tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8840659144674997177.post5721562894672205863..comments2023-09-26T08:16:05.201-04:00Comments on subjectify: wassenaar, and the almost-forced disregard for the viewersubjectifyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10618855072950671422noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8840659144674997177.post-62153538267296958212008-11-16T10:35:00.000-05:002008-11-16T10:35:00.000-05:00even surveillance cameras and satellites make pict...even surveillance cameras and satellites make pictures with a viewer in mind. Photos/artworks made entirely for one's self are like masturbation (made with <I>something</I> in mind). But then, lots of pictures taken with a very specific audience might also be described as masturbatory. ha. <BR/><BR/>So I guess this ploy is just disingenuous, or it's a creative device designed to get the artist out of her own way, which is a tactic that would probably benefit anyone, on occasion. <BR/><BR/>I work with both techniques, obsessive engagement and intuitive responsiveness. Each has it's own advantages... tTom Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12085785354242301614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8840659144674997177.post-34983419670984617162008-11-16T08:31:00.000-05:002008-11-16T08:31:00.000-05:00Is it without regard to the viewer's reaction or i...Is it without regard to the viewer's reaction or is it being made free from any buffers or editing controls?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8840659144674997177.post-46852112025620438232008-11-15T13:19:00.000-05:002008-11-15T13:19:00.000-05:00I think it is possible to photograph without any r...I think it is possible to photograph without any real viewer in mind. But as far as the reason to photograph, isnt it ultimately to show someone? So in the end it is about the viewer and their perception of the photo.Zachariashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18428870532825731163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8840659144674997177.post-20071280147125598142008-11-15T11:37:00.000-05:002008-11-15T11:37:00.000-05:00It's a game of semantics but any photo taken by a ...It's a game of semantics but any photo taken by a person (i.e. not a random auto-captured image) has an intended viewer. That viewer may initially only be the photographer but that still shapes the image greatly.<BR/><BR/>I very much agree that there are images taken in what seems like an automatic state. The photographer can often act upon intuition, taking photos with such rapid visual and mental judgment that they seem to be automatically created.<BR/><BR/>But on a basic level, simply taking a photo implies a viewer or else life would just be life experienced and put to memory and not reimagined in a framed static form.Davin Riskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06675112232040705642noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8840659144674997177.post-70518748207308872442008-11-14T15:35:00.000-05:002008-11-14T15:35:00.000-05:00I think you only feel that way upon viewing the im...I think you only feel that way upon viewing the image. <BR/><BR/>I totally understand what she is saying, I definitely don't take a lot of pictures with any kind of viewer or final placement in mind. Certainly some are already placed in a mental context (Hey, this moment is perfect for so and so), but my favorites often end up being the images that were taken almost in an automatic state, a trance, or practically sleepwalking. I swear I once woke up in a parking lot with my rollei, and no socks or shoes on.Ian Aleksander Adamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13754552618486572662noreply@blogger.com