# Examples of my Work:



## Clay Howard-Smith (Dec 2, 2011)

Hello,

I'm new to the forum and thought I would share some of my work.  Feel free to comment on the website too! Clay Howard-Smith Photography | All Avenues of Photography

Thanks for taking a look,

Clay Howard-Smith


----------



## bobnr32 (Dec 2, 2011)

Nobody will click on an unknown site from a noob.
If you are serious post your pics.


----------



## Clay Howard-Smith (Dec 2, 2011)

I'm sorry to hear that, I'm sure you've run into problems in the past.  At any rate I can assure you there is nothing offensive on my website, I was purely trying to share my work.  I would prefer that you view my work through the website as it was intended to be viewed. I'll post a screen-shot for you of the homepage so that you can make the call as to wether or not view it. 

Thanks,

Clay Howard-Smith


----------



## shootermcgavin (Dec 2, 2011)

I checked it out, it's not my cup of tea.  Artistically I think they are off the mark a bit, too dark.  Not sure what exactly you are going for.


----------



## o hey tyler (Dec 2, 2011)

Your website appears to load quite slowly. It would be helpful for you to link the images here.


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Dec 2, 2011)

Many will refuse to view the site out of principle. Not only due to trust, but it also comes off as lazy when you don't post the pics in the thread. Why should I take the time reviewing your pics when you couldn't even take the time to post the images on the site? That makes me automatically assume (whether its accurate or not ) that you are just out for a pat on the back with no intention of actually being a participating member of this forum. You also have 4 posts since 2009, which helps enforce that notion.I do not mean this to be snarky or mean, just making you aware of it.


----------



## Clay Howard-Smith (Dec 2, 2011)

Well as I expressed earlier in my reply I am not interested in posting single images here. I mainly create linear/non-linear series so posting little snippets isn't how I want you to view my work.  It's not an act of laziness, but an artistic decision.  I can't be resposbile for how you view my work shootermcgavin.  There are clear choices that I made in order to represent my ideas and simply saying you don't like them isn't helpful in the least.  There is no definition or forumla to take the "perfect" image. I'm sorry if you can't see the merit in my technique.  I choose to leave areas of my photographs dark because I'm playing with the idea of emptiness and the continual decisive moment.  As for my participation in the forum I would like to apologize and would be happy to contribute in the future (super busy), and I'm not out for a pat on the back. I'm looking for good constructive criticism.  I think it's a bit ridiculous how you all appear to be attacking me when I was just trying to share some of my world with you.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 2, 2011)

Welcome to the forum!


----------



## Clay Howard-Smith (Dec 2, 2011)

Haha thanks Bitter


----------



## Big Mike (Dec 2, 2011)

> I think it's a bit ridiculous how you all appear to be attacking me when I was just trying to share some of my world with you.


Nobody is attacking you....just explaining the local customs.


----------



## Clay Howard-Smith (Dec 2, 2011)

Hey Big Mike can you please delete this whole thread.  

Thanks,

Clay


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 2, 2011)

Clay Howard-Smith said:


> Well as I expressed earlier in my reply I am not interested in posting single images here. I mainly create linear/non-linear series so posting little snippets isn't how I want you to view my work.  It's not an act of laziness, but an artistic decision.  I can't be resposbile for how you view my work shootermcgavin.  There are clear choices that I made in order to represent my ideas and simply saying you don't like them isn't helpful in the least.  There is no definition or forumla to take the "perfect" image. I'm sorry if you can't see the merit in my technique.  I choose to leave areas of my photographs dark because I'm playing with the idea of emptiness and the continual decisive moment.  As for my participation in the forum I would like to apologize and would be happy to contribute in the future (super busy), and I'm not out for a pat on the back. I'm looking for good constructive criticism.  I think it's a bit ridiculous how you all appear to be attacking me when I was just trying to share some of my world with you.



Possibly if you were to post a few... it would generate enough interest and curiosity that some would go to your site to see the rest.


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 2, 2011)

I think one or two shots are nice..... but as a whole, most of the series don't do anything for me.

The Death and Rebirth is somewhat interesting, but I think it comes across in a very macabre way entirely, rather than the joy that would be associated with rebirth. 

However, you may be very successful.. since there is a large segment of the population that seems to care more about oddity and weirdness... than they do the actual artistic value!

(not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)


----------



## Clay Howard-Smith (Dec 2, 2011)

cgipson1, I just looked at your work and I feel the same way about you.  Where is the artistic value in taking landscape photos?  You could argue that you're creating art through some Duchamp complex, but I would certainty beg to differ.  There isn't artistic value in your work, you're barely succeeding from a technical standpoint.  None of your images that I sampled were anything spectacular.  If you're gonna create boring, rehashed, nature shots then you might as well strive to be the best.  You're the type of person that aspires to shoot for National Geographic, but never will.  In a short and endless unromanticized process that ultimately leaves you with nothing.   That's not even the real crime though, the real crime is how you tarnish what fine artists have worked endlessly to establish.  You call yourself an artist, but where is your concept?  I don't see one.  Perhaps there is one, maybe underlying, but in the end all you have created is ineffective visual data.  My friend, perhaps you should consider putting down the camera and attending a fine art class at your local community college then maybe you would understand what art truly is.  You're a technology whore that believes a better camera takes a better image.  You lack inspiration, and that becomes crystal clear in the rendering of your images.  The images you provide appeal to a larger audience because they are uneducated, not because they are good; they are pedestrian images in the best scenario. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 2, 2011)

hahaha... methinks I hit a sore spot!  


After all.. you did ask for C&C! I actually did so.. and you get pissed off! I find that amusing... it says a lot about you!   

Your little "school" clique has probably been telling you how "wonderful" you are.. and the real world isn't pleasant for you! We call that the "Facebook Syndrome!"  lol!


----------



## kundalini (Dec 2, 2011)

Clay Howard-Smith said:


> cgipson1, ............. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)


 Really?

On the surface, your comments seemed to be a "phuque you buddy" only in retaliation of Charlie's opinion of your work. 

If you truely wanted this thread to be deleted (post #11), you would have simply walked away. Now it seems you are only whinging from a bruised ego. Sorry to say, but you can't have it both ways. If you do want your cake and eat it too, try Sara Lee.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 2, 2011)

Clay Howard-Smith said:


> cgipson1, I just looked at your work and I feel the same way about you.  Where is the artistic value in taking landscape photos?  You could argue that you're creating art through some Duchamp complex, but I would certainty beg to differ.  There isn't artistic value in your work, you're barely succeeding from a technical standpoint.  None of your images that I sampled were anything spectacular.  If you're gonna create boring, rehashed, nature shots then you might as well strive to be the best.  You're the type of person that aspires to shoot for National Geographic, but never will.  In a short and endless unromanticized process that ultimately leaves you with nothing.   That's not even the real crime though, the real crime is how you tarnish what fine artists have worked endlessly to establish.  You call yourself an artist, but where is your concept?  I don't see one.  Perhaps there is one, maybe underlying, but in the end all you have created is ineffective visual data.  My friend, perhaps you should consider putting down the camera and attending a fine art class at your local community college then maybe you would understand what art truly is.  You're a technology whore that believes a better camera takes a better image.  You lack inspiration, and that becomes crystal clear in the rendering of your images.  The images you provide appeal to a larger audience because they are uneducated, not because they are good; they are pedestrian images in the best scenario. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)





Do me next! Do me next!

Flickr: Bitter Jeweler's Photostream


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 2, 2011)

Damn.. I like that! I am a TECHNOLOGY WHORE! Yaaaaayyyy!!!!


----------



## o hey tyler (Dec 2, 2011)

Clay Howard-Smith said:


> cgipson1, I just looked at your work and I feel the same way about you.  Where is the artistic value in taking landscape photos?  You could argue that you're creating art through some Duchamp complex, but I would certainty beg to differ.  There isn't artistic value in your work, you're barely succeeding from a technical standpoint.  None of your images that I sampled were anything spectacular.  If you're gonna create boring, rehashed, nature shots then you might as well strive to be the best.  You're the type of person that aspires to shoot for National Geographic, but never will.  In a short and endless unromanticized process that ultimately leaves you with nothing.   That's not even the real crime though, the real crime is how you tarnish what fine artists have worked endlessly to establish.  You call yourself an artist, but where is your concept?  I don't see one.  Perhaps there is one, maybe underlying, but in the end all you have created is ineffective visual data.  My friend, perhaps you should consider putting down the camera and attending a fine art class at your local community college then maybe you would understand what art truly is.  You're a technology whore that believes a better camera takes a better image.  You lack inspiration, and that becomes crystal clear in the rendering of your images.  The images you provide appeal to a larger audience because they are uneducated, not because they are good; they are pedestrian images in the best scenario. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)



That was douchey and uncalled for. Especially coming from an 18 year old college freshman who probably hasn't studied fine art ever in his life. Interesting attacks from someone who essentially has walled themselves into light painting and doesn't do anything else. I understand all you have is a D50 and kit lens, but don't get mad at others because they have more invested into photography than you do. Grow up. 

