The old adage holds true that it’s all about who you know. One of the main reasons that my composition teacher encouraged me to go to film festivals was for the networking opportunities. I went mainly for an excuse to travel, as I don’t get many opportunities for vacation, and the festival usually would pay for room and board. I’ll say though that I can only take so much of it at one time so everyone would be partying late into the night and even with free beer I only stuck around for a limited time. Who did I really want to meet? How about a girlfriend; oh well. I did meet a few like-minded people and stay in touch with them slightly, though I’ve let that slide a bit in the last year or so. In fact to be truthful I haven’t really hung out with anyone for a long time. Every once in a while I go out for drinks with one of my church friends but that’s about it. I think when I lived in Colorado Springs and close to campus I did a lot more socializing, but now I’m just holed up in the mountains. A typical night for me is watching TV and perhaps having a glass of whisky. So maybe there’s the potential that I’m hurting my future career by not getting out there, and I suppose I could change that but the reality is that I’m exhausted and don’t feel like it.
It was in a way comforting I suppose, that the rules haven’t changed much (if at all) since the days of Duchamp and Schoenberg, but also dispiriting.
If there’s anything I know after taking photo classes since 2013, it’s that seeking the advice of my peers and getting their opinions on my best images helps me go a lot further than just putting work up in a vacuum and waiting to see what they say during the critique. I have no idea why so many people say that some images of mine are their favorite, when really they’re ones I couldn’t care less about myself. Too close to my own work perhaps? The whole last time I was taking Advanced Photo I was relying solely upon others’ opinions on which way to take the project because I had such a hard time finding the images interesting. I don’t necessarily get the associations that others do having certain images next to each other either, so I’ll rely on others as much as their willing to determine sequence as well. What I was really hoping this article would do was give me a little insight into how I could better pick images myself and know which ones are the best ones, but sadly it was a disappointment there, this article seems mostly to tell someone with no knowledge of photography what a photo editor does, if it even does that. Honestly I think reading this article was a waste of time. The pictures were nice, though.
(sorry, couldn’t get that big ad to go away)
I once got an opportunity to photograph Trump myself, and also was pretty interested in Ben Rasmussen’s stories about him. I like that the New York Times is interviewing a photographer, and find it interesting in a meta sense that they have interviewed one of their own staff photographers. And it’s an interesting insight into the man, reading this interview, like how much access he gives to photographers not only in content but his time. I can see an in into my own work here in that he’s an outsider that’s been granted access, so he’s in this very privileged position and he’s photographing some of the most powerful and famous people in the world. I’d call that pretty exciting and I have to admit that I’m a bit jealous. Looking at these photos, I think I gained a bit more understanding on the lure of celebrity and pop culture. I love the long paragraph where he goes into the differences in photographing different Presidents over the years; I love all the stories.
I don’t follow the news too closely so I’ve never seen any of these photos before, but Doug Mills’ photos seem to be what I expected from a White House photographer, and it gives me a bit of insight into what modern news photography looks like. I can’t say that I’m all that impressed with the look of it from a purely visual perspective, I guess I’d just as soon have it all be Tri-X and Cinestill 800T, but then the Times would probably never hire me if I insisted on shooting on film, which means the Times will never hire me.