i beg to differ. the minaret was not entirely captured, there's a tree covering up the view and such composition is damaged by lens distortion. nevertheless, good effort.
art is of course arbitrary. subjective, yet subtle. and i believe i have caused some certain sort of discomforts previously in my comment.
i commented the picture based on my years worth of experience for you to improve in later days.
Some misused the sentence 'art is subjective' to defend their works of art, which to me is quite unethical especially when the basics are not met. that works if you do not need appreciators, but if you need them fans who admire, you need to produce something that agrees in major group of deciders.
by the way you can get photography tips from me for free if you want to learn more, as long as the passion grows fonder. im from wangsa maju.
mr. jacksparrow: hey2 nothing personal about that. i'm happy and pleased to know that and of course, i was just replying another comment from a reader. that's all. and about the offer, sure why not. I live in setiawangsa. :)
Ahhhhh, an industry professional, years of study and hard work in the field, there's nothing better then experience. I thank you from the bottom of my heart for endowing us on your huge fount of practical knowledge of art and photography. Really, from the bottom of my heart I thank people who are willing to share and not closet their skills, to help others so kindheartedly .It truly is what others should aspire to become and follow in your footsteps.
You speak the irrevocable universal truth, that the 'art' community at large, always seem to use the same excuse of the same nature. "art is arbitrary", "Art is subjective" ant that 'art' should only be enjoyed by people with 'art' in their bones, does it not sound pompous to say the lease? should not art be enjoyed by the millions instead of the few? isn't that the purpose of art? to be seen?
then again..by whom?and for what reason?
"There Is No Need For 'Reasons' To Enjoy Art~~!! All There Is Just 'Do'~~!!" i may have heard of that somewhere, and for the love of god, I can’t remember where, i have a certain condition you see. I'm not even sure if it was to 'Enjoy' or 'Appreciate' art. is there a 'real' intrinsic difference between them? Some would tell you with utmost certainty, "Yes"
I apologize again to The Author of this blog for this long-winded explanation, but for no apparent reason i feel the "need" to write, as is the case for photography I presume, the need to capture a situation, a concept, a person, an ideal, in a static representation. Should it be preprocessed and polished, or should it be raw and in its original state. which and how would it be, to be 'truly' 'appreciated'. I’m sure you all would agree that answering this would be, very 'subjective' to say the least. Books and portraits are written, drawn, photographed with the customer's enjoyment in mind, with a certain infusion of art from their respective authors, art for the wide audience, art that sells. On the other end of the spectrum there are those who write simply to express themselves, to gain something almost approaching self-indulgence. These writers and painters and photographers simply want to capture their emotion without regard of whom would 'appreciate' their 'art', just that their art be made and in case of music and motion pictures, be watched of heard, it is simply enough, that is was 'be made'. And the former usually gets 'appreciated' quicker then the latter, the latter would also be 'appreciated' later on, in their own right by those who appreciate that they we're ever made. In essence, to 'enjoy'. This is not to say that those who create in an effort to please, would have their art unappreciated later on, don’t get me wrong, they would still be appreciated, by those who enjoyed them and would enjoy them, a good to reread or pass on to another, a portrait of a family capturing the protracted artistically represented joy, a movie or song heard for a different reason and understanding, to simply be enjoyed and appreciated.
Both have something in common, they were created, with knowledge in hand, and an art to be made, there is no mistaking that to know how to do is paramount, but the choice to do so IS subjective. The pursuit of knowledge IS a noble cause, but at the end it is our choices that matters. What are we if not creatures of fate, bound by out choices in life. That opinions count, and should not be dismissed so easily, right or wrong, constructive or destructive, intrinsic or extrinsic. Through this we can see that art maybe a form of expression, to imitate life, but it life itself may 'imitate' art, life is subjective. Very much soo.
My opinion then, with so long and hard an explanation to reach it, is that the issue of subjectivity may sound irrelevant, but it is true that life, and in small aspect, art, itself be subjective in nature and be enjoyed and appreciated by people in their own way. As we all go trough and enjoy and appreciate the world in our own way. To deny this would be to Deny everything of this worldly realm of existence. Surely your not so misanthropic n your views, I shudder to think those who share the same if not worse predisposition that i possess.
Then here is my Subjective Enjoyment of the art made by my dear friend beda, yes, trees obscure, but it gave me a sense of grounded-nes, the 'masjid' blurred to make it ethereal in spirit, to give a sense of motionless monument, with but not a need to show its full majesty that could not compare to the splendor of nature itself, to the main subject that draws me, the sky, the clouds, which swirl beautifully right above the structure of man, proud undaunted, Free.
Impressive, Quite if not very, impressive.
ReplyDelete~Misanthropic Stalker~
i beg to differ. the minaret was not entirely captured, there's a tree covering up the view and such composition is damaged by lens distortion. nevertheless, good effort.
ReplyDeleteWhat is Art?
