Where are the great pictures on Flickr?
“I went on to Flickr and it was just thousands of pieces of shit, and I just couldn’t believe it. And it’s just all conventional, it’s all cliches, it’s just one visual convention after another.” Stephen Shore
Stephen Shore’s reaction to Flickr is understandable. The most popular groups like Catchy Colors (36,091 members) or Reflections (14,350 members) are brutal. I can’t say I even liked Squared Circle (5,188 members).
My guess is that the best photography on Flickr is hard to find. Good photography is rarely popular. I’m reminded of Bill Jay’s essay (pdf) on photographic fame:
I think we can agree that any definition of fame would include such phrases as “popular acclaim,” “known far and wide,” “public estimation and regard,” “household name,” and similar tributes. Now lay back and concentrate. Name an active living artist-photographer who is famous. . . . . . . (The dots represent time passing. Go ahead, think about it for as long as you like.)
Ready now? Good. Who did you come up with? Joel-Peter Witkin. Robert Mapplethorpe. Annie Leibowitz. Sally Mann. Who? Never mind – we have enough names for our purpose.
The next question is: how many people in the USA have heard of any one of these names? As I cannot hear you I will answer the question myself. Probably one thousand at any one time. More? OK, let us up the figure to five thousand although I think that is stretching it.
Here is the first conclusion: in a nation of 260 million even the higher figure does not represent “public acclaim”; it means that the name is recognized by only five persons in a quarter of a million. Now, compare. When a minor television sit-com actress of dubious talent declared her lesbianism she inundated every major news outlet for weeks, including the cover of Time plus seven inside pages, and her coming-out episode was watched by everyone in the universe except me. That is fame.
So forget about fame and membership stats. Tell me, where are the great pictures on Flickr?
the great pictures here? (not mine), http://www.flickr.com/photos/fake_a_dream/
I personally like this person’s pics (again, not mine):
http://flickr.com/photos/alspix/
He does some great work with pinholes, film and obscure cameras. My favourite sets of his are:
http://flickr.com/photos/alspix/sets/72057594105617344/
http://flickr.com/photos/alspix/sets/72057594105620695/
http://flickr.com/photos/alspix/sets/72157594194034275/
I suppose some of the photos could be considered clichéd, however more often than not Alspix is the one coming up with the idea….
For technically very good pics see:
http://flickr.com/photos/ellishall/
There’s a pic of me in his stream somewhere! I especially like his tubagraphs and portraits of a reflected venice.
Also, check out the alt group, although you have to like alternative photography I suppose…
http://flickr.com/groups/alt/
well, that’s my favourites. If you look hard enough and get past the cruft (difficult I know) then there’s some very good stuff on flickr — photoblogs don’t have the monopoly!
If I find a picture that I like, I follow the trail of the photographer’s favorites.
I think there’s some sort of clumping action going on, so if you follow a flower macro person’s trail you mostly turn up more flower macros.
I’m not very good, so don’t follow mine.
Flickr is a very hobbiest-oriented site. Thus, I think the greatness is in the designers, tech people, housewifes, househusbands, corporate minions, etc that find something important in photography. Most likely, since they’re moonlighting, there’s no art school involved or community of critique, so they share and network there. It suffices.
Granted, the extent of the critiques tend to be “nice composition” and “great colors” but it at least opens a conversation that wouldn’t otherwise be available.
I’ve met several great people/photographers through the site while at a community college completely lacking in a creative community. For that, it was invaluable. Bosse Blomqvist’s photography, found here:http://www.flickr.com/photos/bosseb/ may do nothing for you, but it’s one example of someone I feel has influenced me just because we’ve bounced work off each other for so long.
With Flickr being what it is, it’s easy to only see it for the overriding nastiness. The popular photographs are like popular songs — easy to digest, “catchy” — but you really have to get involved to get anything out of the site.
simple: flickr isn’t there for great pictures.
why if you produced a great body of work would you post it on flickr? what would be the point?
who’s eye would you be trying to attract?
Is Martin Parr going to find it and think it is “quirky” and publish a book for you?
flickr is for the masses with cameras. since when has the masses been interested in anything interesting?
if you’re interested in good photography, in good art, then you find it.
if you’re interested in celebrities, other peoples sexual preferences, been told what to think and look at a picture of a sunset rather than take the time to watch a sunset, then there’s flickr.
Was she the skinny one or the fat one?
sorry last comment is way too harsh. i take that back.