Not trying to be rude... Just my opinion.


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 2, 2011)

LIGHT PAINTING! <snicker!>


----------



## Overread (Dec 2, 2011)

Oh and me! 
Flickr: Overread2000's Photostream

edit - darn it I take more than 10 seconds to make a post and you guys all jump in ahead of me


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 2, 2011)

Clay.. see how nice everyone is? They are offering a new career as a critic! 

You know what they say...  "if you can't play, then coach!!".. so I guess this is the art worlds version of that...."If you can't be an artist, be a critic!"


----------



## MTVision (Dec 2, 2011)

Clay Howard-Smith said:
			
		

> cgipson1, I just looked at your work and I feel the same way about you.  Where is the artistic value in taking landscape photos?  You could argue that you're creating art through some Duchamp complex, but I would certainty beg to differ.  There isn't artistic value in your work, you're barely succeeding from a technical standpoint.  None of your images that I sampled were anything spectacular.  If you're gonna create boring, rehashed, nature shots then you might as well strive to be the best.  You're the type of person that aspires to shoot for National Geographic, but never will.  In a short and endless unromanticized process that ultimately leaves you with nothing.   That's not even the real crime though, the real crime is how you tarnish what fine artists have worked endlessly to establish.  You call yourself an artist, but where is your concept?  I don't see one.  Perhaps there is one, maybe underlying, but in the end all you have created is ineffective visual data.  My friend, perhaps you should consider putting down the camera and attending a fine art class at your local community college then maybe you would understand what art truly is.  You're a technology whore that believes a better camera takes a better image.  You lack inspiration, and that becomes crystal clear in the rendering of your images.  The images you provide appeal to a larger audience because they are uneducated, not because they are good; they are pedestrian images in the best scenario. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)





			
				Clay Howard-Smith said:
			
		

> cgipson1, I just looked at your work and I feel the same way about you.  Where is the artistic value in taking landscape photos?  You could argue that you're creating art through some Duchamp complex, but I would certainty beg to differ.  There isn't artistic value in your work, you're barely succeeding from a technical standpoint.  None of your images that I sampled were anything spectacular.  If you're gonna create boring, rehashed, nature shots then you might as well strive to be the best.  You're the type of person that aspires to shoot for National Geographic, but never will.  In a short and endless unromanticized process that ultimately leaves you with nothing.   That's not even the real crime though, the real crime is how you tarnish what fine artists have worked endlessly to establish.  You call yourself an artist, but where is your concept?  I don't see one.  Perhaps there is one, maybe underlying, but in the end all you have created is ineffective visual data.  My friend, perhaps you should consider putting down the camera and attending a fine art class at your local community college then maybe you would understand what art truly is.  You're a technology whore that believes a better camera takes a better image.  You lack inspiration, and that becomes crystal clear in the rendering of your images.  The images you provide appeal to a larger audience because they are uneducated, not because they are good; they are pedestrian images in the best scenario. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)



Wow! I didn't realize cgipson was asking for YOU to critique his work. You asked the people on this forum to go to your website and critique YOUR work!   Welcome to the forum!


----------



## SCraig (Dec 2, 2011)

Clay Howard-Smith said:


> cgipson1, I just looked at your work and I feel the same way about you.  Where is the artistic value in taking landscape photos?  You could argue that you're creating art through some Duchamp complex, but I would certainty beg to differ.  There isn't artistic value in your work, you're barely succeeding from a technical standpoint.  None of your images that I sampled were anything spectacular.  If you're gonna create boring, rehashed, nature shots then you might as well strive to be the best.  You're the type of person that aspires to shoot for National Geographic, but never will.  In a short and endless unromanticized process that ultimately leaves you with nothing.   That's not even the real crime though, the real crime is how you tarnish what fine artists have worked endlessly to establish.  You call yourself an artist, but where is your concept?  I don't see one.  Perhaps there is one, maybe underlying, but in the end all you have created is ineffective visual data.  My friend, perhaps you should consider putting down the camera and attending a fine art class at your local community college then maybe you would understand what art truly is.  You're a technology whore that believes a better camera takes a better image.  You lack inspiration, and that becomes crystal clear in the rendering of your images.  The images you provide appeal to a larger audience because they are uneducated, not because they are good; they are pedestrian images in the best scenario. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)


I think you may have inadvertently answered your own question as to why you are not getting rave reviews of your work.  I glanced at your photographs and to be quite honest the only ones there that appealed to me at all were those taken in Kenya.  It's not from a technical standpoint, it's just that I never took a course in fine art either so apparently I'm also unable to appreciate your work.

