Photography is "over"

removed account4 · Oct 15, 2017

hi therook

i was playing the devils lawyer to be honest. who knows if any of this technology will be around
or if anything will be accessible... since about 1991 i have been doing HABS/HAER recordations
for cities towns and states and the federal government...and since about IDK 8 or 10 years ago
some of my clients have only wanted TIFF files and "archival" ink jet prints from a list of
known ink sets and accepted papers. these are ARCHIVES and they ask for a CD with the image files
burned onto it, and the proof prints..i used to try to convince them that a tangible object ( negatives ) would be
best even if they want scans in the end... because who knows what will happen to the files, or cd ( digital rot )
of if whoever is charged with "backing up" will be backing up the originals or somehow the backup, creating
corrupt files and .. as a result they come looking for me to either get more files ... and at least
a negative is a stable object .. ive pretty much given up to be honest...

i used to tell my kids that when the magnetic blast or solar wave knocks everything out
they will be the only people around who know how to use a dictionary, and will have photographs
seeing no one from their generation knows how to look something up in a dictionary or will have anything tangible.
==
i don't think anyone really cares about tangible anymore ...
willy wonka was pretty ahead of his time ...
with the chewing gum that is whole meal... too busy to eat !
as long as you spit it out before you get it to dessert ( unless you have a juicer ! )

Pioneer · Oct 15, 2017

This perspective is so limited. We have been trying to capture and record images from our environment for thousands of years. As time progressed we go better at it and the fidelity of the image that was captured became better and better.

This "photography" we get so worked up about has only been happening for a very short period of time. Who knows how long our prints will really last? In reality very few of our images will survive over the very long term. Carving them into a rock is probably the best for the long term. That is typically what has lasted for others to enjoy. And that type of reproduction doesn't require any technology to view.

For me it really isn't worth worrying about whether any of my prints, or any of my digital images, will survive. If I am supremely fortunate a few may last beyond my own demise, but not many, and probably not the ones I would choose. Meanwhile I enjoy taking photographs as much, maybe more, for the experience of doing it.

Maybe I should find a cave that has the right conditions, that I think will last for several thousand years, and hide away some of my prints. How long does fiber paper last?

blockend · Oct 16, 2017

TheRook said:
I'm not so confident the companies hosting those websites and cloud storage facilities will still be there 30 years from now. Or that the uploaded files will still exist and be accessible after all that time has passed. Digital storage has limitations. Although not obvious now, I think this will present a problem down the road... resulting in an entire generation of image taking lost. Except for the prints, that is.

Exactly so. The thing with a photograph is it takes a fraction of a second to take, and is of an event that is probably unremarkable at the time it is taken. However with each passing moment its novelty increases until everything about it is unique. A photograph is basically a time capsule, created in a moment but with a life that may be in centuries.

Now pictures are disseminated widely, but their significance is fleeting because no one is invested in them and they exist on ephemeral platforms. Theoretically the images will last forever "somewhere", but whether the people to whom they are most important will be able to access them is another question.

eddie said:
My experience was different. Slide shows, perusing albums, and even the occasional movie were regular occurrences during family gatherings.

Same here. Photographs have currency in some families and social groups, but not others. I'm the only person I know who still owns a slide projector. Only 20 years ago homes, offices, schools and universities owned millions of the things, now they're rarities, most becoming landfill in the digital year zero. I was called upon to use mine because a club group, most of whose members had hundreds of slides, had no one else who owned a projector. People really did buy into the idea that film was dead, and the hard copies it created were part of a redundant past.

Sirius Glass · Oct 16, 2017

awty said:
Its OK, it still lives, you can get a Polaroid app now.

What is this app of which you speak?

awty · Oct 17, 2017

Sirius Glass said:
What is this app of which you speak?

The comment was made tongue in cheek, but there are apps, plenty of them, google it.
I posted a Holga picture on flickr, someone commented that they like the treatment. I replied that there was no treatment just the way the Holga interpreted it. She replied that she sometimes uses a "Holga filter"....WTF. I checked and there are Holga plug ins for digital editing, like there are for Poloroids. I told her to get the full Holga experience, she should tape her monitor with duct tape and operate the mouse left handed with one eye closed.
Sad state when people cant discern the difference between a computer generated image and one made by a person.