As Flickr is for the general public, and as you mention only the names of those famous photographers are recognized by “five persons in a quarter of a million” [is this a contradiction, how can they be famous if only a few know them]. This should tell you something about the probability to find a good photographer on Flickr I would say.
Bottom-line:
For good photos you simply have to look harder.
Here is mine for a starter:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dutchphotography/
Rgds, Martin M
Alec, thats so funny, your right on point again, (with what my friend Rob and I have been ranting about recently). I see alot of work that for the most part is garbage, but with tons of favorable responses. I don’t get it.
I think NS makes a good point though, one that Rob and I both realized, the analogy of lame pop music, there is definately a market shit quality.
I like her work: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mika-rin/
As with most large communities there will be the tyranny of the majority. It reminds me of an old essay by Clement Greenberg, Avant-Garde and Kitsch. People like shit, they are brainwashed to do so. It is no different in painting (http://www.thomaskinkade.com) and music (http://www.billboard.com). If photography fame is insignificant in the US, don’t let me start on the European situation. I don’t think there is one in a million over here that can name a photography superstar!
That being said, great photography is a matter of personal preferences and background. What’s greatness? A photograph that perfectly communicates what the photographer wanted or a photography embraced by art critics and the art community? And as for fame, it is a double edged sword. Most likely fame will come as an overnight sensation only to shine you into obscurity when the new kid on the block arrives.
I’m totally devastated. the great Stephen Shore has just passed judgment, and found me lacking in talent, ability and creativity. I suppose that I and all of the rest of the millions of Flickr members should put our cameras away in closets and delete all of our photos.
But wait a second! In his remarks he stresses that the average person doesn’t even know the names of the most famous photographers of our time, and therefore its conceivable that more people know the names of some Flickr photographers than have heard of him. He draws a contrast between the lack of fame of renowned photographers and the media attention given celebrities. So he believes that Flickr photographers are celebrities too. OK, I feel so much better now. In the morning I’ll start making some calls and line up some talk show appearances. Maybe if I come out as a lesbian I can get on the cover of TIME magazine as well. “Flickr Starlet Comes Out Of The Closet”.
Please thank Stephen Shore for his inspiring message to all of us Flickrites.
With all due respect to Mr. Shore, it’s impossible for anyone to make an assessment of all of Flickr, or even most of it. It’s not a single entity, there are all kinds of different communities using it in different ways. There’s no doubt that it’s consumer-oriented/hobbyist in nature, but there’s great stuff to be found if you can ferret it out.
I don’t personally participate in Groups or Pools, but I’ve worked with people via Hey, Hot Shot! who are deep into those communities and get a lot out of it - Ben Roberts, who was a Winter ‘07 Edition Hot Shot comes to mind. (Check out Ben on Flickr too.)
And speaking of Hey, Hot Shot - Naturally I’m biased, but the collection of Hey, Hot Shot! Sets on my stream is chock full of great pictures.
I use Flickr extensively for both the gallery and the competition… in part because it’s easy to integrate into my blogs, but also because I enjoy my own little corner of the Flickr community. Also, there are a lot of people who use my Flickr stream as their main source of gallery news.
What’s everyone getting so worked up about?
The bulk of photography for about 60 odd years has been snapshots and throwaways, we just didn’t have such wide access to those before.
Flickr just lets folks rummage through other people’s shoeboxes. That’s part of its appeal to me.
Some is more interesting than others, of course, but that’s true of anything
late night at Al’s place, sure beats a night on the town.
For my money I’d try http://flickr.com/photos/menlo/ href=”http://flickr.com/photos/menlo/”>this.
For my money I’d try http://flickr.com/photos/menlo/
I don’t think my photographs can be defined as shoebox material.
For me the goal of flickr was to have an alternative way to learn about photography, instead of taking courses. I decided to try to find out what photography meant to me, and explore it more thoroughly..
I was also curious about the possibilities to learn from peers, a model we used to promote when I was a teacher in art school teaching interactive and game design.
Most of the time I have spent there I used to find out what I liked and didn’t like about the photography of others, and I also gathered as much information as possible from other photography websites, set myself a few projects, read a lot of books, visited museums, and took a B&W course and learned to use the darkroom.
I agree on the rubbish and cliches, and I’m aware of the different types of flickr users. For me it was quite useful to find out what I didn’t like and discover the reasons why.
