Posted by * Visual Mindscapes *: 
Most of the time, when photographers do self portraits, they put it in thier portfolios.  It's funny because in most cases, not all, it isn't the photographer who is taking the picture.

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 

*My question is: As photographers, models, or MUAs, how do we make a distiction between art and commerce? Is there a difference?

Yes Art was here before commerce!
So at one time an artist was pure!!
Now If there is no pay there is no Art!!
Some one has been sold out!!

Posted by * Visual Mindscapes *: 
Most of the time, when photographers do self portraits, they put it in thier portfolios.  It's funny because in most cases, not all, it isn't the photographer who is taking the picture.

This is a complete surprise to me! 

I took my own self-portrait.  (And doesn't that sound redundant?)  The Rolleiflex in the image is just a prop.  The taking camera is my 4x5 view camera.  I tripped the shutter with a very long shutter cable held in my right hand.

If someone else takes the picture, is it still a self-portrait?  Okay, you composed the image.  But you didn't choose the moment, did you?  That choice lies at the heart of what we do.  I don't think you can delegate it, and still claim credit for the image.

Sanders McNew
www.mncew.net

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: [snip]... distiction between art and commerce? Is there a difference?

None if you take the view that art has a value (it does IMO). If you don't then it's called self indulgence and by definition you don't care what the rest of us think.

Posted by piers: 

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: [snip]... distiction between art and commerce? Is there a difference?

None if you take the view that art has a value (it does IMO). If you don't then it's called self indulgence and by definition you don't care what the rest of us think.

A breathtaking statement.  You've just damned entire galleries of art as exercises in either mercantilism or  self-indulgence.  The equation art=value=commerce is not always true.  Not all value is commercial.  Nor is self-indulgence the only alternative. 

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net

Posted by Atreides: 
I was having trouble finding TFP too, Chelsea, becuase no one would work with me unless they saw photos.

this didn't surprise you did it?

Posted by Atreides: 
I was having trouble finding TFP too, Chelsea, becuase no one would work with me unless they saw photos.  So I did a lot of mine with a tripod and some of them just holding the camera. I have taken extensive photography classes both in high school and college so I knew how to do it, but I think it is becoming more commonplace to have self-portraits on online portfolios!

By the way, yours are amazing, Chelsea.




thank you, I like yours a lot too. I have never taken photography classes but I want to!


xo

-Atreides

Posted by theda: 
I've been convinced that "credit" rests with s/he who presses the button. 

Once the photographer has chosen the lighting, background, camera settings, pose, and placed the camera on a tripod thereby composing the shot, I wonder what is the difference between using a timer, a remote, or an assistant to activate the camera's shutter.

Posted by sarahlouise: 
i just can't seem to seperate my passion from corporate. With my graphics i always turn everything into something I love doing whilst trying to fit the brief at the same time. If I'm not feeling what I'm doing it won't be half as good. 

I find this to be true with everything creative that I do. If I am not passionate about it, the work will suffer.

Posted by piers: 

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: [snip]... distiction between art and commerce? Is there a difference?

None if you take the view that art has a value (it does IMO). If you don't then it's called self indulgence and by definition you don't care what the rest of us think.

As long as the value of art is more than a mere monetary sum, we are in agreement.

Posted by Brian Diaz:
You are not your work.  There is a great deal of you and your personality REFLECTED in your work, but the distinction must be made.  And if you keep proper separation from your art, further separation from your commerce is much simpler...

Very well expressed.

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 

Posted by theda: 
I've been convinced that "credit" rests with s/he who presses the button. 

Once the photographer has chosen the lighting, background, camera settings, pose, and placed the camera on a tripod thereby composing the shot, I wonder what is the difference between using a timer, a remote, or an assistant to activate the camera's shutter.

I was about to say almost exactly the same thing. I have shot using mirrors, timers, releases, remotes and someone else actually pressing the button.

One of my favorite photos is me with a good friend. I only partially consider it a self portrait because a friend actually pressed the button and released the shutter, but it is almost identical to  the shot I took of him a few moments before after I set up the lights, put the camera on the tripod, framed and focused the shot.

Others might say that technically using a timer is doing the  same thing we pressed the button, but the timer actually released the shutter.

