<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: At What Age Do Photographers Do Their Most Influential Work?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/blog/2011/10/23/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/</link>
	<description>Little Brown Mushroom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:34:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: vlad voloshin</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9852</link>
		<dc:creator>vlad voloshin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2012 23:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9852</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It was also Quentin Tarantino&#039;s assumption..something about being young and horny and making the best work..and then as the hormone levels fall, creativity fades...
I don&#039;t agree with all this completely, though maybe there is something to it.
Some terms in the discussion are questionable:
What is influential?
What is a value of universal recognition of someone&#039;s work?
What is a great work?
What is  the &quot;greatest productivity&quot;?
Why is great productivity important?
Parr&#039;s terms are vague too.. raw, edgy.. is that something every photographic series must aspire to?
All this makes sense if you assume that photograph only as important as the amount of money it makes and how many people have copied it in their work.
But is that really always important? The what type of photographer are you addressing?
There are tons of creative individuals of all ages in all creative fields..maybe statistically young people prevail, but why this statistic is so important?
some of my favorite creatives that did amazing work after 40 are E. Weston, I. Bergman, Ozu Yasujiro, Billy Wilder, Dostoevsky, the list can go on..]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was also Quentin Tarantino&#8217;s assumption..something about being young and horny and making the best work..and then as the hormone levels fall, creativity fades&#8230;<br />
I don&#8217;t agree with all this completely, though maybe there is something to it.<br />
Some terms in the discussion are questionable:<br />
What is influential?<br />
What is a value of universal recognition of someone&#8217;s work?<br />
What is a great work?<br />
What is  the &#8220;greatest productivity&#8221;?<br />
Why is great productivity important?<br />
Parr&#8217;s terms are vague too.. raw, edgy.. is that something every photographic series must aspire to?<br />
All this makes sense if you assume that photograph only as important as the amount of money it makes and how many people have copied it in their work.<br />
But is that really always important? The what type of photographer are you addressing?<br />
There are tons of creative individuals of all ages in all creative fields..maybe statistically young people prevail, but why this statistic is so important?<br />
some of my favorite creatives that did amazing work after 40 are E. Weston, I. Bergman, Ozu Yasujiro, Billy Wilder, Dostoevsky, the list can go on..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MB</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9851</link>
		<dc:creator>MB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2012 20:25:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9851</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I also think it depends on the culture that is rating and promoting the work. US culture promotes and worships youth so it would be no big surprise that young photographers (with access to handsome friends) would top a lot of decision makers lists. I&#039;m in fashion and people rave about a lot of the new (young) photographers but it&#039;s the middle aged photographers booking the big jobs and publishing great books.

Creativity and greatness can be fostered at any age. I&#039;m just hoping American&#039;s obsession with youth dies down enough to promote the worth of our entire population instead of the &quot;lucky&quot; ones who are under 25.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I also think it depends on the culture that is rating and promoting the work. US culture promotes and worships youth so it would be no big surprise that young photographers (with access to handsome friends) would top a lot of decision makers lists. I&#8217;m in fashion and people rave about a lot of the new (young) photographers but it&#8217;s the middle aged photographers booking the big jobs and publishing great books.</p>
<p>Creativity and greatness can be fostered at any age. I&#8217;m just hoping American&#8217;s obsession with youth dies down enough to promote the worth of our entire population instead of the &#8220;lucky&#8221; ones who are under 25.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: QWG</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9850</link>
		<dc:creator>QWG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 18:03:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[i thought this section from a speech made by the mathematician Richard Hamming might bear some relevance to the discussion. 

&quot;Age is another factor which the physicists particularly worry about. They always are saying that you have got to do it when you are young or you will never do it. Einstein did things very early, and all the quantum mechanic fellows were disgustingly young when they did their best work. Most mathematicians, theoretical physicists, and astrophysicists do what we consider their best work when they are young. It is not that they don&#039;t do good work in their old age but what we value most is often what they did early. On the other hand, in music, politics and literature, often what we consider their best work was done late. I don&#039;t know how whatever field you are in fits this scale, but age has some effect.

But let me say why age seems to have the effect it does. In the first place if you do some good work you will find yourself on all kinds of committees and unable to do any more work. You may find yourself as I saw Brattain when he got a Nobel Prize. The day the prize was announced we all assembled in Arnold Auditorium; all three winners got up and made speeches. The third one, Brattain, practically with tears in his eyes, said, ``I know about this Nobel-Prize effect and I am not going to let it affect me; I am going to remain good old Walter Brattain.&#039;&#039; Well I said to myself, ``That is nice.&#039;&#039; But in a few weeks I saw it was affecting him. Now he could only work on great problems.

When you are famous it is hard to work on small problems. This is what did Shannon in. After information theory, what do you do for an encore? The great scientists often make this error. They fail to continue to plant the little acorns from which the mighty oak trees grow. They try to get the big thing right off. And that isn&#039;t the way things go. So that is another reason why you find that when you get early recognition it seems to sterilize you.&quot;

the speech was given at Bell Labs in 1986 and the entire text can be accessed here: http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html 
the whole thing is worth reading.

Cheers,

QWG]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i thought this section from a speech made by the mathematician Richard Hamming might bear some relevance to the discussion. </p>
<p>&#8220;Age is another factor which the physicists particularly worry about. They always are saying that you have got to do it when you are young or you will never do it. Einstein did things very early, and all the quantum mechanic fellows were disgustingly young when they did their best work. Most mathematicians, theoretical physicists, and astrophysicists do what we consider their best work when they are young. It is not that they don&#8217;t do good work in their old age but what we value most is often what they did early. On the other hand, in music, politics and literature, often what we consider their best work was done late. I don&#8217;t know how whatever field you are in fits this scale, but age has some effect.</p>
<p>But let me say why age seems to have the effect it does. In the first place if you do some good work you will find yourself on all kinds of committees and unable to do any more work. You may find yourself as I saw Brattain when he got a Nobel Prize. The day the prize was announced we all assembled in Arnold Auditorium; all three winners got up and made speeches. The third one, Brattain, practically with tears in his eyes, said, &#8220;I know about this Nobel-Prize effect and I am not going to let it affect me; I am going to remain good old Walter Brattain.&#8221; Well I said to myself, &#8220;That is nice.&#8221; But in a few weeks I saw it was affecting him. Now he could only work on great problems.</p>
<p>When you are famous it is hard to work on small problems. This is what did Shannon in. After information theory, what do you do for an encore? The great scientists often make this error. They fail to continue to plant the little acorns from which the mighty oak trees grow. They try to get the big thing right off. And that isn&#8217;t the way things go. So that is another reason why you find that when you get early recognition it seems to sterilize you.&#8221;</p>
<p>the speech was given at Bell Labs in 1986 and the entire text can be accessed here: <a href="http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html</a><br />
the whole thing is worth reading.</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>QWG</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 72randy</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9849</link>
		<dc:creator>72randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 11:34:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9849</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Learning that Tom Merton was such a influence on Mr Soth, I thought you all might enjoy this site on Merton from someone who knew him well: http://mertonocso.wordpress.com]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Learning that Tom Merton was such a influence on Mr Soth, I thought you all might enjoy this site on Merton from someone who knew him well: <a href="http://mertonocso.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://mertonocso.wordpress.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Tourtellotte</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9848</link>
		<dc:creator>James Tourtellotte</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:16:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9848</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am way past 40 and have been shooting since I was 13. At 14 got my first check from the Washington Post. I can tell you in no uncertain terms that the images I produce now are far better than what I produced when I was 25 or 35. Being free of that need to impress someone else has unleashed much better imagery. I have seen remarkable images from individuals young or old.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am way past 40 and have been shooting since I was 13. At 14 got my first check from the Washington Post. I can tell you in no uncertain terms that the images I produce now are far better than what I produced when I was 25 or 35. Being free of that need to impress someone else has unleashed much better imagery. I have seen remarkable images from individuals young or old.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9847</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:25:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9847</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#039;s a counterpoint from the world of science. It is a brief summary of a study published in Nature this week: http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7381-401c
&quot;US biomedical scientists rarely earn their first major grants during their optimum innovative years, concludes a study (K. R. W. Matthews et al. PLoS ONE 6, e29738; 2011). In 2008, the average age of a scientist getting a first grant from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) was 42, the authors found. But researchers who won Nobel prizes in medicine or chemistry between 1980 and 2010 did their pioneering work at an average of 41 years; 78% did so before 51, the average age of NIH investigators now. Part of the problem is that the NIH is risk-averse and unwilling to fund nascent work, argues Kirstin Matthews, lead author of the study and a science and technology policy fellow at Rice University in Houston, Texas.&quot;
Thus, the spread says about 41 but you can keep on going up to about 51 and be relevant. On average. but the idea is not to be average, right?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a counterpoint from the world of science. It is a brief summary of a study published in Nature this week: <a href="http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7381-401c" rel="nofollow">http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7381-401c</a><br />
&#8220;US biomedical scientists rarely earn their first major grants during their optimum innovative years, concludes a study (K. R. W. Matthews et al. PLoS ONE 6, e29738; 2011). In 2008, the average age of a scientist getting a first grant from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) was 42, the authors found. But researchers who won Nobel prizes in medicine or chemistry between 1980 and 2010 did their pioneering work at an average of 41 years; 78% did so before 51, the average age of NIH investigators now. Part of the problem is that the NIH is risk-averse and unwilling to fund nascent work, argues Kirstin Matthews, lead author of the study and a science and technology policy fellow at Rice University in Houston, Texas.&#8221;<br />
Thus, the spread says about 41 but you can keep on going up to about 51 and be relevant. On average. but the idea is not to be average, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lou</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9846</link>
		<dc:creator>Lou</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 16:12:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9846</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m inclined to think that the arts (including photography), philosophy and the sciences, are all characterised by a central line of inquiry, which evolves in the individual at a relatively young age and then develops when they come into contact with a suitable medium. This 
medium, be it photography, literature, astronomy or indeed a combination, as in the case of polymaths such as Goethe, brings with it various characteristics, that effect the age at which the individual reaches their perceived zenith.  

