I figure someone has to speak up. I also figure anyone who doesn’t condones what’s going on.
To me, it doesn’t matter what sort of person or photographer Panos is because I’ve seen the effects of his words. You can’t give Michael Hassoun that day back, the one after he was set upon, for one example.
If he really does “mean what he says” then he is a pretty despicable person, judging from his comments here on your forum. I hope he doesn’t “mean what he says”!
How do these comments affect Burn? I’m curious to know what do you think. I think they set the level of what’s acceptable behavior lower and lower as time goes on, so the environment becomes ever more toxic. The population of targeted people grows, poised to defend themselves or leave. No big surprise 99.9% won’t comment, who wants to dive into a dirty, poisoned fishbowl.
I think the comments are also doing the photographers a grave disservice. How could they use your publishing as a professional reference with the childish nonsense attached to their work?
The level of discourse, I think, is distasteful and repellant to many (thoughtful adult types), and limits your audience… and limits how seriously you are taken. I do think there may be a voyeuristic population that is here for the laughs (though I’d worry if those were “at” rather than “with”… maybe that doesn’t matter).
So yes, I still think the tenor and the tone of comments here does reflect, even defines Burn, and if indirectly, you. I’m sorry to say this, but I think it’s important. Others should know their words reflect on you. You may not think so, Panos etc., may not think so, but others outside the bubble may.
I asked Panos a direct question… If his verbal harassment was detrimental to Burn, would he control himself. I wouldn’t expect him to answer me, but maybe that’s something you could take up with him privately, if you haven’t already. Why would he persist, if it were destructive to something he is so deeply invested in… you don’t have to be Freud to figure this one out, right? But allowing the efforts of so many to be held hostage by one individual’s psychological problems doesn’t seem like a recipe for success…
Also, I have to say your defense of Panos in these situations tells him, and everyone else on Burn, that he can continue to attack anyone with impunity. This kind of does make you directly responsible for whatever he does next.
Well, this is all just me. This is not my blog, not my project, take whatever I say with a big grain of salt… and I’ll depart after this… I’d just hate to see all the good work fail for no good reason. Then again, if Burn fails, it would mean an end to some small measure of meanness in the world, so there’s the upside.
Good luck, Mr. Harvey, you need it.
FLY…& ALL
With due respect to everybody, I must say that it is high time that somebody should say something about the recent ‘trend’ that we are seeing for some weeks here in Burn.
Just consider this as my opinion for the time being and reject, if you must.
From whatever I have understood about Burn over the time (and please correct me if I am wrong), David wants this magazine to be more of a collaborative and collective effort for all of us and he definitely doesn’t want it to be HIS magazine only. In this respect, please refer to the official description of the magazine “Burn is an evolving journal for emerging photographers”. Burn may be curated by David but for its improvement, he seeks our opinion every now and then and he listens to everybody’s suggestions and implements them as and when the same can be implemented. I think nobody can have any complaints in this regard.
Now, proceeding on the basis that Burn is OUR magazine rather than David’s magazine only, I must say that knowingly or unknowingly and willingly or unwillingly, we have certain duties and responsibilities that we must observe in this regard.
Now, talking about this trend, FLY, without expressing any opinion about what you have said above, I just want to point out one thing that I think must be pointed out here. You said “…and I’ll depart after this…”. I am sorry to say that I have seen many people saying this in the last few weeks and I can see that many sane voices are already absent from here. This really is saddening. If you honestly think that what you are saying is RIGHT, then I think that is ALL THE MORE REASON for you to stay here and help us improve ourselves. I know that nobody can stop anybody from leaving a public forum like this, but FLY do you really believe that your or my and anybody else’s ‘leaving’ the forum is going to help us improve or do you really think that it is THE SOLUTION? If you believe that WE are going wrong somewhere, you must point that out…not once, not twice but if needed thousand times till we achieve OUR goal. This I am not saying to you only, but I am saying it to everybody who might have ‘left’ us or might be contemplating ‘leaving’ or might have gone ‘silent’. Problems are everywhere, in our personal lives, in families, in society, in politics, in our finances…tell me a place where there is no problem at all? You just cannot escape problems, not only here but anywhere…! So, guys this IS the time to STICK TOGETHER for our own sake and not to be selfish and escape. When so many of us will be working towards achieving that common goal, we are sure to find a solution much sooner rather than later.