Kevin Ekstrom · Oct 17, 2017

MattKing said:
I'm not sure that respondents to this thread are paying enough attention to the other parts of what Wim Wenders said, in particular: "You produced something that was, in itself, a singular moment. As such, it had a certain sacredness. That whole notion is gone."
And more importantly:
“The culture has changed. It has all gone. I really don’t know why we stick to the word photography any more. There should be a different term, but nobody cared about finding it.”
It seems to me he would be fairly comfortable here on the "analogue" part of PHOTRIO - we could reassure him that it hasn't gone, it is just very much more localized in niche neighbourhoods.

Why do we need a new word? It's still the same.
The word "photography" is a combination of the Greek root words "photo-," meaning "light," and "-graphia," meaning "writing" or "drawing." Thus, "photography" literally means "writing or drawing with light."

Just silliness from sentimentalist who cant deal with change.

guangong · Oct 17, 2017

Don’t forget that camera manufacturers have been busy convincing the general public that film is no longer available. Upon seeing my camera the first comment is usually,”Where can you buy film? Do they still make film?” However, the attraction of digital for most people is that it is easy. No need to take to processor but immediately viewable. Permanence is of no concern. Other than recording family events and vacations, most people did not use film for documentary or artistic purposes and those who did were always a minority. Digital makes perfect sense for commercial photography where costs is important.
Film will be around for a long time although perhaps not with very many choices. A possible danger could be the intrusive nanny state that could determine that something like acetic acid is too dangerous just as certain pigments and brushes are now unavailable to painters. (As if painters normally ate pigments or used them by the ton.) Never underestimate the need for governmental control.
Of course, there is always the chance of the unforeseen. Few could have imagined that many, if not most, teachers in the USA would be unable to read or write script and in fact argue against the need to learn it.
As for right now, film is very much alive.

TheRook · Oct 17, 2017

guangong said:
Don’t forget that camera manufacturers have been busy convincing the general public that film is no longer available.

I think more accurate is that camera manufactures are simply ignoring film by not investing in it any further; all of their resources are directed towards digital photography. (With the exception of a few new instant film cameras, that is.) As a result, the general public then assumes film is no longer available. But I don't really see any indication that the manufacturers are actively pushing the idea that film is no longer available. Rather, they appear to be silent on the issue altogether. Film is no longer a concern for them... no longer a part of their profit-making strategy.

wiltw · Oct 17, 2017

TheRook said:
I'm not so confident the companies hosting those websites and cloud storage facilities will still be there 30 years from now. Or that the uploaded files will still exist and be accessible after all that time has passed. Digital storage has limitations. Although not obvious now, I think this will present a problem down the road... resulting in an entire generation of image taking lost. Except for the prints, that is.

Your view is, unfortunately for those trusting in offsite storage services, all too probable! Back in the 1980's, Digital Equipment Corporation was one of the largest companies in the US and considered only second to IBM in the computing world, with 25 years on the Fortune 500 list. In 1990 it was #27 on the Fortune 500 list and its revenue peaked at nearly $15 Billion. Today it no longer exists, it had vanished by 2000! Compaq purchased DEC primarily for its services business, not being interested in semiconductor production nor minicomputers. Oddly, after HP bought Compaq, the vestiges of Compaq remained only for its budget PC side of the business...what happened to DEC-turned-Compaq services business under HP???
IOW, services -- offered by the second largest computer company -- had VANISHED within ten years of it being #27 in the USA!
We have already seen over the past decade nearly a dozen significant cloud storage services cease to exist.

Sirius Glass · Oct 17, 2017

wiltw said:
Your view is, unfortunately for those trusting in offsite storage services, all too probable! Back in the 1980's, Digital Equipment Corporation was one of the largest companies in the US and considered only second to IBM in the computing world, with 25 years on the Fortune 500 list. In 1990 it was #27 on the Fortune 500 list and its revenue peaked at nearly $15 Billion. Today it no longer exists, it had vanished by 2000! Compaq purchased DEC primarily for its services business, not being interested in semiconductor production nor minicomputers. Oddly, after HP bought Compaq, the vestiges of Compaq remained only for its budget PC side of the business...what happened to DEC-turned-Compaq services business???
IOW, services -- offered by the second largest computer company -- had VANISHED within ten years of it being #27 in the USA!
We have already seen over the past decade nearly a dozen significant cloud storage services cease to exist.