In more than a years time I learned a lot, and I found some groups that are interesting enough for me to hang around, and I started curating some groups, digging up interesting stuff..
One of the most interesting aspects for me is the fact that flickr is a method of sticking to what I have called ‘exploring photography in the spare time between work and family life’.
I have also been looking for other options, where more high quality stuff is available, and I would love to have an online version of the Magnum Workshops, and flickr could be considered an interesting platform..
where? in my flickr portfolio: http://www.flickr.com/photos/maciejdakowicz/sets/72157601136881084/
but you have probaly seen it already…
and HARDCORE STREET PHOTOGRAPHY group is a good place
It takes time and patience….
but there are good pictures on flicker. sometimes very good ones.
here are some example:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/63714921@N00/454608176/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andross/292637094/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/anetbat/871889596/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/linascheynius/458946913/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alikaragoz/927802813/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yeah-yeah-yeah/269181028/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/malll/286016211/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/liraz_zur/1032544688/in/set-72157601266201653/
There are photos on Flickr!?
I don’t have any images on Flickr but it seems like a good way for people to get stuff online without going through the hassle/expense of sorting out your own web page.
However i’ve heard of a few occasions recently where friends who have images on Flickr have been approached by publishers to use their images, toting the whole “it will be good for your profile” line in lu of payment. I think it’s pretty shoddy for people to use Flickr as a free photo library.
Flickr is for those 1/4 million people (not for the those 5 you mention). It’s to share what you like. Like anyone who blogs is a journalist or great story writer. Nope. This is for the rest of us, who are not concerned about things and do not make living of it. Anyone who has few hundred bucks to buy a digicam or scan film is qualified and included. Thanks to flickr. For arty great pictures go to expensive galleries, openings or contemporary art museums :)) or subscribe to fancy magazines
“where are all the great pictures on flickr?”
Flickr is a mass appeal commercial site open to anyone in the world with an internet connection.
Thousands (tens of thousands? I forget, but the figure is staggering) of photos are uploaded every minute of every day, so it’s no surprise that the gems are well hidden and hard to find, especially when the vast majority of members would not claim to be making art or even aspiring to it.
“My guess is that the best photography on Flickr is hard to find.”
You don’t say? What an insightful observation.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/supercommon/sets/72157601301195759/
Most “pros” think posting on Flickr devalues their work, so they make little flash websites everybody hates. Most of the great photography on Flickr is an accident, and the photographer is often oblivious! What happens when digital cameras are everywhere.
well…stephen shore’s reaction is a little ass headed in terms of what is expected of flickr.. it is as mass market as it gets… you dont go there looking for high art… (if you look hard enough you will find some real gems though) unless Alec Soth and Stephen SHore start uploading to flickr and contribute to raising that standard!
Amateur hour:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ericzieg/
To slightly rehearse some of the arguments already mentioned on here, I’m not sure flickr is intended or suited to the display of ‘great’ photography. The entire format encourages superficial browsing, following link after link. It’s a very different experience to the contemplative atmosphere of a gallery or an artist’s photobook. If you’re able to slow down a little and commit some time to flickr (luckily I have a job that allows this) you can find find some extraodinary work. You might have to spend some time clicking through to a larger size jpeg to get the full measure of the work, and even then you’re a long way off a print . . . I like Stephen Shore but it wouldn’t be so hard to click past this picture http://www.henryart.org/ex/stephenshore.html as a small jpeg on flickr, whereas in the gallery you’re going to think twice.
I think I’ve collected some interesting stuff (my favourites), ‘though please don’t judge me cos of the occasional boob shot. .
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexbynature/favorites/
I would second what Jen Bekman has said…
One approach is to find someone whose taste you appreciate and look at their favorites.
(not so unlike, say, your favorite photo blog.) These are found on the scroll down tab from the user’s icon at their photo stream.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/leastwanted/favorites/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mark_s/favorites/page2/
The interface isn’t great, the back button is too necessary.
There is an incredible amount of fascinating graphics being scanned as well. If you like that sort of thing, which I assume most photographers do. Searching tabs and sets all yield great stuff - and while I have a lot of photoblogs bookmarked (thanks to Alec’s lead to Google reader) I also look at flickr maybe more as, no offense intended, there’s more variety there. My interest in say, anonymous snapshots, has led to images that just won’t be seen elsewhere.