I have said this earlier and I say it again that I am here to learn. I personally badly miss many voices here that I just adored and greatly respected for their clear and unambiguous opinions and analysis of photographs and essays. I don’t know what has happened to them! There was a time when I was personally very ‘scared’ of commenting here because many bad interpretations were made of them by some people. But then I thought what-the-hell, I am not going to succumb to these guys! I have my opinion and I must stick to them and not worry about what some guys say about them and let me decide whom I am going to listen to and whom I am going to ignore. If somebody is shouting madly at me, it is easy to shout back madly at him/her but such arguments are destined to be doomed from the start as they take you nowhere. I think that ignoring or showing total indifference to them is the greatest ‘insult’ that I can inflict under the circumstances and with time, these voices will die down no doubt, being deprived of the ‘fuel’ that they need to survive.
So guys, let’s promise ourselves that there will be no more talks of ‘leaving’ and in stead, let’s talk about ‘living’ for a change. I can see the light at the end of the tunnel, can’t you? :-)
Happy Burning…
Bodo
I think its on the record how I feel about Panos, but I must say that as far as Panos is concerned I agree with Fly. David set this forum up as a great tool but it seems to me that some people are so greedy and selfish that they have appopriated the forum David has lent them and, to put it nicely, spit all over it. I always felt and feel still that Panos’ behavior on this forum is destructive. Ultimately it is destructive towards the work David and Anton are trying to do and to the work submitted and featured here. When what should be the stage of the featured photographer is hijacked (consistently) by one attention starved egomaniac, there is a problem that needs to be addressed. And it needs to start with the offender(s) themselves understanding that they are a real problem. Panos isnt the only one, but he is the main culprit.
Rafal,
Well said.
Sure Panos has enthusiasm etc talent? I’m sure he could go far if that enthusiasm is channeled in the right direction. That is for him to decide, it might come with maturity. Sure as David has said in the past he is the only one who has delivered on time, these are all fine attributes. I have not been a burner for long, but I very quickly grew tired of the hijackings and attention seeking, and have said so in past postings, I find them easy to ignore now.It just a bit irksome opening up abusive post first thing in the morning over a cup of coffee.
I used to work for highly talented and well respected photographer who would do anything to get the shot, (including swimming across the amazon, because the dug out had been hijacked, holding a 4×5 above his head) I used to get shouted at,dismissed,humiliated infront of my peers, I put up with it to learn from the guy and sure his attitude was fun sometimes because he said what he felt and we had some wild times.
He worked in the ad industry for years but eventually, the industry turned on him because he was such hard work, I was even in an ad agency when I overheard a conversation saying they wanted his style but not to use him because of the attitude.
There are boundaries to respect.
Bodo – well said … you have way too much heart. I feel you.
Rafal? You could not slip the chance to make an announcement, could you? All in a politically correct manner with appropriate credits. Where did you copy the text from ???
Fly – zzzz :-) – Life is shorter for insects.
Dimitri – I really wonder what drives you? Honestly – you seem to be a decent man but have fallen for some sort of phobia. I could possibly name it but you would consider it as an attack?
ALL
You all have too much time on your hands – talking, and talking, and talking.
Spare David, spare your own selves … Rules have been made before we came, before Burn was born. If there were rules, Insects like Fly would not be able to even say a thing. Be grateful. If you can’t then ignore.
Is this all about “what you say” and “how not to say it”? I’ll talk your own language that is simple enough for anyone on this site to understand – do you shoot JPEG? Or RAW?
And when you have the answer, draw the analogy – Panos is THE RAW. I know him – you don’t. Don’t make it more than it is for yourself.
If something is crap – it is crap. But you want the crap to be called with its chemical formula that varies from person to person and types of food consumption. Crap is crap – said straight or not.
Daria – you are beautiful. Your photos are beautiful. And most importantly, you are a beautiful soul to tolerate this.
David, Anton
Can we add 2 fake buttons on the bottom of the site? One for “Resignations” and another for “Punch ____”
Hugs you all. good night
Haik, excuse me? What announcement? What are you talking about? Crap is crap, you called it. We agree about panos’ attitude then.
As far as name calling I see you come from the same place Panos does. I wont name it because, well, lets keep the standards high despite some trying to drag them down.