For example, discounting Doogie Howser, medicine takes time to qualify in, hence its relatively autumnal career peak. On top of this, background and fate play their part in hampering or encouraging an individual&#039;s realisation of their inquiries. The search for any &quot;average&quot; or &quot;ideal&quot; is however misleading and placing the human condition into a bell curve, implies the existence of a simplistic, rational  world which most lines of inquiry are born in opposition to.

Photography is of course a physical activity, so someone who photographs war zones and teenage drug binges, is probably going to &quot;peak&quot; earlier than someone who photographs their family growing old or the changes in a city&#039;s surface. But aside from these self evident
constraints, perhaps that there is actually far more play in the productive age range.

Whilst I genuinely believe that nearly every person who has contributed to this post, has already had their best ideas, probably when they were still a child, whether or not they have realised them to their full potential is an entirely different matter. The idea of an artist&#039;s peak is largely driven I feel, by the notion of success, something which weighs down upon the artist heavily, through both its presence and absence. Early success can lure an artist into the assumption that they have completed their line of inquiry, resulting in stagnation and repetition, lack of success can have a similar result, in that the artist stagnates through a perception of failure. Therefore I would argue that the &quot;peak years&quot; idea is not an immutable, physical reality, but an almost entirely social construction, that in fact imposes itself on our lives and unfortunately our work.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m inclined to think that the arts (including photography), philosophy and the sciences, are all characterised by a central line of inquiry, which evolves in the individual at a relatively young age and then develops when they come into contact with a suitable medium. This<br />
medium, be it photography, literature, astronomy or indeed a combination, as in the case of polymaths such as Goethe, brings with it various characteristics, that effect the age at which the individual reaches their perceived zenith.  </p>
<p>For example, discounting Doogie Howser, medicine takes time to qualify in, hence its relatively autumnal career peak. On top of this, background and fate play their part in hampering or encouraging an individual&#8217;s realisation of their inquiries. The search for any &#8220;average&#8221; or &#8220;ideal&#8221; is however misleading and placing the human condition into a bell curve, implies the existence of a simplistic, rational  world which most lines of inquiry are born in opposition to.</p>
<p>Photography is of course a physical activity, so someone who photographs war zones and teenage drug binges, is probably going to &#8220;peak&#8221; earlier than someone who photographs their family growing old or the changes in a city&#8217;s surface. But aside from these self evident<br />
constraints, perhaps that there is actually far more play in the productive age range.</p>
<p>Whilst I genuinely believe that nearly every person who has contributed to this post, has already had their best ideas, probably when they were still a child, whether or not they have realised them to their full potential is an entirely different matter. The idea of an artist&#8217;s peak is largely driven I feel, by the notion of success, something which weighs down upon the artist heavily, through both its presence and absence. Early success can lure an artist into the assumption that they have completed their line of inquiry, resulting in stagnation and repetition, lack of success can have a similar result, in that the artist stagnates through a perception of failure. Therefore I would argue that the &#8220;peak years&#8221; idea is not an immutable, physical reality, but an almost entirely social construction, that in fact imposes itself on our lives and unfortunately our work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Davin Ellicson</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9845</link>
		<dc:creator>Davin Ellicson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 03:20:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9845</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, right. Isn&#039;t what Alec is saying is that photographers often define their &#039;style&#039; in the 20-40 years-old range--they become known often for this kind of work. Certainly, if you look at Alex Webb&#039;s work, he was doing absolutely amazing work at age 27 in 1979 when he switched from black and white. I mean it seems as if there was no learning curve for him. He was making images at 27 that look as good as what he does today.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, right. Isn&#8217;t what Alec is saying is that photographers often define their &#8216;style&#8217; in the 20-40 years-old range&#8211;they become known often for this kind of work. Certainly, if you look at Alex Webb&#8217;s work, he was doing absolutely amazing work at age 27 in 1979 when he switched from black and white. I mean it seems as if there was no learning curve for him. He was making images at 27 that look as good as what he does today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aron</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9844</link>
		<dc:creator>Aron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 03:08:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9844</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am done with age! Joe has it right. It takes years, like any other art form. I am not sure money is a good indication of success but in today&#039;s world it is. I may not be composing 4′33″ but I want to be 4′33″. I am not even going to go further ... Alec knows ...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am done with age! Joe has it right. It takes years, like any other art form. I am not sure money is a good indication of success but in today&#8217;s world it is. I may not be composing 4′33″ but I want to be 4′33″. I am not even going to go further &#8230; Alec knows &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Casey</title>
		<link>http://www.littlebrownmushroom.com/age/at-what-age-do-photographers-do-their-most-influential-work/#comment-9843</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Casey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 00:32:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://littlebrownmushroom.wordpress.com/?p=4401#comment-9843</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You get it!  Lik has stated he&#039;s spent 25 years mastering landscapes and only within the last five years have people started to come to know his name.  Just last year he got a TV show on the weather channel.  He&#039;s 53 years old!  Schulman died at 98... he wasn&#039;t considered a master, even in his 60&#039;s!  I&#039;m not even sure the author of this posting knows who Adams, Schulman, Wolfe or Lik are!  Then again...  how old is the author?!  That would say a lot about how much they know or comprehend.  The younger a person is, they typically think that youth is everything.  &quot;Audentes Fortuna Iuvat&quot; - Fortune favors the bold.  Youth... has nothing to do with it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You get it!  Lik has stated he&#8217;s spent 25 years mastering landscapes and only within the last five years have people started to come to know his name.  Just last year he got a TV show on the weather channel.  He&#8217;s 53 years old!  Schulman died at 98&#8230; he wasn&#8217;t considered a master, even in his 60&#8242;s!  I&#8217;m not even sure the author of this posting knows who Adams, Schulman, Wolfe or Lik are!  Then again&#8230;  how old is the author?!  That would say a lot about how much they know or comprehend.  The younger a person is, they typically think that youth is everything.  &#8220;Audentes Fortuna Iuvat&#8221; &#8211; Fortune favors the bold.  Youth&#8230; has nothing to do with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
