Pretty funny. I'm still not sure what qualified Johnson as a photographer though, online or otherwise. Does he actually make images or just write about them?
Guy
Posted by Tom Gallione on June 26, 2006 at 12:03 PM
Guy, he certainly does write alot about photography but I can't say that I've ever seen an image made by him. Maybe you know already but he used to write The Sunday Morning Photographer over at the Luminous Landscape and the 37th Frame newsletter - http://www.37thframe.com/
Tom, yes, I did look him up and found his site and blog. For someone calling himself an "online photographer" he sure has a whole lot of "online" and not a heck of a lot of "photographer"
Guy
Posted by Tom Gallione on June 26, 2006 at 12:25 PM
I agree. I suppose that brings up the question, "Does one need to be an active participant in the field they are critiquing?" My immediate answer would be "yes", but in other disciplines that is not always the case. I doubt that all music, food or wine critics are.
That may not be comparing apples to apples but makes me wonder to what extent is my receiving of another's critique is affected by what I think of them as a photographer.
Tom, I agree critics don't necessarily need to excel in creating the things they critique, but Johnson is not critiquing images here - he's taking cheap shots at people. When you do that there's a big difference between someone poking fun at themselves or others in the same circle vs. an outsider who's just trying to cash in on the joke (and he literally does cash in - his web sites are loaded with stuff for sale).
Guy
Posted by Tom Gallione on June 26, 2006 at 1:31 PM
Well, I'm not going to sit here and judge the guy's motives. I posted the link because I thought his comments were funny and true. I don't think he's taking cheap shots at people as much as he is satirizing a mode of thinking that is prevalent today.
Tom, I apologize, I wasn't asking you to defend anyone. I appreciate you posting interesting links.
This is just my own pet peeve with this type of critic - someone who sits on the sidelines, slings mud and pokes fun at those who actually practice the craft and trying to grab a piece of the action - totally my personal perception and not intended to put you on the spot.
That said, I don't know the first thing about Mr. Johnson so I was wondering if anyone knew of any actual photography he has created.
Very esoteric. Once people graduate from the mediocrity of Internet nature photgraphy forums, they can have Mr. Johnston provide real critique.
"The internet is in danger of becoming one great big photography club—which often act as arbiters of oppressive group standards, almost always superficial ones. We need to take artists at their word."
The photo above is real art. Really - take my word for it.
Posted by Tom Gallione on June 26, 2006 at 2:51 PM
Hey Jim. I think you need to crop 50% from the right, 50% from the left, 50% from the bottom, and 50% from the top. It also looks like you missed focusing on the nose. Anyone who shoots shots like this should know that you focus on the nose.
I think you should have either included both the hands or neither. Chopping hands like this is a bad idea. You get 2/7 for creativity and 1/7 for tech.
Guy,
Why does someone need to be a photographer to give a useful critique? I find I get more useful information from non photographers.
From photographers it is usually critiqued from a technical standpoint, which I couldn't care less about. That is if anyone at all has the gumption to critique at all.
Jim, I have no problem with any critique from anyone - photographer or otherwise. My question was specifically about the credentials of someone who calls himself "the online photographer", and has a lot (much of it bad) to say about photography. I make it a point to consider such commentary in the context of its source. I certainly do place more value on words coming from a source I consider credible or respected, so I was inquiring about Mr. Johnson. So far I have not been able to get a good idea of who he is and what value to place on his observations.
Guy
Posted by Tom Gallione on June 26, 2006 at 3:57 PM
Not sure if this makes him a credible source or not...
Writer and photographer Mike Johnston is the publisher of The 37th Frame, an ink-on-paper quarterly for hard-core photography enthusiasts and imaging professionals. It goes out to a "who's who" of famous photographers, pros, museum curators, photo magazine editors, critics, textbook authors, hobbyists, and photography instructors and professors in sixteen different countries. The 37th Frame is available to anyone who wants to subscribe.
A 1985 BFA graduate of the Photography program at the Corcoran College of Art and Design in Washington, D.C., Mike Johnston has been a photography teacher, freelance photographer, and custom exhibition printer. He was East Coast Editor of Camera & Darkroom magazine from 1988 to 1994 and Editor-in-Chief of PHOTO Techniques magazine from 1994-2000, where his editorial column "The 37th Frame" was a popular feature and where he presented, among other things, a set of three articles on "bokeh" by John Kennerdell, Oren Grad, and Harold Merklinger that were subsequently widely discussed among photographers.
His critical and technical writings have appeared in various publications and newsletters such as The Washington Review and D-Max. A number of his articles written under the pseudonym "L. T. Gray" (el Tigre) appeared in the English magazine Darkroom User. He currently writes a regular monthly column for the English magazine Black & White Photography. A single parent with one young son, he lives in Wisconsin. Johnston's next book, The Empirical Photographer: Essays and Photographs 1980-2000 is currently in search of a publisher.
Tom,
I believe it does. Probably more than the pimply faced kid that just received his first camera, and just learned how to push a button. In this instance is he considered a photographer?
I got quite a kick out of Mike Johnsons article. Regardless of his photography skills his comments were not only humorous, but ironically true to the mark for some of the critiques I've read. I've kept up with some of Mike J's editorials for a while here and there and have enjoyed his writing. Of course we here at NPN are above such missconceived critiques, but a short visit to photodotnet will display many examples of his comments styles.
