|
Forums >
Newbie Forum >
GWC vs. Artist?
One man's GWC is another man's Artist! Jun 25 12 08:37 pm Link -B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote: Like Terry R ?? Jun 25 12 08:49 pm Link I think the whole thing is a bit overblown. To me a GWC is someone who just wants to shoot models to shoot models and be around them. The image isn't as important as being able to say "hey, I shoot models - naked ones too" to his friends. I don't think what you make from your photography matters as much as intent. I've been shooting seriously for about two years now. I don't have an MFA in photography and I've never apprenticed. For those reasons alone, some would call me a GWC but I consider myself an artist (as egotistical as that may seem). I also don't consider myself a professional even though I do make some money through Getty. Because I don't make my living through photography is enough for some people to call me a GWC. I also pay for bookings. Another apparent GWC thing to some. Basic point? Labels are labels. Screw it. Do you want to learn the craft of photography? Are you seriously critiquing what you do and are you striving to move from the snapshot to a well composed photo? Are you shooting cliches or concepts? These are the things that matter. The rest is fluff. Jun 25 12 08:55 pm Link False Dichotomy - many definitely non-GWCs are far from artists many complete GWCs are actually very much artists Jun 25 12 09:00 pm Link I've been called a GWC. After looking at the port of whoever made the statement, I didn't really worry about it. I've been in pleanty of shows, (took some awards in group shows) had my own solo shows & have been published. Even been tracked down by a musician took use an image for a CD cover. Just make the images you make & keep improving. Jun 25 12 09:00 pm Link Fotografica Gregor wrote: +1 Jun 25 12 09:06 pm Link CLiKK wrote: The gender, age and thematic narrative mix of portraiture in one's book... the greater the diversity the more likely the maturity and tenure of artist... but this is Model Mayhem... might be wise ask your question to an art director and listen carefully to his/her reply... Jun 26 12 01:42 pm Link CLiKK wrote: GWC vs. Artist are among many generalized subsets that basically describe personality types. Jun 26 12 01:51 pm Link Fotografica Gregor wrote: +1 I have also noticed that some here at Model Mayhem who claim to be "Professional" Photographers have and will used the term "GWC" in a manner that try's to degrade and put down beginning and amateur photographers. Jun 26 12 01:59 pm Link As the term has evolved, in my opinion, GWC has become more annotation on behavior than a quantification of finished results. Jun 26 12 02:10 pm Link Artist GWC here  Jun 26 12 02:49 pm Link This post is awesome. I didn't intend to stir up a hornets nest, either! So where does the guy selling stock photography fit? I don't mean Getty but like IStock? I've made some money there over the years, but I know it can be argued that "commercial" stock photography isn't the same as "artistic", right? Jun 26 12 07:49 pm Link CLiKK wrote: Where do stock shooters fit in the GWC framework? I don't think they are related issues. Jun 26 12 08:29 pm Link The label is based on intentions, not quality of end result. Jun 26 12 08:36 pm Link S B Photos wrote: Exactly. Jun 27 12 11:54 am Link I wanted to come back to this for a second. Trying to debate about whether better equipment makes better art, in terms of photography, is futile in my opinion. It's a necessity to be more than a one trick pony to have a fair amount of equipment, better glass etc. and it's nothing like painting in that regard. Are there people that have a butt load of equipment and bad taste? ABSOLUTLEY, but photographers with good taste have to stockpile equipment be it commercially manufactured and/or self-designed and good glass to explore various styles of artistic expression. Jan 22 13 06:47 am Link There are many very talented photographers - artists if you will - who are "GWCs" in that a main focus of their work is to be around naked girls and perhaps take a run at some of them. there are crappy photographers who are gentlemen as well artist versus GWC is a faulty dichotomy the ones who are really **dangerous** are the ones who are brilliant photographers because they draw in llamas - the llamas who work with them do not expect problems and may be more vulnerable due to the quality of their work. back channel the ones I've heard about from highly trusted llamas who got away with doing the most damage over time - or who still are - are all very good photographers. Jan 22 13 06:54 am Link I don't know, talented photographers that are pervish sexual predators should just be called that instead of a newer-agey acronym that tends to define less pervasive people that are in and out of "The Industry" at almost the same rate as one bat an eyelash. Jan 22 13 09:45 am Link Teila K Day Photography wrote: Exactly what I was thinking. Jan 22 13 09:57 am Link CLiKK wrote: No. Jan 22 13 09:57 am Link CLiKK wrote: STOCK PHOTOGRAPHY!? Jan 22 13 10:22 am Link These are my definitions: Artist: someone who strives for art. It doesn't matter about their level of experience or the fanciness of their gear -- but a willingness to learn, willingness to create something, a thought, a feeling, an aesthetic. GWC: A guy who likes looking at/taking pictures of pretty girls. That's it. Poetry, art...maybe those happen as an accidental side effect. I've worked with plenty of GWCs who have had decades of experience, great gear, great understanding of how the gear works. But they were only there to shoot pictures of a pretty girl, to spend time *around* a pretty girl. That was it. Jan 22 13 10:30 am Link A real GWC uses a large format camera but doesn't bother to load the film holders  Jan 22 13 10:34 am Link i think for glamour at least it's important to like the girls, to like spending time with them. hopefully that will translate into good chemistry on set, a happy model and good pictures. terry richardson certainly seems to have done ok for himself. and i remember an interview with one playboy photographer about why he got started and it was like "um, pretty girls?" when i'm shooting glamour i want to crank up the music and feel happy and i want the model to be feeling good so they can give a good performance. otherwise i just can't get the pics i want. i don't think liking pretty girls and making good pictures is mutually exclusive. in fact for glamour i think if you're too clinical about it you will get art nudes not glamour. so maybe it partly depends on the genre. for my part i don't care about art. i care about making money to pay the bills. and i do enjoy spending time with models. it's a fun hobby. i wouldn't keep doing it if it weren't fun (i get paid by brides, not models). local photographers come by the studio and we show&tell our latest model shoots. if that makes me a GWC then so be it. but really i think we should be judged on our images (which can get into the whole "art vs. porn" thing), not on what may be going through our minds when we shoot those images. and of course the guys who prey on the models and harass them are bad. let's keep it respectful unless there is mutual interest in more. as far as models are concerned i think they should be worried about PWCs (perverts with cameras). guys who may cross that line from thinking about something to doing something about it without permission. Abby Hawkins wrote: Jan 22 13 10:37 am Link Images by MR wrote: How original. You must have lost several nights sleep thinking that up. Jan 22 13 11:46 am Link Black Dog Studios RI wrote: I was going to write something along these lines, but you beat me to it and stated it so well. Jan 22 13 11:57 am Link I am just a GWC-WABL That's 'With A Big Lens' Jan 22 13 12:11 pm Link CLiKK wrote: If you are worried whether you are GWC, chances are you're not. Jan 22 13 12:25 pm Link Elvis has left the building  Jan 22 13 12:33 pm Link eos3_300 wrote: Ha ha ha ! Jan 22 13 12:34 pm Link -B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote: +1 Jan 22 13 12:50 pm Link -B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote: +1 Jan 22 13 12:51 pm Link ah, an old thread is like a fine wine.... Jan 22 13 12:54 pm Link The Term GWC doesn't mean anything. its just a slang used to degrade someone. But it could be a number of things. If you think about it. Guy With Camera,Girl With Camera, Girl Without Clothes and so on! But I think there is more appropriate way to describe someone. Jan 22 13 01:20 pm Link ButchArri wrote: -B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote: This. Jan 22 13 02:08 pm Link Rik Image wrote: Oh, LOL, damn necro threads... Jan 22 13 03:03 pm Link Be You! Have Fun! The rest is the white noise in the background! :-) Jan 22 13 03:03 pm Link |