But,of course, you’ll never find the kind of commentary and intelligent writing or great photography as reliably that you see at the better photo blogs… - but it’s fun, and there is great stuff there. A great photographer once said (long ago) that “one day the camera will be like the pencil.” I think flickr has brought that day that much closer.
“Nothing to do with price of fish” but I love W Robert Angells pics, as for flicker, or is it flcker,flec, feltcher, fl, fll…………………..
Some of my favorites:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shadowtones/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/leveckis/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10481997@N08/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/beniliam/
Good things here:
Maciej Dakowicz
http://www.flickr.com/photos/maciejdakowicz/sets/1391696/
Mark Alor Powell (Locaburg)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/locaburg/sets/1432947/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/locaburg/sets/845861/
thanks Mark.
There are some good things here.
Maciej Dakowicz
http://www.flickr.com/photos/maciejdakowicz/sets/1391696/
Mark Alor Powell (Locaburg)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/locaburg/sets/1432947/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/locaburg/sets/845861/
(Sorry if this is posted several times - I keep getting a message telling me this is spam.)
@Lisanne Anderson: Your photos are indeed shoebox material. Just look at the amount of photos you publish, too much. There is no selection. And a picture of a random car on a random street? How very boring.
The thing about flickr is this:-
you actually have to participate to find the good stuff, otherwise its just pictures of flowers and puppies…….
‘last 7 days interesting’ is a joke……..
If you wanna see some truely great flickr photographers,heres a few links to get you started:-
(N.B. none of these are my pictures)
Clarice
Velco
Motionid
Jim O’Connell
John Gladdy
Junku-newcleus
Localman
Zebrio
okay, so i have to admit i also have a flickr-account…even a pro-one…but as i don´t want to upload all of my pictures on my website but to show some anyway i use this method. furthermore it allows me to copy and paste the html-code for embedding photos in other sites…it´s also quite practical if you have an idea and want to show it to your friends. sometimes it also helps me editing. and as i also don´t see flickr as a professional platform i don´t have to worry. it´s a place for sketches as well as for photos i like and want to show.
and i also enjoy discovering photography by other people because there is good photography, too…i don´t mind if i just like 1 or 2 photos of a person and not his whole “body of work” cause sometimes it´s inspiring somehow or you can learn something of it…
also for me it´s important to find out what pictures i like and why i like them…that all helps me to develop my own work…
it´s like a 08/15 playground where you can be frustrated because you think it´s all such an obviously silly waste of time or where you can try to find the plaything that you like or find out how to use the playground creatively to make it your own exciting playground and adventure of which you can get some experience…
the use of it matters. it´s you who can decide. so why be desperate?
flickr was never meant to be a platform for professionals i think…it´s somehow “democratic” at least.
The thing about flickr is this:-
you actually have to participate to find the good stuff, otherwise its just pictures of flowers and puppies…….
‘last 7 days interesting’ is a joke……..
If you wanna see some truely great flickr photographers,heres a few links to get you started:-
(N.B. none of these are my pictures)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/clarice_e_simon/‘
http://www.flickr.com/photos/velco/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/motionid/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimoconnell/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_adam-aka47/sets/72157594216142241/detail/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/junku-newcleus/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/localman/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zebrio/
I don’t really have any witty comment to preface this, and I am also drunk.
I’m sorry.
http://flickr.com/photos/rickschneider
http://www.flickr.com/photos/frederico_mendes/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yuridojc/
great photographers, great pictures on flickr
I would agree that most of what is up there is not v good and that it isn’t easy finding the good ones. Sort of like finding a needle in a haystack. One method I use to find them is to search for cameras or lenses likely to be used by more serious photographers.
And keep in mind that for more than a few, Flickr is a play area and the heavily edited, excellent, sets are on their personal web sites. Like Tiny Eyes below, Flickr seems to be the sole outlet for some, but even though he’s playing, he knows what he’s doing.
Here are some of my favourites:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eamon/ - Eamon
http://www.flickr.com/photos/leveckis/ - Ed
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eshepard/ - Eliot
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mhartel/ - Markus
http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanphotos/ - Matt
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nilsjorgensen/ - Nils
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tinyeyes/ - Tiny Eyes
I would agree that most of what is up there is not v good and that it isn’t easy finding the good ones. Sort of like finding a needle in a haystack. One method I use to find them is to search for cameras or lenses likely to be used by more serious photographers.
