Photography dies?

[Iron Flatline]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Mp3 = Jpg = as seen and heard on the net = beats silence:cool:

Good point, and actually well said. I mean my observation purely as a technical metaphor, and also to point out that the convenient online version is compromised until bandwidth catches up with the technical options.

[Guest stnami]

...once it catches up............now seeing that there is no editor on the web as such, with all this content running amok, finding the conceptually exciting will still be a bit of a problem as it is now.........

ps my workshops still have the darkroom and film aspects integrated within them. Most of the kids enjoy the experiece......to the 8-10 year olds its all magic. The more sophisticated 20 year old thinker sees applications in their own work, happy snaperas stay as happy snapers and go to concerts with disposable film cameras

 

.

.

Mp3 = Jpg = a bit thin in sound/print

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[hankg]

...once it catches up............now seeing that there is no editor on the web as such, with all this content running amok, finding the conceptually exciting will still be a bit of a problem as it is now.........

 

I forget who said it but it was something like: "It has been said that if you gave 10,000 monkeys, 10,000 typewriters and 10,000 years you would get the works of Shakespeare. The Internet has proved this hypothesis wrong."

[stunsworth]

Isn't it true that lab dependent photographers back then who can't develop their own for at least B&W are not considerd photographers...

Durring my HighSchool, they are not even allowed to compete. Perhaps segregated to their own cathegory

 

That was just stupid. It's things like that that really annoy me. The object in photography is the photograph, not how difficult it was to process the film. To be honest most people have no interest in how difficult a shot was to capture. They just want to look at the photograph.

[sean_reid]

To be honest most people have no interest in how difficult a shot was to capture. They just want to look at the photograph.

 

Right, in the end there's just the picture. That it was difficult to make does not, in itself make the picture any stronger and having been made with ease doesn't, in itself, make the picture any weaker. I think many of Kertesz's pictures, for example, came easily to him.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Kent10D]

Right, in the end there's just the picture. Being difficult to make does not, in itself make the picture any stronger and being made with ease doesn't, in itself, make the picture any weaker. I think many of Kertesz's pictures, for example, came easily to him.

 

On the other hand, being a photographer (pro or amateur) is a bit of a double-edged sword in the sense that an uderstanding of the process makes it possible to appreciate the amount of thought and work that may have gone into a shot, with the downside that sometimes that gets in the way of pure aesthetic appreciation.

 

Sometimes it's a struggle to maintain perspective, but I do enjoy being able to appreciate good work from more than one angle.

[ron110n]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That was just stupid. It's things like that that really annoy me. The object in photography is the photograph, not how difficult it was to process the film. To be honest most people have no interest in how difficult a shot was to capture. They just want to look at the photograph.

 

No it's not stupid... it happened. Were you taking pics those times like the 70's?

Why pissed??? Did the HS Seniors bullied on your photo???

They asked me to just mail it to my auntie and she can appriciate it better or sign up for the lab. That's what the big bullies told me.

 

The sophomore me didn't act like you child in reponse. "I signed up for the photo lab".

Untill now I'm thankful that they insulted my photo.

 

BTW Steve, you also gotta print your own to qualify.

Or your entry will be with the Polaroids.

 

 

Best regards,

 

-Ron

 

________________

Caveman's Gallery

[Guest stnami]

No it's not stupid... it happened

........ still dumb................ things sure were not that way in this neck of the scrub, we were happy to use a lab when needed ......colour/cibachromes went to the lab

.'

.

BTW Steve, you also gotta print your own to qualify.

.... qualify as what!!????????

[ron110n]

Imants,

It's a CathSchool exlusively for boys.

I'm sure you have an idea with the attitude.

 

-Ron

 

________________

Caveman's Gallery

[Guest stnami]

.....still a dumb perspective followed by a handfull

[ron110n]

Imants,

 

I got some stamps so you can mail it your aunt...

 

-Ron

 

________________

Caveman's Gallery

[MrEd]

.....what are you all talking about???

........before digital I used Polaroids:D ....quite effectively AND often............ .

 

.....it sure was fun.....

 

.

[Guest stnami]

...... back into the ward for a while........... as far as the stamps go they don't accept them on the otherside:D

[Alberti]

If Puts thesis is "the decline of chemical photography also represents a corresponding decline of photography itself" then this maybe means that there are many stages, film selection, cropping, developers, enlarging mechanics included, in creating the final image. ... All that being lost. As well, art fled through the side door when Workflow knocked on the door.

 

To put it in a question:

1) What do we consider to be part of the art of photography?

2) Where lies the elements that you consider that infuses the magic that gives the image a timelessness, that creates the sought after artisticity?

3) On which shoulder does the muse sit now we use the M8?

 

The style of statement (Photography died yesterday) is fascinating, I have collected many examples of those statements from Seneca onwards. Its the generation conflict that shows up. My message: don't look back, you will be nailed to the ground from incapabiliity to make decisions. Leverage the new elements. Plunge ahead. Create a new art.

I find it terrific that we now have discussions on Bokeh, on plane of focus, on DoF, things that were not in the old Leica International and now formulated like that by Günter Osterloh that some might remember. In analog film era this was never discussed, now all at once it is qualities like these that take center stage. Marvelous to me. Digital brings out new qualities. It does change our work.

 

With digital at least I won't get a call such as that my prints for a friend of mine in an exhibit (Stedelijk of all places..) are turning yellow... Bust chemistry and my sloppy style of working!

 

The man who reinvents himself all the time.

[johnastovall]

Mike Johnson starts today's blog off with a thought provoking and I think important essay about what we are really doing with digital.

 

Mike spring boards off of an essay by Erwin Puts, "Photography does not exist anymore!" He then goes on to examine the fundamental essences of what this craft we do with lenses, sensors and computers and where it fits in presenting the world and our ideas.

 

We need to think more about what the medium is and what it is not truly grow in our craft and art.

 

Read "Digital and its Discontents." I can't think of a better thing to do this hot morning.