Haik, I really don’t know what to make of your question to me. The question should rather be, why don’t MANY MORE people on this forum step in and speak up when they witness such brutal and gratuitous abuse being constantly perpetrated before their very eyes. When even one’s motivation in taking a stand against rudeness and intolerance has to be attributed to some kind of “phobia”, it’s a sad, sad world we (or rather, you, Haik) live in indeed.
(For the record, I myself really liked Daria’s photo for the kind of genre it belongs to. So as far as the actual assessment of the photo is concerned, I was in fact in agreement with Panos and disagreeing with the people he was slandering. But there are ways and ways of disagreeing.)
By the way, why don’t YOU, Haik, reveal your identity to this forum?
I have the impression that you ask for a “witch-hunt”… I cannot approve it…
I’m sometimes sad for the lack of respect for photographers and their work… but I am for the freedom of expression…
Bodo,
You make a good point, and I am doing what I think I should now (just to get this on the record) but I have many other productive things I need to be doing rather than trying to argue civility here, which is hopeless. And slogging through the muck here is a real bring down for me. And seriously, it would be kind of embarrassing to be associated with all this nastiness. Thanks though.
Haik,
No, it’s about being infantile and mean. It’s also about the success or failure of this project. I’m suggesting that the harassment and hazing, and the fact that the audience condones it is a fundamental and limiting problem here. I understand the idea of total freedom (which is, of course, a myth) might seem like a worthy goal, but it must be tempered with responsibility for one’s words and actions, and respect for other people. I understand you may not find these ideas pleasant or helpful, these are “grown-up” ideas, I hope you’ll understand someday.
Look at yourself, even your own humor is tinged with adolescent violence.
Dimitri,
Yes, I wonder that myself.
Ms. Bardou,
Why is a call for civility a witch hunt? You condone harassment and hazing? Are you a proponent of viciousness? Do you think people should have no responsibility for what they say or do? It sounds to me like you are in the bubble. I know what I’m asking is difficult, but try to see Burn as someone outside would see it.
There is no freedom of expression on Burn because the childish nonsense is a filter and a censor in itself! Why you can’t see that baffles me. The fact that you don’t understand that true freedom requires respect for other people and personal responsibility is so, so sad.
Mr. Harvey,
I just had this one thought…. I was making this one assumption: that you and the community want Burn to grow, mature and prosper. Maybe I’m totally wrong, and everyone is just happy to keep things just as they are. And that may be the impetus for all this unpleasantness, to keep outsiders like myself out.
But, to grow or be taken seriously outside your immediate circle, I think you’re going to have to deal with this problem at some point. Again, maybe that’s not the goal.
You know, too, there is a well-documented constellation of behaviors related to substance abuse that seem to fit Panos. I’m making no judgements, but just to go on the record, that might be an avenue to pursue for insight, when the time comes. There is also the idea that those around the substance abuser are co-dependent, with all that goes with that, the manipulations and enabling, and so on. I’m suggesting you think about that, see how that feels, see if it makes any sense in your personal relationship with Panos.
You preach freedom over everything, but not respect for your fellow man or personal responsibility. Do you think these are mutually exclusive ideals? If not, it certainly looks to me like the rest of your tribe could use those lessons…
BODO…
of course you are quite right and , as Haik says, you are a man of heart…the comments part of BURN should of course be monitored by YOU…all of YOU….and i think that is what is happening right now..some of your friends who have “left” have done so for personal reasons having nothing to do with BURN…many write to me privately and many will return when they can….
FLY…ALL
you are articulate and clear…many thanks….
a lot of the responsibility for hijacking however must surely fall on more than the one man who is now being “voted off the island”….
after all, his original attack under Daria’s photograph was against someone he thought was attacking her…the responsibility for hijacking discussion on Daria’s photograph now falls on many of us….
i have never read an attack by Panos towards the photographer whose work was being presented, with the one exception of Michael Hassoun who was being chastised not for his photography, but for representing a military system…as i recall, the military , all military, was under attack…an anti-military missive is not so unusual among critical writing citizenry worldwide…. by the way, i will be working with Michael this month behind the scenes to help him produce his next essay…he is a “large man” , an intelligent man, and countered brilliantly all written “attack”…..
i am NOT now defending Panos’ sometimes inappropriate rants…i have NEVER defended his late night rants personally….how could i know what he is about to say?? …how could i possibly even read all of them???…i am being somehow blamed for enabling Panos just because i felt his WORK would eventually have a real net WORTH…i was critiquing WORK for heavens sake….work/photographs….is it really my responsibility to then follow through on every egocentric personality on this forum and somehow monitor their behavior public or otherwise??? because i endorsed some aspect of the “RESULT” of Panos’ madness, am i contributing to more of same?? i think you would say yes…and others would as well…ok, point taken….
HOWEVER, speaking of hijacking or “off track”, let’s look now at the comments….i posted late last night the environmental piece by Carlan Tapp….there are now 4 comments under that story, ALL about the story…there are however right now at least 12 comments hijacking Daria’s photograph blasting Panos for blasting!!!…shouldn’t those same writers (you included) be commenting on either Yulia’s Cosmos piece or Carlan’s wake up call on an environmental disaster???
am i not to be judged by the stories published??? can i not please be judged by the photographers who i spend so much time with to allow them to speak as authors?? you are putting a lot of weight on the comments and not much on the content and the long term mentoring which is where i spend so much time…if not, then it would certainly behoove me not to have any online presence whatsoever….i can do my own photography, work personally with those who seek mentoring, and put new shingles on my house which are in need of repair….
i mean really, who needs this?? i am not creating a “product for sale”, nor do i receive income from BURN..quite the contrary as it should be obvious….however, i have now been given the responsibility of not only mentoring and creating content for BURN but for the psychodrama that will always be inherent in a public forum…..there have been quite a few very intelligent pieces written on “blog management”….and most “blog managers” just give up with the impossibility of it…as did Alec Soth who just could not deal with the drama that even started invading his personal life…for me, it has mostly been a pleasure i must say…i have met so many of the writers here over the last three years and the rewards have way outstripped the negatives….
however, the only way out of this is to: (a) as demure Audrey says, go on a “witch hunt” (b) censor comments (c) close down comments entirely under the photographs (d) close down BURN and view it as a life “experiment”….
Magnum does have a full time person who monitors comments on their blog….comments are held briefly to eliminate UFO’s and inappropriate rants…pure dissent is of course welcomed….i do not have such a person, nor do i have the time nor the inclination to do this…
Fly, i think you may have misconstrued what i was saying about the 99% who do not write….99% will never write no matter how the conversation goes…this is pretty much a fixed number in all of publishing….this BURN 99% is however growing by 30% every month, so i doubt that the comments are making any difference one way or the other to interested photographers/readers …
so, while some commenters may “leave” other readers who will never want to write are arriving….and the numbers of submissions i receive every day from names who are not identified as writers here are staggering….these are photographers first, writers second…
i see all the names of all who submit work here…few are commenters…
well, just look at who i have PUBLISHED in the last posts…EVER SEEN ANY OF THEM COMMENT HERE???
the 99% NOT WRITING are very often OUT PHOTOGRAPHING and submitting and participating in the best possible way….
having said all of this (and i guess i went on a bit of a rant myself..laughing..sorry) of course i would prefer a “clean well lighted place” all around…Bodo has implored you to stick around and help..giving YOU some of the responsibility..i would implore you to do the same..and to please comment on the stories (which you have not done) and not just on bad boy Panos…i think the attacks on our bad boy might just be more “enabling” than my endorsement of his work….but, i am not a psychiatrist….
more importantly Fly, i would wish that you show some work and drop your UFO mask …..a mask is a mask is a mask….a “hiding”…many of the writers here show us their work…this is the point of BURN…as Bodo said, for you the audience to be the producers of BURN…
now see, you are enabled!!!
again, many thanks for taking the time to think clearly and write….as you know, i read…i listen….
cheers, david
DAH..
It’s really good to hear that burn is mostly a pleasure for you..as it should be. Certainly other people’s psychodramas are not your responsibility, and it is rather pathetic that some people can’t pull themselves together to act as positive forces here..Still, I was just talking last night after the Antonin K. talk with another photographer/burn friend, and we were musing that it would help facilitate a “clean well lighted place” if you could write just a few sentences about each of the pieces of work you show here. I know how pressed your time is, but I (we) think the time you would spend in doing that would be well worth the investment, as it would set the tone for thoughtful, respectful response..