Posted by Donald Bates: 

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 

Posted by theda: 
I've been convinced that "credit" rests with s/he who presses the button. 

Once the photographer has chosen the lighting, background, camera settings, pose, and placed the camera on a tripod thereby composing the shot, I wonder what is the difference between using a timer, a remote, or an assistant to activate the camera's shutter.

I was about to say almost exactly the same thing. I have shot using mirrors, timers, releases, remotes and someone else actually pressing the button.

One of my favorite photos is me with a good friend. I only partially consider it a self portrait because a friend actually pressed the button and released the shutter, but it is almost identical to  the shot I took of him a few moments before after I set up the lights, put the camera on the tripod, framed and focused the shot.

Others might say that technically using a timer is doing the  same thing we pressed the button, but the timer actually released the shutter. 

I think there's a big difference.  With a self-timer, you set it, you know how long it will run.  To the extent you do not control the precise moment, it is a random consequence of the timer you have set in motion.  It does not have the intermediate judgment of another choosing when to trip the shutter. 

It is that judgment that matters.  Every photographer understands how many dozens of expressions cross a person's face in the span of one second.  When you put the shutter in another's hands, you delegate the selection of which of those expressions to freeze in the image.  It is an overworked phrase, but you are letting somebody else pick the decisive moment, and at that moment, I think, you lose the right to claim authoriship of the image.

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net

Posted by Sanders McNew: 

Posted by Donald Bates: 

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 

Posted by theda: 
I've been convinced that "credit" rests with s/he who presses the button. 

Once the photographer has chosen the lighting, background, camera settings, pose, and placed the camera on a tripod thereby composing the shot, I wonder what is the difference between using a timer, a remote, or an assistant to activate the camera's shutter.

I was about to say almost exactly the same thing. I have shot using mirrors, timers, releases, remotes and someone else actually pressing the button.

One of my favorite photos is me with a good friend. I only partially consider it a self portrait because a friend actually pressed the button and released the shutter, but it is almost identical to  the shot I took of him a few moments before after I set up the lights, put the camera on the tripod, framed and focused the shot.

Others might say that technically using a timer is doing the  same thing we pressed the button, but the timer actually released the shutter. 

I think there's a big difference.  With a self-timer, you set it, you know how long it will run.  To the extent you do not control the precise moment, it is a random consequence of the timer you have set in motion.  It does not have the intermediate judgment of another choosing when to trip the shutter. 

It is that judgment that matters.  Every photographer understands how many dozens of expressions cross a person's face in the span of one second.  When you put the shutter in another's hands, you delegate the selection of which of those expressions to freeze in the image.  It is an overworked phrase, but you are letting somebody else pick the decisive moment, and at that moment, I think, you lose the right to claim authoriship of the image.

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 

Posted by theda: 
I've been convinced that "credit" rests with s/he who presses the button. 

Once the photographer has chosen the lighting, background, camera settings, pose, and placed the camera on a tripod thereby composing the shot, I wonder what is the difference between using a timer, a remote, or an assistant to activate the camera's shutter.

It has everything to do with who pushes the button..

Posted by piers: 
While it might be nice to debate the matter of who is the author is as if it is only a purely artistic point,  you might want to consider it is actually a legal matter too - and arguably that is of greater significance if this is how you pay the rent.

We constantly face pressure from clients trying to claim copyright on our work just because they commissioned the shoot, art directed it, paid for the film, hired the eqipment, provided the subject matter etc etc - all; of which is BS but that doesn't stop them trying.

Most of the posters here are working under US copyright law and while it is pretty similar to the law here I'm not going to presume it is identical so please bear that in mind with what follows. The act we have does not specifiy what it takes to be considered the author of a photograph - the generally given term is "the photographer" and it is left at that. Not "the person who pressed the shutter". If it were the later we would have seen a load of assistants trying to claim rights they don't have.

Posted by piers: 
While it might be nice to debate the matter of who is the author is as if it is only a purely artistic point,  you might want to consider it is actually a legal matter too - and arguably that is of greater significance if this is how you pay the rent.

