Showing all 34 replies.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>portraits of mental illness
>consistently ugly and schizophrenic aesthetic
>no composition, camera randomly held crooked, things randomly cut off on the edge of the frame
>”yeah but she shot a tranny with direct flash doe”
I didn’t even have to check the early life section
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>4512552
First if all, thanks for the effortposing anon. Second, dam those pics are mid at best.. the composition is terrible, of course the subjects might have been rare back then but nowadays I don't need to go to a circus to see strangers twice as ugly. Literal garbage tier photographer
>>
>>4512580
Like an anon said i also appreciate the effortposting, it makes us discover or refresh the memories of a famous name.
Shame you picked a museum jew rather than an actual good one, but you open the door to discuss this whole ideological sub-genre inside photography, the museum jew one aka Stieglitz, Cartier-Bresson, Arbus, Leibowitz, Nan Goldin, Jill Freedman, Man Ray, Winegrad, Levinstein, good old Terry along with opinions from non-photographers like Susan Sontag.
>>
>>
>>4512843
>How would you describe this sub-genre?
Jewish photography, basically, our contemporary version performed after the theories from the 60's and 70's and the old timey version, bending the rules and forfeiting aesthetic rulings from past painting conventions and newer new vision ones.
Photography as a medium rather than an art form, a racist one because of its scientific origins, exploring the limits of the media itself (the meta) rather than the works portrayed therein, documenting reality and being an non-interventionist agent when doing it, frowning upon flexible vision and undergoing a fixed standard way of working, the criticism against the idealization of subjects like aesthetically pleasing geometries, orderly masses, coordinated functions, symmetrical compositions, heroic narratives against clear obstacles
...and thus the championing of traditionally ugly subjects, provoking emotions against heroism/greater good causes, subverting the concept of order, doing away with classical portrayals of beauty set by other art forms, not aesthetically isolating political symbolism with its former history, all of these are done because otherwise it would be fascist not to.
Or simply going full meta and objectifying the body of work from someone else and re-contextualizing it in a fictitious way while taking the credit or royalties, like the case of Maloof & Goldstein with Vivian Maier or Stieglitz with the Pictorial movement in the US.
Once you understand these theory basics you will also understand the bizarre logic behind contemporary art photography, juries and their decisions. And once you somewhat understand how jews work when they enter a field you will perhaps understand why they made these theories.
>>
>>4512976
In other words, destroying and mocking the original culture is their plainly stated goal, and they will ceaselessly accuse you of being stupid and uncultured if you don’t go along with it and adopt their culture instead.
Your entire post is an antisemitic conspiracy theory because this is its logical conclusion. The actual answer is: most people are shitty photographers. Jews are no exception, but they are more likely to have rich relatives who can make excuses. There are plenty of shitty, sloppy photographers that weren’t jewish and still had enough rich friends to succeed. The justifications are just investor grade bullshit. Jews don’t have a mystical evil culture that worships ugliness and the destruction of beauty, sorry. If you think we do and said we do, you’re either using a made up quote or referring to the jewish equivalent to a white separatist fundamentalist christian nazi nutjob.
>>
>>4512976
>jews aren’t just getting rich by bullshitting about their snapshits and upselling them to retarded rich kids with more money than taste, its a grand kabbalistic conspiracy to remove beauty and competence from art because they love glorifying evil and decay. i shall have no part in their jesus hating ways. -antisemites
>man i wish i could be rich. whats the secret? shovels and septic tanks? maybe photography is a waste of time and I’m poor because jews are hogging all the money. -also antisemites
snore
you invented a photography genre just for a conspiracy theory that explains jews having more money than you
reflect on your life
>>
>>4512982
>destroying and mocking the original culture is their plainly stated goal
Perhaps, but this is not stated as a medium theory rule but you do read between the lines due to your previous experience reading certain things.
>The actual answer is: most people are shitty photographers
While this is true it does not explain the decisions and criteria used by many jury members and critics in competitions and academia, they use the photography theory made years ago that state the same things i did.
>If you think we do and said we do
Settle down Moshe, i am basing everything i said directly from widespread and accepted theory taught in schools.
For further inquire please consult: Susan Sontag (On Photography, Fascinating Fascism), John Szarkowski (Looking at Photographs), Kaja Silverman (The Subject of Semiotics), Rosalind Krauss (Contemporary Criticism), Mikkel Borch-Jacobsen (Undoing Recognition), among others that aren't as widely known.
>>4512985
>man i wish i could be rich
>getting rich by bullshitting
>a conspiracy theory that explains jews having more money
Who said anything about money you doofus, i am talking about the theory regarding making and looking at photography.
>reflect on your life
I am, i spent a couple of years reading the established theory only to realize that it doesn't reflect at all the practice of trying to make pictures aesthetically pleasing for both the masses and the initiated.
It's its own monster, the products of these theories are consumed only by the academics and hold little relevance to what a random civilian or a photo hobbyist enjoy, the images produced by some of these purveyors are deemed interesting only because they had a previous traditional education which leaks into their work, that's why the old museum masters have some cool works but their students fully developed under the theories are lackluster in the traditional sense.
>>
>>4513058
>i quoted the salesmen and beneficiaries and fell for the grift
Great, but jews don’t go further than that. No shit we join in with the sales pitch and leverage our hard fought academic roles to help a fellow sell his snapshits. Please give us a break with the insane complex conspiracies and kabbalistic subversion worship shit. The average jew has an IQ of 100, no rhythm, and no taste just like you. The difference is we help each other no questions asked and you think our shoddy excuses for overvaluing artwork are intellectual revelations and satanic wizardry because even if you’re not a christian, at heart you still think we’re literally magical people.
You basically asked ten jews if the last one sold you a fake rolex and they all called their lawyers and got back to you with a flowery language telling you to enjoy your watch and piss off. And then they got book deals talking about the critical intersectionalities of the repro watch market. There is no “jewish photography”, it’s just good business. Open and shut. That’s that, snoyim. We’re good at making money.