ERICA…
now, that is a constructive idea….it has been suggested before, but i have not done it being afraid that it would illicit less than candid response…but, let me give it a try…..many thanks amiga…
cheers, david
DAH..
looking forward..not only to the possibility of a little more peace in the house but also to reading your thoughts on the publishing of any given piece. hopefully candor will thrive in an intelligent way that ripples outward from your own..
half thought you might show for a beer last night..sort of surprised at how few people showed up, half king is a great intimate setting to hear photographers talk about their work..
just one suggestion David…if it is somehow possible to open a separate ‘Discussions’ forum (on the right hand column) where you can transfer/shift the comments (including this comment of mine) which are not related to the photograph/essay so that when we are pressed for time, we just can go through the comments under the photograph/essay and leave and when we have time, we can go through what’s going on in the Discussions forum and poke our dirty noses inside :P and throw muds at each other (that’s fun, really). It really takes a lot of time to go through these general discussions and it will be fair to the photographer/essayist also. Only a very brave photographer would want to send the link of his/her published work on burn to any prospective client/publisher/grandmother if the comment that pops up under it is something like (just for example, no personal attack intended)
RAPE ME
RAPE ME
RAPE ME…
laughing… :-D
Bodo
Or bodo, one suggestion to ALL with regard to your comment..
there is always a discussion thread (whatever is recent under DIALOGUE)..put the non photo/ essay related comment there WHEN YOU WRITE IT..I don’t see how Anton is to sift through everyone’s comments..of course I am not doing that now, but it seems that Daria’s thread has “taken one for the team”..
and thanks for that Daria..
True Erica true, I stand corrected.
ERICA…
i just could not take another social situation, although i would love to have seen Antonin…i was “off the grid” yesterday , still recovering from sunday…..
yes, poor Daria did “take it” for no reason…however, there was some very good discussion too before everything went sideways….
BODO…
yes, we have that with Dialogue…for us to transfer comments is impractical ….an “off the photograph” comment is supposed to go into Dialogue as it now stands…may do now use it that way…
cheers, david
Shock collars, it’s the only way.
ERICA …
I’ll be leaving a comment for you under Dialogue/spring cleaning …
:o)
cheers,
Lassal
Dear Mr. Harvey,
Thanks very much for hearing me out, and for the invitation to stick around… but I do feel like I’ve overstayed my welcome. Maybe I send you a photo or two one of these days, I have some exciting (for me) things bubbling away… which is where my attention belongs…
How did Lord of the Flies end again??? I should know this…
tat-ta… buzzing off for real…
FLY….
yes i believe in freedom of speech…yes i believe in civility towards my colleagues and all humans….not mutually exclusive concepts among civilized mature adults..when have i “preached” otherwise? (liking someone’s work, does not mean i like their behavior)..freedom AND civility is certainly my mantra, and that is how i live…as you, i wish others would do the same…we are going around in circles a bit here, because i absolutely do not disagree with what you say…i am just trying trying to figure out how to make that happen…i think all societies large and small grapple with this very issue….unfortunately history proves that in the larger societies someone decides what is “right” and then and then, well we know what happens….”purity” becomes “dogma” becomes “totalitarianism”…..
you paint a bit more of a dismal picture here than what i feel exists and you have ignored my statements about what BURN actually is doing (maybe we posted simultaneous)..BURN is being defined by submissions which are growing by leaps….you cannot seem to get away from this one person who must have attacked you at some point, hence the mask…this just cannot be an impersonal overview treatise on your part…and, had i been attacked at some point, i would feel as do you..so, i am not dismissing your concerns, but merely trying to put them in realistic context…
yes, of course, it is quite obvious that substance abuse has played a part in all of this…admitted many times by said party right here in the comments…..i once spent several months in a rehab house with “recovering” drug addicts and alcoholics doing a photo essay…at first, i was impressed with the program..everybody was going to “do better”, make a new life….honest about their addiction and willing to now “take a step forward”…after a couple of weeks i became disheartened, when i realized that few can recover…the young woman i had photographed so much and who was a shining example of recovery died from a heroin overdose about two weeks after i published her picture as a shining example of this program……even recently, when i was shooting a similar piece, the doctors and officials in charge told me frankly that “recovery” from addiction is somewhere around 7% of those who give it a try…pretty close to futile….so, to answer you…yes, i know…..do i know what to do about it? no…nor do the professionals evidently…
if you want to send me an e-mail privately please do so ……david@burnmagazine.org…..i will maintain strict confidence…we share the same concerns….
cheers, david
David. I know,personally, HUNDREDS that have recovered from horrendous drug/alcohol addictions. I did the rehab thing many years ago, and got it[ and I was way way out there]. Still have it. Most who were in there with me didnt. Quite a few are dead now. BUT..Lots do get it and 7% of several million is still a big enough number for it NOT to be futile. I would Like to see the essay you did on this.