ReplyDelete~Misanthropic Stalker~
jacksparrow: erm..thnx for that. :)
ReplyDeletemy stalker: what is art kan? hmm..very subjective. different people different perspective i guess. what say you?
art is of course arbitrary. subjective, yet subtle. and i believe i have caused some certain sort of discomforts previously in my comment.
ReplyDeletei commented the picture based on my years worth of experience for you to improve in later days.
Some misused the sentence 'art is subjective' to defend their works of art, which to me is quite unethical especially when the basics are not met. that works if you do not need appreciators, but if you need them fans who admire, you need to produce something that agrees in major group of deciders.
by the way you can get photography tips from me for free if you want to learn more, as long as the passion grows fonder. im from wangsa maju.
mr. jacksparrow: hey2 nothing personal about that. i'm happy and pleased to know that and of course, i was just replying another comment from a reader. that's all. and about the offer, sure why not. I live in setiawangsa. :)
ReplyDeleteAhhhhh, an industry professional, years of study and hard work in the field, there's nothing better then experience. I thank you from the bottom of my heart for endowing us on your huge fount of practical knowledge of art and photography. Really, from the bottom of my heart I thank people who are willing to share and not closet their skills, to help others so kindheartedly .It truly is what others should aspire to become and follow in your footsteps.
ReplyDeleteYou speak the irrevocable universal truth, that the 'art' community at large, always seem to use the same excuse of the same nature. "art is arbitrary", "Art is subjective" ant that 'art' should only be enjoyed by people with 'art' in their bones, does it not sound pompous to say the lease?
should not art be enjoyed by the millions instead of the few? isn't that the purpose of art? to be seen?
then again..by whom?and for what reason?
"There Is No Need For 'Reasons' To Enjoy Art~~!! All There Is Just 'Do'~~!!" i may have heard of that somewhere, and for the love of god, I can’t remember where, i have a certain condition you see. I'm not even sure if it was to 'Enjoy' or 'Appreciate' art. is there a 'real' intrinsic difference between them? Some would tell you with utmost certainty, "Yes"
I apologize again to The Author of this blog for this long-winded explanation, but for no apparent reason i feel the "need" to write, as is the case for photography I presume, the need to capture a situation, a concept, a person, an ideal, in a static representation. Should it be preprocessed and polished, or should it be raw and in its original state. which and how would it be, to be 'truly' 'appreciated'. I’m sure you all would agree that answering this would be, very 'subjective' to say the least. Books and portraits are written, drawn, photographed with the customer's enjoyment in mind, with a certain infusion of art from their respective authors, art for the wide audience, art that sells. On the other end of the spectrum there are those who write simply to express themselves, to gain something almost approaching self-indulgence. These writers and painters and photographers simply want to capture their emotion without regard of whom would 'appreciate' their 'art', just that their art be made and in case of music and motion pictures, be watched of heard, it is simply enough, that is was 'be made'. And the former usually gets 'appreciated' quicker then the latter, the latter would also be 'appreciated' later on, in their own right by those who appreciate that they we're ever made. In essence, to 'enjoy'. This is not to say that those who create in an effort to please, would have their art unappreciated later on, don’t get me wrong, they would still be appreciated, by those who enjoyed them and would enjoy them, a good to reread or pass on to another, a portrait of a family capturing the protracted artistically represented joy, a movie or song heard for a different reason and understanding, to simply be enjoyed and appreciated.
Both have something in common, they were created, with knowledge in hand, and an art to be made, there is no mistaking that to know how to do is paramount, but the choice to do so IS subjective. The pursuit of knowledge IS a noble cause, but at the end it is our choices that matters. What are we if not creatures of fate, bound by out choices in life. That opinions count, and should not be dismissed so easily, right or wrong, constructive or destructive, intrinsic or extrinsic. Through this we can see that art maybe a form of expression, to imitate life, but it life itself may 'imitate' art, life is subjective. Very much soo.
My opinion then, with so long and hard an explanation to reach it, is that the issue of subjectivity may sound irrelevant, but it is true that life, and in small aspect, art, itself be subjective in nature and be enjoyed and appreciated by people in their own way. As we all go trough and enjoy and appreciate the world in our own way. To deny this would be to Deny everything of this worldly realm of existence. Surely your not so misanthropic n your views, I shudder to think those who share the same if not worse predisposition that i possess.
Then here is my Subjective Enjoyment of the art made by my dear friend beda, yes, trees obscure, but it gave me a sense of grounded-nes, the 'masjid' blurred to make it ethereal in spirit, to give a sense of motionless monument, with but not a need to show its full majesty that could not compare to the splendor of nature itself, to the main subject that draws me, the sky, the clouds, which swirl beautifully right above the structure of man, proud undaunted, Free.
~Misanthropic Stalker~
hey, agus. thanks for the long speech. i'm touched.
ReplyDelete