I laughed out loud. I didn't look twice at the bona fides of who was teaching me a lesson about pretension. I've come to realize I need those lessons now and then. A person who questions the source of the lesson usually isn't open to learning lessons.
Posted by Scott Hussey on June 26, 2006 at 7:05 PM
I'm familiar with Mike Johnson from when he used to write Sunday Morning Photographer. Luminous Landscape and Steve's Digicams used to carry it. As far as I can tell, The Online Photographer is actually the name of the blog, not a self proclaimed title. There is more than one photographer that posts to the blog as well. I have seen some of Mike Johnson's photographs too (and I like some of them), and he uses the gear he writes about.
I realize he was being satirical, and I realize I am not Garry Winogrand or Edward Steichen, but I have received similar comments here on NPN. I wonder if some of the photographs used as examples in the original post were posted here on NPN, what the reaction would be.
I am paraphrasing something I have said before since I can't remember my exact words. It is possible to learn a lot from critiques, but they can also be constraining and can stifle creativity and breed conformity.
I think the value of critiques to a specific individual depends on a lot on that individual. Where someone is in their learning process and what they are trying to accomplish are going to determine if critiques are going to be a useful learning tool. When discussing the pursuit of art, there is not going to be a one size fits all solution.
Posted by Eric Fredine on June 26, 2006 at 7:49 PM
From wikipedia:
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally "argument against the person") or attacking the messenger, involves replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself. It is usually, though not always, a logical fallacy (see Validity below).
Posted by Mark Hobson on June 27, 2006 at 10:58 AM
have been enjoying mr. Johnson's musing/writing for years...spot on accurate and funny...although, i don't know whether to cry or wind my watch...
Discussion
23 replieshttp://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/06/great-photographers-on-internet.html
and a follow-up post - http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/06/wicked.html
Pretty funny. I'm still not sure what qualified Johnson as a photographer though, online or otherwise. Does he actually make images or just write about them?
Guy
Guy
That may not be comparing apples to apples but makes me wonder to what extent is my receiving of another's critique is affected by what I think of them as a photographer.
Guy
This is just my own pet peeve with this type of critic - someone who sits on the sidelines, slings mud and pokes fun at those who actually practice the craft and trying to grab a piece of the action - totally my personal perception and not intended to put you on the spot.
That said, I don't know the first thing about Mr. Johnson so I was wondering if anyone knew of any actual photography he has created.
Guy
Guy
"The internet is in danger of becoming one great big photography club—which often act as arbiters of oppressive group standards, almost always superficial ones. We need to take artists at their word."
The photo above is real art. Really - take my word for it.
Nathan
Nathan
Why does someone need to be a photographer to give a useful critique? I find I get more useful information from non photographers.
From photographers it is usually critiqued from a technical standpoint, which I couldn't care less about. That is if anyone at all has the gumption to critique at all.
Guy
Writer and photographer Mike Johnston is the publisher of The 37th Frame, an ink-on-paper quarterly for hard-core photography enthusiasts and imaging professionals. It goes out to a "who's who" of famous photographers, pros, museum curators, photo magazine editors, critics, textbook authors, hobbyists, and photography instructors and professors in sixteen different countries. The 37th Frame is available to anyone who wants to subscribe.
A 1985 BFA graduate of the Photography program at the Corcoran College of Art and Design in Washington, D.C., Mike Johnston has been a photography teacher, freelance photographer, and custom exhibition printer. He was East Coast Editor of Camera & Darkroom magazine from 1988 to 1994 and Editor-in-Chief of PHOTO Techniques magazine from 1994-2000, where his editorial column "The 37th Frame" was a popular feature and where he presented, among other things, a set of three articles on "bokeh" by John Kennerdell, Oren Grad, and Harold Merklinger that were subsequently widely discussed among photographers.
His critical and technical writings have appeared in various publications and newsletters such as The Washington Review and D-Max. A number of his articles written under the pseudonym "L. T. Gray" (el Tigre) appeared in the English magazine Darkroom User. He currently writes a regular monthly column for the English magazine Black & White Photography. A single parent with one young son, he lives in Wisconsin. Johnston's next book, The Empirical Photographer: Essays and Photographs 1980-2000 is currently in search of a publisher.
from http://www.photo.net/mjohnston/
I believe it does. Probably more than the pimply faced kid that just received his first camera, and just learned how to push a button. In this instance is he considered a photographer?
I realize he was being satirical, and I realize I am not Garry Winogrand or Edward Steichen, but I have received similar comments here on NPN. I wonder if some of the photographs used as examples in the original post were posted here on NPN, what the reaction would be.
I am paraphrasing something I have said before since I can't remember my exact words. It is possible to learn a lot from critiques, but they can also be constraining and can stifle creativity and breed conformity.
I think the value of critiques to a specific individual depends on a lot on that individual. Where someone is in their learning process and what they are trying to accomplish are going to determine if critiques are going to be a useful learning tool. When discussing the pursuit of art, there is not going to be a one size fits all solution.
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally "argument against the person") or attacking the messenger, involves replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself. It is usually, though not always, a logical fallacy (see Validity below).
this particular piece pretty much restates my NPN article - Nice Comp Ansel, But I Would Have Used Color Film