Wise words but one cannot make the blind see especially when their minds are closed.

wiltw · Oct 17, 2017

guangong said:
Don’t forget that camera manufacturers have been busy convincing the general public that film is no longer available. Upon seeing my camera the first comment is usually,”Where can you buy film? Do they still make film?” However, the attraction of digital for most people is that it is easy. No need to take to processor but immediately viewable. Permanence is of no concern. Other than recording family events and vacations, most people did not use film for documentary or artistic purposes and those who did were always a minority. Digital makes perfect sense for commercial photography where costs is important.
Film will be around for a long time although perhaps not with very many choices. A possible danger could be the intrusive nanny state that could determine that something like acetic acid is too dangerous just as certain pigments and brushes are now unavailable to painters. (As if painters normally ate pigments or used them by the ton.) Never underestimate the need for governmental control.
Of course, there is always the chance of the unforeseen. Few could have imagined that many, if not most, teachers in the USA would be unable to read or write script and in fact argue against the need to learn it.
As for right now, film is very much alive.

Unfortunately, much of the 'film is no longer available' stance has been enacted over the years...

chemistries VANISH (Kodachrome, Ilfochrome neė Cibachorme),
classes of products vanish (reversal print paper for color prints from slides);
emulsion are made in far fewer formats (220 format vanished);
dozens of emulsions previously from many manufacturers have vanished...Velvia 50, Kodachrome, many varieties of Ektachrome, Ilford color films
and if you do buy E-6 films, finding RELIABLE QUALITY processing services to process your films!

blockend · Oct 17, 2017

wiltw said:
and if you do buy E-6 films, finding RELIABLE QUALITY processing services to process your films!

Yes, high street photo finishers have all but died off, which was the life blood of the dev and print business. Enthusiasts were never that big a market, at least compared to the millions of people dropping off their weekend photographs on a Monday lunchtime at the 1 hour labs.

Skiver101 · Oct 22, 2017

I don't think it's over. Far from it.
However... Harry Benson, a famous photographer; who is now the best part of 90 years old, was asked recently...
''What advice would you give to a young person today who was thinking of taking up photography as a career...''
To which he replied...'' buy a guitar ''.

Sirius Glass · Oct 22, 2017

Because everyone with a cell phone thinks that they are a photographer and they freely give away their images to television stations and posting on the internet have made a career in photography nearly impossible.

jim10219 · Oct 22, 2017

Sirius Glass said:
Because everyone with a cell phone thinks that they are a photographer and they freely give away their images to television stations and posting on the internet have made a career in photography nearly impossible.

Lots of industries have gone this way. Journalism, musician, recording engineer, author, photographer, taxi driver, travel agent, manufacturer, and many others. It won’t be long before computer programmer, doctor, lawyer, military personnel, teacher, accountant, and just about any other job gets eliminated or reduced to a menial data entry position. It’ll be alright though. Things will always balance themselves out eventually. It’ll just mean we all get more free time to pursue what we love.

And that’s the key right there. Don’t get caught up in the notion that you are a professional anything. Just work hard, be resourceful and willing to try new things and you’ll make it out okay. Then, do what you love with your free time. You don’t have to do what you love for a living to be happy and fulfilled.

Sirius Glass · Oct 23, 2017

Sirius Glass said:
Because everyone with a cell phone thinks that they are a photographer and they freely give away their images to television stations and posting on the internet have made a career in photography nearly impossible.

When I was a teenager deciding what I wanted to do with my life [during the 1960's] I realized that I could not make a good enough living in photography and went into electrical engineering instead. I grew from there.

nmp · Oct 23, 2017

Never believe when someone predicts end of something. Remember "end of history?"

Tim Stapp · Oct 23, 2017

Sirius Glass said:
Because everyone with a cell phone thinks that they are a photographer and they freely give away their images to television stations and posting on the internet have made a career in photography nearly impossible.

I recall recently (I was the hired photographer) having to elbow my way in through the cell phones to photograph the cake cutting at a wedding. I asked the DJ why: given Pandora and iTunes, everyone doesn't think they're a DJ but think they are a photographer? He responded with "I have bigger speakers." I thought to myself that I have a bigger lense and off camera flash...

Sirius Glass · Oct 23, 2017

Tim Stapp said:
Sirius Glass said:

Because everyone with a cell phone thinks that they are a photographer and they freely give away their images to television stations and posting on the internet have made a career in photography nearly impossible.

Click to expand...