Art, and what one construes as being art, are completely and entirely in the eye of the beholder.  What you perceive as art I may perceive as a waste of bandwidth.  What I perceive as art you may perceive as a waste of bandwidth.  That, in and of itself, means nothing.  It simply means that we have differing tastes in what we appreciate.  You like abstractions, I do not.  I like nature and wildlife, you do not.  That does not mean that either are wrong or less "Artistic" only that they are viewed differently by two different people.

If you like what you produce then by all means keep doing it your way.  I like what I do so I'll keep doing it my way.  The same goes for everyone here.  Personally, as I've said before: My views on art are like my views on wine.  If someone has to explain to me why I should like it I'll take a beer.  Right now I think I'll go have a beer.


----------



## Mike Lamb (Dec 2, 2011)

I'm not interested (and that seems to be a common drift) in going to go to your website to see your pics.  

And you are not interested in posting images on this forum.  So it's pretty simple.  Go away.


----------



## GrantH (Dec 2, 2011)

I tried to view your photos, though the link you provided. It doesn't work. If we can't see your site, how do you figure we may see your photos?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 2, 2011)

Link works fine here.



Clay, if you can get past this fine thread, I hope you stick around to help others on the forum. There are not many people here who have studied art as a college major and there is a great need for more voices that speak from that background. You can help educate all the "Charlies" of the forum. You might even find yourself in some hot art debate. Please, Clay, make yourself at home. The beer is in the fridge an the nuts are all over the board.


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 2, 2011)

GrantH said:


> I tried to view your photos, though the link you provided. It doesn't work. If we can't see your site, how do you figure we may see your photos?



Here ya go!

Clay Howard-Smith Photography | All Avenues of Photography

EDIT: as Bitter said.. the link is working fine....


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 2, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Clay, if you can get past this fine thread, I hope you stick around to help others on the forum. There are not many people here who have studied art as a college major and there is a great need for more voices that speak from that background. You can help educate all the "Charlies" of the forum. You might even find yourself in some hot art debate. Please, Clay, make yourself at home. The beer is in the fridge an the nuts are all over the board.



Sure Bitter! I am just a Technology Whore!


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Dec 2, 2011)

Hey, go with what you know!

But, wasn't it you that we had a great discussion about abstract art with, and you gave a shot at thinking in that manner?
That's what this place is for. I'd rather argue in art speak with Clay than read another "what camera, lens, lights, settings" thread or look at another OOF  image of someones child for the 372 time.


----------



## COLTSFANATIC1 (Dec 2, 2011)

great point Bitter,


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 3, 2011)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Hey, go with what you know!
> 
> But, wasn't it you that we had a great discussion about abstract art with, and you gave a shot at thinking in that manner?
> That's what this place is for. I'd rather argue in art speak with Clay than read another "what camera, lens, lights, settings" thread or look at another OOF  image of someones child for the 372 time.



yes.. and I appreciate a lot of abstract art more than I used to. I do make an effort... but if I don't find merit in something, I don't find merit in it. 

yes. there is that! I would have been glad to continue the discussion with Clay.. but that didn't go very far.


----------



## tevo (Dec 3, 2011)

Clay Howard-Smith said:


> cgipson1, I just looked at your work and I feel the same way about you.  Where is the artistic value in taking landscape photos?  You could argue that you're creating art through some Duchamp complex, but I would certainty beg to differ.  There isn't artistic value in your work, you're barely succeeding from a technical standpoint.  None of your images that I sampled were anything spectacular.  If you're gonna create boring, rehashed, nature shots then you might as well strive to be the best.  You're the type of person that aspires to shoot for National Geographic, but never will.  In a short and endless unromanticized process that ultimately leaves you with nothing.   That's not even the real crime though, the real crime is how you tarnish what fine artists have worked endlessly to establish.  You call yourself an artist, but where is your concept?  I don't see one.  Perhaps there is one, maybe underlying, but in the end all you have created is ineffective visual data.  My friend, perhaps you should consider putting down the camera and attending a fine art class at your local community college then maybe you would understand what art truly is.  You're a technology whore that believes a better camera takes a better image.  You lack inspiration, and that becomes crystal clear in the rendering of your images.  The images you provide appeal to a larger audience because they are uneducated, not because they are good; they are pedestrian images in the best scenario. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)



I wouldnt bash Charlie's work too much.. lol


----------



## tevo (Dec 3, 2011)

Oh, people like you.

The type of person who takes a Psychology class for 3 days and then thinks they understand how the universe works.


In this case, the type of person who calls light painting a fine art, asks for C&C, and when he gets it, tries to insult and belittle respected photographers.




NICE.


----------



## jake337 (Dec 3, 2011)

Clay Howard-Smith said:


> cgipson1, I just looked at your work and I feel the same way about you. Where is the artistic value in taking landscape photos? You could argue that you're creating art through some Duchamp complex, but I would certainty beg to differ. There isn't artistic value in your work, you're barely succeeding from a technical standpoint. None of your images that I sampled were anything spectacular. If you're gonna create boring, rehashed, nature shots then you might as well strive to be the best. You're the type of person that aspires to shoot for National Geographic, but never will. In a short and endless unromanticized process that ultimately leaves you with nothing. That's not even the real crime though, the real crime is how you tarnish what fine artists have worked endlessly to establish. *You call yourself an artist, but where is your concept?* I don't see one. Perhaps there is one, maybe underlying, but in the end all you have created is ineffective visual data. My friend, perhaps you should consider putting down the camera and attending a fine art class at your local community college then maybe you would understand what art truly is. You're a technology whore that believes a better camera takes a better image. You lack inspiration, and that becomes crystal clear in the rendering of your images. The images you provide appeal to a larger audience because they are uneducated, not because they are good; they are pedestrian images in the best scenario. (not trying to be rude... just my opinion!)



We could ask you the same question.

Attraction series:  I see no evidence and get no feeling of attraction whatsoever.

Descent and rebirth:  Not sure how the concept relates to the artwork shown.

Transference:  Just not getting any feeling of transference.

Self identity:  Again, no feeling provoked.  Seemed as though you were just playing with light.

Kenyan adventure:  I really enjoyed the first and third of this series.

I do like your light painting though.  Work in progress 2nd series and experimental project are intriguing and interesting.

Keep on truckin'


----------



## Robin Usagani (Dec 3, 2011)

I like your experiments.  Light painting?  Did you use on of those fiber optic light?  The work in progress the one on the left is fantastic.
Work in Progress (2nd Series) | Clay Howard-Smith Photography


----------



## cgipson1 (Dec 3, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> I like your experiments.  Light painting?  Did you use on of those fiber optic light?  The work in progress the one on the left is fantastic.
> Work in Progress (2nd Series) | Clay Howard-Smith Photography



Interesting.. that is one of the two I liked..... the other was http://clayhowardsmith.com/wp-content/gallery/experimental-light-painting/differntversion.jpg .... but most of it was incoherent, and messy.


----------



## tevo (Dec 3, 2011)

looks like the OP has crawled back into his cave...


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Dec 3, 2011)

Is your web hosting service one of the freebies? Page loading up slowwwwwwly...


----------



## GooniesNeverSayDie11 (Dec 5, 2011)

GooniesNeverSayDie11 said:


> that you are just out for a pat on the back with no intention of actually being a participating member of this forum. You also have 4 posts since 2009, which helps enforce that notion.


 What did I say?


----------



## GeorgieGirl (Dec 5, 2011)

Hmmm. This is another fine mess. Tell you what I think...I think I am sick and tired (lol) of this notion that one must only post a photo or two. That usually starts to fire things up real good around here and I have found in signatures an incredible world beyond the snippets that are indeed 'hidden' talent beyond these pages. 

Glad to see what you have to offer. I agree stick around, I like the departure of your efforts. 

It'll make us all better in the end.


----------



## DiskoJoe (Dec 7, 2011)

This is a good thread. Nothing like some TPF hazing to crush a young kids dream.


----------



## invisible (Dec 7, 2011)

DiskoJoe said:


> Nothing like some TPF hazing to crush a young kids dream.


This.


----------



## Dom6663 (Dec 7, 2011)

Not sure if you old-farts are acquainted with the art student owl meme. I just thought this fit the thread







If OP ever looks at this thread: Many of your photos are quiet beautiful, and definitely works of art. But no matter how technically skilled of a photographer you are, you'll never get jobs, contacts, or opportunities if you can't take honest polite criticism from others. TPF is an amazing resource, and I'm sure nobody will mind if you apologize and continue to be a member of the community.


----------