We constantly face pressure from clients trying to claim copyright on our work just because they commissioned the shoot, art directed it, paid for the film, hired the eqipment, provided the subject matter etc etc - all; of which is BS but that doesn't stop them trying.

Most of the posters here are working under US copyright law and while it is pretty similar to the law here I'm not going to presume it is identical so please bear that in mind with what follows. The act we have does not specifiy what it takes to be considered the author of a photograph - the generally given term is "the photographer" and it is left at that. Not "the person who pressed the shutter". If it were the later we would have seen a load of assistants trying to claim rights they don't have.

Legaly you are right!
in terms of actual pushing the shutter..it is that person who takes the shot..
i dont care who sets up the shot..because when it comes to clickin the shutter.some one has to do it right..
If you are at a shoot and some one else sets up the scene shoots it with a 10,000 dollar camera..and some one is standing behind him with a holga Who owns the shot and who has the better shot?

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 
You make a good point, but it's based on delegating "the selection of which of those expressions to freeze in the image."

I think a still life or product shot shows there is something beyond pushing the shutter to capture the decisive moment and claim authorship of an image.

Also, if a series of images is taken, and a photographer selects one, has he really delegated that much?

I don't see a clear enough distinction between the contribution of a timer and a human in a self portrait or any image.
[snip]

Several points:

First, a still life or a product shot is not a portrait.  A portrait is all about capturing something fleeting in a living, complex, animate subject.  Timing is everything in portraiture.  No so in a product shot or a still life. 

Second, the fact that the photographer chooses from a selection does not make him the one who created the options in the first place.  By the same analogy, does an editor have the right to claim authorship in an image because she chooses it from the portfolio put on her desk?

Third, a self-timer is different because there is no artistic judgment made as to the timing of the shutter.  The artistic judgment at work is the photographer's in choosing the randomness of a timed shutter fire.  Put a person's thumb on the button and that person will wait for a moment she finds opportune.  Her judgment, in the end, chooses the moment, and the element of randomness is lost. 

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net

Posted by Sanders McNew: 

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 
You make a good point, but it's based on delegating "the selection of which of those expressions to freeze in the image."

I think a still life or product shot shows there is something beyond pushing the shutter to capture the decisive moment and claim authorship of an image.

Also, if a series of images is taken, and a photographer selects one, has he really delegated that much?

I don't see a clear enough distinction between the contribution of a timer and a human in a self portrait or any image.
[snip]

Several points:

First, a still life or a product shot is not a portrait.  A portrait is all about capturing something fleeting in a living, complex, animate subject.  Timing is everything in portraiture.  No so in a product shot or a still life. 

Second, the fact that the photographer chooses from a selection does not make him the one who created the options in the first place.  By the same analogy, does an editor have the right to claim authorship in an image because she chooses it from the portfolio put on her desk?

Third, a self-timer is different because there is no artistic judgment made as to the timing of the shutter.  The artistic judgment at work is the photographer's in choosing the randomness of a timed shutter fire.  Put a person's thumb on the button and that person will wait for a moment she finds opportune.  Her judgment, in the end, chooses the moment, and the element of randomness is lost. 

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net

Posted by XtremeArtists ®: 
I see your point, and regardless of the poisoned thoughts of those who only worry about copyright and commerce, I think that there is more to being an author than pressing a button. Any GWC can press a button, but composing a shot, selecting a subject, finding a suitable location, setting up lighting, choosing a theme, selecting wardrobe, picking a lens, selecting an apature, putting together a set, etc... are all things that I consider to be part of the work of an author.

When I create an image, no matter how simple or complex, it has already been created in my mind before it is captured by the camera. There are no surprises in my photos.

It is my idea. At the moment that I have conceived and planned the shot, I am the author.

Fair enough.  I don't mean to suggest that tripping the shutter is the only defining task of a photographer's work -- of course a photographer does much more than that.  My only point is that in portraiture, the choice of moments captured is at the heart of the photographer's job.  I was reading last night about how Avedon created his portraits in his American West series.  He was shooting with a Deardorff 8x10-inch camera, and would stand next to the lens and engage his subject  while his assistants would be loading and unloading the film holders.  But it was Avedon's thumb on the shutter cable button.