I recall recently (I was the hired photographer) having to elbow my way in through the cell phones to photograph the cake cutting at a wedding. I asked the DJ why: given Pandora and iTunes, everyone doesn't think they're a DJ but think they are a photographer? He responded with "I have bigger speakers." I thought to myself that I have a bigger lense and off camera flash...

So use a Hasselblad, Mamiya RB67, or a Speed Graphic to photograph a wedding. I am sure someone somewhere has done that before.

ChristopherCoy · Oct 24, 2017

Two years or so ago I quit following "photography". I quit logging into the forums, I unsubscribed from all the FB groups, I sold all my cameras, I quit meeting up with photography groups, I just quit.

The thing is, if you quit following "photography", the only thing left is fauxtography. So I'd say that "photography" is over, and is now only a niche artform that only true enthusiasts enjoy.

I hired a photographer for my wedding in April 2017, and I ended up teaching them how to light the dang thing.

BMbikerider · Oct 24, 2017

The phrase 'Photography is over' a massive overkill in the way it was meant. The actual word photography has been deemed to mean 'drawing with light' and whatever medium we use it is still photography. The way we use photography is changing, there is no doubt about that but in essence it is the same.

What has changed is the ease by which people can freeze moments in time thanks to full automation which is almost (but not quite) foolproof. It takes little skill to get a picture which will satisfy most. That is what puts a photographer on a different plane to a 'snapper'. Also it is evident that most want to see their pictures immediately not in an hour or a day. It is the immediacy that has prompted the creation of quite small devices to satisfy this 'need'.

Can I suggest that this 'need' is actually quite shallow and has little long term substance. It is a bit like going out to a club for an evening, in a couple of days it is forgotten. Little technical skill is learned or remembered because it isn't needed and in that I find to be quite disappointing. People learn and remember when they have to think about what they are doing and gradually improve. Although I do use a digital 'thing' when I am working to get the required picture, but for relaxation and to test my skills I much prefer my darkroom.

removed account4 · Oct 24, 2017

ChristopherCoy said:
Two years or so ago I quit following "photography". I quit logging into the forums, I unsubscribed from all the FB groups, I sold all my cameras, I quit meeting up with photography groups, I just quit.

The thing is, if you quit following "photography", the only thing left is fauxtography. So I'd say that "photography" is over, and is now only a niche artform that only true enthusiasts enjoy.

I hired a photographer for my wedding in April 2017, and I ended up teaching them how to light the dang thing.

hi christopher
good to see you made it back, and congratulations on your wedding.

why do you say it is fauxtography ?
this is something i don't really understand, photo graph just means made / drawn with light and whether it is a sensor
or something with emulsion on it isn't it made with light ?

the lament over digital tech seems like the same thing as large format users towards "the K O D A K class"

ChristopherCoy · Nov 11, 2017

jnanian said:
hi christopher
good to see you made it back, and congratulations on your wedding.

why do you say it is fauxtography ?
this is something i don't really understand, photo graph just means made / drawn with light and whether it is a sensor
or something with emulsion on it isn't it made with light ?

the lament over digital tech seems like the same thing as large format users towards "the K O D A K class"

It's the difference between knowing HOW to produce an image with a camera, and how to produce an image with a computer. One is done beforehand, one is done as an afterthought.

blockend · Nov 12, 2017

Curating ones own photographs may be over. Choosing good from bad pictures, ones that tell a story from ones that don't, putting them in a book, album or a box, is mostly a thing of the past. Photography seems to be directionless now, consisting of endless test shots of banal subjects that exploit the technological potential of a camera or lens. Because photographs are "free" their value has been lost.

NJH · Nov 12, 2017

Skiver101 said:
I don't think it's over. Far from it.
However... Harry Benson, a famous photographer; who is now the best part of 90 years old, was asked recently...
''What advice would you give to a young person today who was thinking of taking up photography as a career...''
To which he replied...'' buy a guitar ''.

That is quite a funny statement in some key ways. When I was a teen I got into photography and playing guitar, at that time in the late 80s there was still a thriving film photography world but the guitar was seen as utterly uncool. I kept playing guitar through university but the big thing here musically was rave culture back then (no guitars in sight), a fair few people liked guitar bands but to some degree it was still a bit underground and still very much not cool. Nirvana actually played a gig at my University, then a year later everything changed, again.

Back then the best advice was precisely the same as it has been the past 30 years, buy a computer!

Photography is "over"

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency