That’s very true. Many are irreplaceable whether they are good photographs or not. They are personally meaningfull. And legal documents too, even though most of those are replaceable. And pets. But to estate administrators (or whatever one wants to call those who have to dispose of someone else’s earthly goods) much less is meaningful.Counterpoint: Listen to news reporters report on natural disasters as they interview people. What's the most commonly named item that A) people grab before evacuating; B) miss the most when they see their homes destroyed.
Answer: Photographs.
Photography is used for many purposes. FB pictures of burgers and selfies are snapshots. If you do not like this, blame George Eastman. He put a camera in everyone's hands. The digital revolution has just made it easier and provided a channel to display the snaps- along with the works of art. You (Reginald) may be frustrated because the masses are not flocking to the powerful images. You see billions served on a McDonalds, not the Michelin 5 star gourmet restaurants.
That's true, but it still has little influence on the aesthetic quality of the photograph. YouTube channels that flirt with photography and away from technology see their viewing figures plummet.A focus on gear is hardly new to shutterbugs through the ages.
@BrianShaw
If you don't realize that your comments are character insults, and that your nonsensical dodge of "certain folks minds" isn't transparent, then I suggest you get some etiquette lessons as well. My "attitude" is neither "weird" or "elitist". Please learn how to formulate a rebuttal without resorting to such low-grade techniques of insulting others.
Please feel free to ignore me, as I will you. Okay? But don’t you dare lecture me like your my mommy. Okay?
I agree, the OP is being over sensitive. In all the years I have posted comments with BrianShaw I have not found him to be insulting. He states things as he sees them and sometimes he disagrees with me.
At the same time we neither assume that every shoebox is saved nor every image a keeper. We are subject to idiosyncratic curation from having no thought to edit all the way to a sacred treasure.It seems metaphorically like a shoebox, but I think it's very weak. I think it's dubious whether such cloud collections are often passed on. I think the sensational experience of viewing cloud images on as screen would be considered a poorer experience than prints, and of course the ease of losing cloud images is ever present. Some individuals are certainly masters and experts at managing "IT resources" like photos in the cloud, but it's a skill quite a bit more complicated for many people compared to putting prints in a photo album. YMMV, of course.
Counterpoint: Listen to news reporters report on natural disasters as they interview people. What's the most commonly named item that A) people grab before evacuating; B) miss the most when they see their homes destroyed.
Answer: Photographs.
Boy, that was a slog. I don't think it is worth the hour it would take to critique.A very interesting essay on the ethics of manipulated images. Covers, most of the topics broached in this thread: https://www.ukessays.com/essays/media/digital-manipulation-the-ethics-of-photography-media-essay.php
Steve rides a shorter horse perhaps. Ha ha ha.
Get over it Reg... let’s move on.
A very interesting essay on the ethics of manipulated images. Covers, most of the topics broached in this thread: https://www.ukessays.com/essays/media/digital-manipulation-the-ethics-of-photography-media-essay.php
Actually, I think the reference was to the ideas you promulgated in a particular post.Perhaps you don't mind being referred to as weird or elitist.
I was at the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery earlier this week. One gallery featured pictures of lynchings where the victim was skillfully removed. Very moving.Yes, it does including adding and deleting significant images such are removing hunting dogs tails and adding sharks appearing to leap at helicopters.
Actually, I think the reference was to the ideas you promulgated in a particular post.
Many of us who have posted in this thread disagree with many of the premises you have sought to promote in this thread.
Just because we disagree with you doesn't mean that we are being low-brow and nonsensical.
Wow! You must have little idea of how your voice comes out from your writing.Actually no. The references are NOT to the ideas. Here's the quote for you to read: "I’m seeing a rather anti-photography sentiment here. Unless photos are relevant etc in certain folks minds, then photography isn’t worthy. Weird and elitist attitude." Notice please, the reference to "certain folks minds" - to which he means mine, and his use of "attitude" which is a trait of a person, not an idea. And that personage he was pretending to disguise was of course me.
I guess it is just too much to expect people to have the basic knowledge of logical fallacies,, and how to disagree with someone's ideas. Here, I looked it up for you all, and present it here for your edification. It's called an ad-hominem argument: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem.
And you know, I don't care how many of you fail to see ad-hominem arguments when they occur, or have no understanding of logic, or want to reinterpret what the fellow said. Ignorance of etiquette is not an excuse for anything. Period. Can't follow decent etiquette? Need everyone to make excuses for you? Maybe philosophy just isn't your thing.
Really? There must be over 500 posts in the thread on the philosophy of ken Rockwell. Is this a symptom of the decline of Western Civilization?
It was never about Ken Rockwell... that was just a set-up.Really? There must be over 500 posts in the thread on the philosophy of ken Rockwell. Is this a symptom of the decline of Western Civilization?
Perhaps the intent was just a bit too obtuse...That many have been unable to arrive at the intent of this thread speaks volumes.
During the late 1980’s when I was a system development engineer working on the Kodak Premier System (which was a ‘film in - film out’ system), marketing insisted it be called The KODAK PREMIER Image Enhancement System and NOT The KODAK PREMIER Image Manipulation System.A very interesting essay on the ethics of manipulated images. Covers, most of the topics broached in this thread: https://www.ukessays.com/essays/media/digital-manipulation-the-ethics-of-photography-media-essay.php
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?