Is Photography Dead?

[2F/2F]

Hey, it's 10:49!

 

[tomalophicon]

Photography died when painting got invented... wait.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Photography died when painting got invented... wait.

Hey don't confuse me!

Jeff

 

[eclarke]

Why shouldn't it be dying?? Look around, human society is foundering..

 

[Sirius Glass]

No, but threads like this on APUG are killing me!

Mostly agree, but fortunately there's the "ignore thread" option. I wish the admins at LFPF would implement that feature of vBulletin!

From the movie Lilies of the Field, 1963: "Amen! Amen! Amen! Amen!"

 

[zsas]

Kirby Furguson has an interesting take, the elements of creativity are: copy, transform and combine. See video 3 at the below at his site Everything is a Remix

Dead Link Removed

 

[MattCarey]

I posed what I thought would be an interesting question for debate.

In that spirit, I'll respond. Rather than try to paraphrase my reactions, I'll give them straight out.

The quality of my work is not the topic of this thread. My point was the lack of creativity at the present time. It is not only photography. For example, how many films have been made in the past ten years that are remakes of older films. Not only are they remakes but they are usually inferior to the original.

My initial response to this, and my response the next day: if this represents your thought processes, it sucks to be you.

I don't mean that in any way as an insult, but rather a statement of the sad state of affairs when someone with a passion for a given art can't find the creativity in the work of others.

The critic A. D. Coleman often stated that he had never taken a single photograph. He said that being ignorant of the process allowed him to concentrate on the image itself. If one had to be a master painter, or musician, or photographer in order to make a valid criticism then there would be precious few such opinions.

Again, my unfiltered reaction to this: a great example of pseudo-profound logic.

We all bring our own experiences to the table when we approach art. By Mr. Coleman's logic, he is able to offer critiques for that subset of the population who has never taken a photograph. Since I have made photographs, I bring a very different perspective to the table than he does. What does he have to offer me?

Well, what he has to offer me is a different perspective from what I have. It isn't better or worse. It is different.

I doubt he is completely ignorant of the process. I have never, for instance, played the bassoon. I am not completely ignorant of the process.

When someone takes the 1,000,000th photograph of a tree on a hill, that person brings a different perspective. Whether it is effective, whether it is pleasing, that remains to be seen from the final product.

Another unfiltered reaction to this discussion topic: teen angst. The irony of this discussion is that it is, itself, uncreative. The topic has been discussed many times and will be discussed many times more.

Which is to say, even though it is uncreative, it is important. It is not new to ask if it has all been done (in any subject). Just as teen angst is an important phase in life to help one define goals, it is important to reassess what is important in aspects of one's life. I responded to this thread previously because, having re-entered analogue photography after a long hiatus, I too asked these sorts of questions. I had to evaluate: what is it in other people's photography that brings me joy? And: what is it in my own photography that brings me joy?

One last thought: I am reminded in this discussion of a statement one of my high school teachers once made to the class. She said: "Odds are you will never have an original thought".

I think of her often. I thought of her when my first patent issued. I remember her with each patent (and other times). I think of her often. I believe she was incorrect.

 

[eclarke]

She may have motivated you to be an original thinker!!!..EC

 

[Curt]

You will know when it's over.

In his final two years, Eastman was in intense pain, caused by a degenerative disorder affecting his spine. He had trouble standing and his walking became a slow shuffle. Today it might be diagnosed as lumbar spinal stenosis, a narrowing of the spinal canal caused by calcification in the vertebrae. Eastman grew depressed, as he had seen his mother spend the last two years of her life in a wheelchair from the same condition. On March 14, 1932, Eastman died by suicide with a single gunshot to the heart, leaving a note which read, "My work is done. Why wait?

 

[36cm2]

"Insofar as literature is a telling of new stories, literature has been exhausted for centuries but insofar as literature tells archetypal stories in an attempt to understand once more their truth - to translate their wisdom for another generation - literature will be exhausted only when we all, in our foolish arrogance, abandon it" -- Gardner

Applies just as much to photography.

I haven't been able to read the whole thread, so someone may have already said this, but Polyglot ... awesome.

Rumors of photography's death are greatly exaggerated.

Leo

 

[MattCarey]

I haven't been able to read the whole thread, so someone may have already said this, but Polyglot ... awesome.

Rumors of photography's death are greatly exaggerated.

Leo

When photography dies, I intend to document the funeral in pictures...

 

[removed account4]

the unfortunate reality is that many people lack imagination.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Has always been so, John. But many, many more don't.

 

[markbarendt]

Maybe the question that needs to be asked is whehter or not there are any interesting subjects left?

That begs the question of interesting to whom?

When I was a kid there were 3 TV channels, "we" shared a more common set of experiences. A single photo/event would/could touch more of us.

Seems to me now that our experience is less shared/common now. The reach a new photo has is smaller.

 

[Steve Smith]

Here's a thought: I'm a mediocrity. 50 years after I pass, no one will know my name, much less what I did on this earth. And that's for the things I am really good at. When it comes to photography, I'm working up to mediocrity.

I'm sure that also desribes me and 99% of everyone else here!


Steve.

 

[Joe VanCleave]

I'm more interested in the question of how many possible photographs there are, before subsequent images are simply repeats of previous ones. How big of a closed set is the set of all possible photographs?

Here's a simple thought experiment. Say we limit our discussion to photos with a resolution of 800x600 pixels. And for the sake of simplicity we limit each pixel to a monochrome tonal range of 256 levels of gray.

The number of combinations possible is: (800 x 600) ^256, or 4.8 x 10^260. That's a lot of photos. To get an idea of how big a number that is, consider the estimate for the number of electrons in the entire universe as being about 10^80 (according to the results of a quick-and-dirty Internet search).

Of course, many of these photos will be virtually identical to one another with the exception of just a few pixels being different. One could define some criteria of how many pixels need to be different before such images are considered uniquely different from one another. That would tend to somewhat reduce the size of the set of all possible photographs. But I'd guess that it will still be an enormous number of images.

The total number of photographic images created by mankind to date is nowhere near this magnitude. Keep in mind that my calculations don't consider color imagery which, at 8-bit resolution per channel, would be much larger.

I think it is safe to say that there are still an enormous number of unique photographs still waiting to be created. Perhaps that is what we should be doing.

~Joe

 

[MattCarey]

the unfortunate reality is that many people lack imagination.

An unfortunate reality is that many people lack the imagination and/or desire to see the imagination in others.

I.e. don't underestimate others, lest it actually reflect on yourself.

When it comes to creativity, there are two main aspects of it. That which is learned and that which is innate (i.e. talent).

Even those with great talent need to learn their craft. Even Mozart, who was composing at something like age 6, had to learn. And there are few like him in history. Even someone with great talent needs to spend some time studying.

Then there is talent. Talent can be the difference between moderate and great success, even for the person who works 60 hours a week for years learning a craft. Some people will just never attain the same level as others because they lack the same talent.

Many leave the story here, but there is an important level to consider beyond this. Talent is, as I've said above, innate. It is a part of the person. It can be nurtured, but it can't really be created.

In other words, it is a gift in the most true sense of the word. There is no virtue in having a talent. One does not earn a talent. One either has some level of gift or one does not. Talent is a wonderful thing. Something to be cherished. It is not something for which a person can really take pride in, however.

Most societies tend to forget this. We tend to have an arrogance about talent. We consider talent to be something prideful. On the other end of the spectrum, we consider disability to be something shameful. We even use disability terms as insults (gimp, spas, idiot, moron, etc.).

It is a gift to have the talent to make photography an art. A gift I do not possess. It is a minor gift to be able to make pleasing photographs. I either have that gift or enough luck to occasionally succeed in that realm. I have other talents, and the arrogance that goes with them. I'm working on the humility though.

 

[benjiboy]

Yes.

Cheer up, Jerry, it gets worse!

Indeed Gerald cheer up , one thing the democratisation of photography that digital photography has produced in allowing the man in the street who is a none photographer and visually unsophisticated to modify his images in Photoshop and print them at home which produces a modern equivalent of Folk Art and haven't you heard that if you give enough Chimps typewriters one of them will eventually write Hamlet.

 

[blockend]

I'm wrestling with a decision whether to keep sharing images on-line. My output is prolific enough in 35mm and medium format to make the scanning of images something approaching a full time job. Of course not all are good photographs, but even scanning as a replacement to contact printing at low resolutions means hours of work and extra negative handling.

The alternatives are to go digital, which has a certain logic when you're shooting up to fifteen films in a weekend, or stick to the darkroom and make contact prints for posterity and fine prints of the best stuff for pleasure. The joy for me is making and looking at a quality silver print and screen sharing is a poor substitute for that, certainly not one worth all my spare time to catalogue.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

stick to the darkroom and make contact prints

I stopped making contacts years ago. For 35mm they're really too small to be of any value. If a negative looks interesting I make a 5x7 to judge whether to make a final print. This result is far less work in the darkroom.

 

[benjiboy]

I'm wrestling with a decision whether to keep sharing images on-line. My output is prolific enough in 35mm and medium format to make the scanning of images something approaching a full time job. Of course not all are good photographs, but even scanning as a replacement to contact printing at low resolutions means hours of work and extra negative handling.

The alternatives are to go digital, which has a certain logic when you're shooting up to fifteen films in a weekend, or stick to the darkroom and make contact prints for posterity and fine prints of the best stuff for pleasure. The joy for me is making and looking at a quality silver print and screen sharing is a poor substitute for that, certainly not one worth all my spare time to catalogue.

I suggest you slow down and reduce your output if you are after quality, no one can take 540 meaningful photographs in a weekend let alone afford the film.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Contact sheets are very useful, also - I'd never recommend cutting them out of a film workflow.

You gain a whole new perspective on your work, and you get a second slower look at your images...who wouldn't see the value in gaining a new objective look at your pictures? To me it's one of the main advantages of film over digital...

 

[semi-ambivalent]

I suggest you slow down and reduce your output if you are after quality, no one can take 540 meaningful photographs in a weekend let alone afford the film.

Maybe he's channeling Winogrand.

 

[photoncatcher]

No!

 

[blockend]

Fifteen films is exceptional, ten is the average if I'm working on a project. About half are portraits on 120, the others are 'street' or documentary photographs on 35mm. Not exceptional to cover a subject I won't have the chance to record again.
I rue the days I shot one film a week and the images I missed.