RE The whole comments thing: I think its largely to do with the way blogs work. In a ,non cyber, social situation we all have conversations/debates/arguments/jokes that get passionate and heated etc, but when we are done so are they. There is no stenographer transcribing every word for later perusal. Here there is. EVERYTHING we say here remains here to be pored over ad nauseum. So all arguments and debate never finish, there is always a last word to add. A price we have to pay I guess.
It has made me think.
John
Audrey
I fully second your opinion: I feel this place quite the opposite of “childish”. I feel that most people here are acting as adults (i.e. taking responsibility for what one writes/shoots/shows) and I don’t think burn is under a “vicious” dictatorship. Just my 2 eurocent.
how many times herve to we have to talk about my style of writing…ok, done done done…
———————————
Just to show you how it feels, Bob, because you yourself said that you were reacted not an opinion; but how it was said, ie. the “language”. here we write no NY times editorial, a bit free for all instead.
so a lot of stuff might come up a bit quippy; a bit abrupt, yet, we should not pay too much attention to it.
These quips, I do think it is useless, to the site or to the photographer entired, to write them, either to laud it or to dismiss it. Yes, it’s part of the way many particiapte in forums on the internet, so be it. I rather am more interested in allayed opinions.
It seemed addressed to me, but I never mentionned anything about Daria’s physical appearance, BTW….
abck soonest or rather: je reviens bientôt. :-)
Herve :)))…please do not worry…re-read my comment above (i love u man!)…and i know i was upset this weekend, but please do not worry…u are right, my writing style is way too ‘combative’ even though i dont mean it…please dont worry, i will really write differently…i mean, long but hopefully, not so, obnoxiously or patronizingly toward others ;)))….ok, sent u an email….i totally agree wityh your tactics: :))…ok, running home…late, b :))
JOHN….
my apology…”futile” was a bad word choice…you are right 7% of whatever number you want to put out there means some do make it ….so pleased you are one of them….i just meant to say that the 7% was so much lower than what i fantasized or imagined given the apparent 100% enthusiasm for recovery going in..thanks for putting this in perspective…
i shot this essay in b&w for the Richmond (Va,) Times Dispatch and i doubt i have a copy of the story in the newspaper..but, i should and will scan these prints which i still have and make a link for you…Rubicon was the name of the rehab house…a live-in facility ….
cheers, david
DIMITRI…
Haik is really Haik…he was a student of mine in Los Angeles just as you were in New York…he is a flat out great guy, mostly proud of his family….all he wants to show you for his portfolio are pictures of his kids…that is who Haik is….
cheers, david
DAVID;
Throughout all of this bun fight the person I feel the most sorry for is poor Daria. Her moment in the sun has been tarnished by back biting, nastiness and hidden agendas.
Hopefully she realises that not everybody in the photo world is the same. She is young and I feel she has a real talent, I just hope she won’t be put off by the rants.
I feel many more people would comment, but don’t want to get jumped on if they don’t see the same way as some of the others. Some are just more sensitive than others.
Actually; I really miss Jim’s comments. I always felt they were a good counterpoint to many of the others comments here. Did I agree with all he said? Hell, no! But I’ve met plenty of other editors who were as “to the point” as him. When you are busy and get used to talking “straight up” then you tend to do it in real life too. And as you know, it seems much harsher in print.
I log onto Burn about three times a day, but now skip most of the comments. I check out the images and read your posts and those of the people I respect. I don’t often post because my IP address is blocked as spam anyway, so only post from the library (today) or from the folks place.
I suppose the concept of treating people as you would like to be treated would solve all the world’s problems. Maybe I’m too much of a dinosaur or too “old school” to understand why people take joy out of upsetting and hurting others.
Many of us work hard, and are out photographing/working as much as possible, but just get on with life and don’t need to tell everyone about it.