And keep in mind that for more than a few, Flickr is a play area and the heavily edited, excellent, sets are on their personal web sites. Like Tiny Eyes below, Flickr seems to be the sole outlet for some, but even though he’s playing, he knows what he’s doing.
Here are some of my favourites:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eamon/ - Eamon
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mhartel/ - Markus
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tinyeyes/ - Tiny Eyes
Tried pointing out seven but Wordpress flagged my post as spam. So I’ll try with three.
I would agree that most of what is up there is not v good and that it isn’t easy finding the good ones. Sort of like finding a needle in a haystack. One method I use to find them is to search for cameras or lenses likely to be used by more serious photographers.
And keep in mind that for more than a few, Flickr is a play area and the heavily edited, excellent, sets are on their personal web sites. Like Tiny Eyes below, Flickr seems to be the sole outlet for some, but even though he’s playing, he knows what he’s doing.
Here are some of my favourites:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mhartel/ - Markus
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tinyeyes/ - Tiny Eyes
Tried pointing out seven but Wordpress flagged my post as spam. So I’ll try with two.
Yup! it is hard to find… well harder than looking at the most popular groups or ones that flickr recommends!!
Squared Circle!!! The clue be in the name with that one
You just have to search for groups that you want, filter out the generic stuff (tulips, sunsets and HDR photography etc…)
But even then, when you find what I’d call “good groups” in the flickr world:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/bringit/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/onthestreet/
They just come across as a random collection of single images with little or no connection between the one sitting at either side of them in the pool. And this pretty much sums up the whole of the flickr experience!
It really is all about the one off images, and if it wasn’t they’d have made it easier for people to share their projects/sets/collections.
flickr, with all of its tags, sets, groups, favourites and all the rest of its many sorting mechanisms allows for a kind of sprawling, day-to-day photography that would be otherwise impenetrable. the idea is that works are followed over time, integrate with the works of others, or are found via search.
while this might not align with the careful spoon-feeding of the gallery going experience, it should not be discounted. the problem with this post is that it assumes that the point of photography is “great photos”, when in flickr many times greatness is found in the aggregation of many photos, not necessarily great ‘individually’ but part of a larger, valuable whole. for example, the point of ’squared circle’ isn’t the individual photo, it is the collected collective work.
flickr is about conversation. while conversations are incredibly valuable things, they tend to not make for “great” works of literature. think of flickr as a photographic conversation, rather than a series of profound statements, and it’ll make a lot more sense.
This is a great question. But I guessing this is more a rhetorical question. I’m thinking that you probably can’t be pointed to the great ones on flickr - you have to discover them for yourself. Perhaps it will turn out to be the “popular” ones -but likely it is not - because it’s up to you to decide. You have to put some effort into it to get anything out of it.
I am most drawn into the flow of Flickr … you just can’t step into the same stream twice (even feels that way in my own flickr stream). It has a certain unconsciousness about it which is quite nice - and mostly undigested even if it is tagged. It fits the amateur’s environment in that one probably chooses to participate out of love for the exchange - but not for money - fame or fortune. Why does anyone strike up a conversation with a stranger after all ? Or put a message in a bottle?
My opinion is that you have to look - you have to seek out the things that interest you visually - these things are not served up like in traditional models (I’m thinking traditional here in the sense of being presented in a gallery / museum / institutional - “sanctioned greatness” sort of way).
The only filter is you and whether you might dwell a little longer and pursue the ones that you like and choose to ignore the ones that don’t hold your interest.
and also, don’t forget about the porn.
Alex, flickr reached critical mass some time ago, when I signed up late 2004, the gems were not buried so deeply, and compared to some other sites the interface was elegant and quick to learn, over time, I became more and more enamoured by the ‘community’ and these days my flickr experience has changed emphasis to something more social in an online gaming kind of way. Using other’s contacts was one way of finding the gems a tasks that required a fair level of time and effort on my own part. Given that flickr has reached critical mass a task made all the more difficult, here’s some of my favourites who I think are worthy of *some* time.
http://flickr.com/photos/ann3n3/sets/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/akiruna/sets/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/luisa/sets/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/baywhale/sets/
There are quite a few street portraitists, street photographers, some people attempting documentary and others succeeding at it. It’s a huge melting pot. I wouldn’t have never started medium format if I hadn’t seen all the groups that are dedicated to it and show that anybody can do it. In a way is like when I needed to hear Nirvana to understand that I could also play guitar.