David; if you answer this and don’t get a reply it’s just that I’m back home and my comments will be getting spammed again!
Most of all; congratulations Daria on your fine image.
Cheers
Thank you, David !
Dimitri – here is a hand for you.
http://haiko.net/burn/hand.jpg – my real hand holding my real baby.
email is m-e-s-r-o-p-i-a-n at g-m-a-i-l wiht no dashes.
cheers
thanks for that info on Haik’s behalf, David, I appreciate your taking the trouble.
be well
My goodness.
I just spent a most wonderful evening with Mr. Black and Mr. Berube at a most intriguing local establishment with music and beverage diversions (see live comment dictated by Bob, transcribed by Mike, via my phone under the latest “dialogue thread, where we *all* nshould head whenever we just want to chat)
and I am now in my hotel happy that I was able to circumnavigate myslef back without undue lostness. And I read this much of the above, and quite honestly, while I know passions are engaged and some hearts are honest, i think simply “what rubbish”.
I will not name names. But if you do not like a particular person’s posting, and you *know* you don’t, DON”T READ IT! I’ll provide a helpful hint – their name will be at the top of the post.
I will admit (bob, you know I love you man, you got 4 extra hugs before I could even walk to my car) sometimes I don’t read bob’s posts. They’re too long and dense, and I save them for later. Sometimes i don’t come back to them.
But people, GET REAL. To insult our host because he allows everyone to say what they want, to say that some people’s words are not acceptable…well……all I can say is ….IF YOU DON”T LIKE IT, Why. Are. You. Here. ????
Burn is Burn, It will be. or it won’t. I hope it will, and I will do what I can to help and make it prosper. But c’mon, all…whining about peopls posts?? If ou don’t like it, ignore it. don’t dignify that whaich you disapprove with response.
Some people rant. some people must wave their arms and hands while they talk, and if you hold them still, they suddenly become mute. some people take a great while to gather their thoughts, and provide them in a nice, linear, progressive, organized way. Some people start out organized, have a glass of wine, and then get stuck fguring out which way to push a button. Some of us simply want to swing from the chandalier and sip wine and drink in the humanity in the room below us. To each, I say, their own….except those who simply want to gripe that someone is not conforming to *their* standards, and must be disciplined. if all you can do here is gripe and complain, then you are NOT contributing….
do good. be good.
now….back to your regularly scheduled programming.
Daria, you still out there? What do *you* think? After all, this is *your* thread……
with wishes of great light to all, and subtle promises of some sort of postings of images from tonight, if they aren’t all completely wonky…I am…
andrew b
P
Andrew B
YOU GO!
Bob, all cool, thanks for your mail. Never, absolutely never anything personal from me for you or anyone on this site (if so, private correspondance is the one road to take), It’s always about how words/opiions may appear and put someone on the outside rather than on te inside still feeling included. I think here on BURN 2 differing qnd strong opinions on artistic work mean we still do sit at the same table; not at diffrent ones on each end of the dining room.
All I can say about the latest exchanges on this thread, is that if one says something that might unfortunately have one of us (leaving out flaming trolls) leave the table, it was wrong to say it. There is simply no reward to doing that.
If BURN is truly 0,1% writers and 99,9% readers, some responsibilities belong to the writers to escape derivative contributions, rants and journal-entry types posts. At least, that they appear as after-thoughts, not the main course.
“right or wrong, MY country”…. “Love it or leave it”…. ah, yes…. glory days….
Andrew B; Well said!
Hey “Fly”…
What’s up..???
Now that most of us know who you REALLY are…:)))
Now that u proved your
unlimited CREEPINESS after shooting yourself to the foot..
Now thst we took of your little mask..
I wonder how it feels..
But honestly..
Since it’s Easter
Since it’s Pasha..
Since I feel sorry about
Your humiliation..
I say it’s enough ..
I’m not gonna post your name in public..
“Intellectuality” and pretense lost again…
Hypocrisy also..
And next time I’m in BROOKLYN..
I’ll buy you a beer of your choice…
It was nice meeting you last year in Look3…
See u soonest…
:)))))
( and as a lesson of the day? Remember : none of this humiliation would have
ever occured if you were honest enough to post with your real name..
Anyways..
The circle now closed..
Truth prevailed..
Big hug:)))