Of course flickr it’s full of people shooting flowers and bugs, and uploading family snapshots… they are allowed to do it and use it as a gallery to refer to their friends. Others try to get involved into something more artistic and gradually might do something interested. As said before, just check Hardcore Street Photography for seeing a lively and reasonably well curated group. It is hard to find those people that shoot more seriously, mostly because they are few and edit more before uploading. You just can’t find them by chance. And for coherent groups of work instead of single (’stunning’) images it’s even harder (Maciej’s St Mary Street shots, Bedlam’s panoramic street images, Hin Chua’s corporate insider photography…).
Maciej Dakowicz’s Cardiff nightlife photos
http://www.flickr.com/photos/maciejdakowicz/sets/1391696/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/macebio
good stuff
Alec created a quick set for you
http://www.flickr.com/photos/danbandalee/sets/72157601304400053/
And check out my favourites
http://www.flickr.com/photos/danbandalee/favorites/
Feargal Sharkey sang “a good heart these days is hard to find” and I agree with him but saying that I’m really happy with my wife if you get my drift.
Alec created this set for you
http://www.flickr.com/photos/danbandalee/sets/72157601304400053/
Feargal Sharkey sang a good heart these days is hard to find - this is true but I’m really happy with my wife so what the hell.
amour
dan
I have to recommend Todd Fisher’s pictures:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/46498700@N00/
Of course there’s a lot of crap and pretense on flickr, but it’s like picking through a pile of other people’s pictures in the trash. Fascinating.
After a visit in Pisa in 2004, it made me realize how important it is for a tourist to make a picture of the tower, even if thousands of other tourists was becoming more important than the tower itself.
I then did some researches ont Google Image and then Flickr on these “tourist symbols”.
I have to admit that I was like hypnotized.
Just check by typing “eiffel”!
I agree in a way with Striatic that this is more about conversation. But conversation more than communication (communication would be very optimistic).
However, and with regards to this flow of pictures on Flickr, I would like to point out a sentence of Regis Durand in his book “Disparités”:
“The image is not the reflection of a reality, it is it on the contrary which imposes a manner to us of reading the world, and thus, in a sense, which realises it”
(”L’image n’est pas le reflet d’une réalité, c’est elle au contraire qui nous impose une manière de lire le monde, et donc, en un sens, qui le fait exister.”)
(I apologize if translation is not 100% correct…)
Hereunder my essay on these picts:
http://www.no-artist.com/corinnevionnet/my_album/photo_opportunities/index.htm
and some explanations here :
http://www.no-artist.com/corinnevionnet/my_album/myalbum_txt.htm
it helps me edit.
i really like my favorites, ive found plenty of good photographers there, most of them use it to edit too:
http://flickr.com/photos/einarsodinecs/favorites/
look no further, as the gates open, the lights of heaven rain down, the chorus sing ahhhhhh in a high pitch with harmonies:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shveckle
Just writting it gives me goose bumps.
HERE! http://flickr.com/photos/quaketronics-tom/sets/72057594114240438/
and don’t worry, it’s not just a link to some of mine
it helps me edit, a nice place to throw stuff up and think about it for a while. i keep trying to edit my stream down to see where im going. i have also found a lot of good photographers (and lots of cute girls taking self portraits), as is evident in my favorites:
http://flickr.com/photos/einarsodinecs/favorites/
flickr needs a good edit
i think lots of people use flickr to edit. i like it because i can throw things on there and think about them for a little. i always try to edit down my stream to see where im going.
i have found plenty of good photographers (and cute girls taking self portraits), which you can see in my favorites (http://flickr.com/photos/einarsodinecs/favorites/).
like others have mentioned, you find a photographer you like and then look at their favorites and you tend to find more you like…
(i tried to post before but got tagged as spam, so i actually registered with the site…)
I came across this article today about using images on Flickr to fix your “bad” images, where is photography going if we can take a shot and then think it will be made good later???
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6936444.stm
[...] Sometime after midnight Minnesota time, Alec asked the question, “Where is the good stuff on flickr?” It is now 8:45am, and he has received 38 answers to his query, 39 if you count this one right here. Flickr is full of great stuff, it’s just a matter of finding it. As a veteran Flickr user, I’ve found that the contacts and favorites of somebody decent are usually good places to start. It’s true that you need to have at least one as a jumping off point, but if you’ve gotten yourself this far, well then you’re pretty close. [...]
Chris: that must be great when combined with portraiture.