• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Photography is "over"

Latest Gallery

Two Rocks

H
Two Rocks

  • 2
  • 2
  • 27
.

A
.

  • 2
  • 3
  • 27

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
203,583
Messages
2,856,784
Members
101,913
Latest member
General
Recent bookmarks
0
Sorry if I end up making the same point as before in similar threads. I get one of the big things Wim is talking about and he is 100% right. People have lost the mental attachment to the power of a still image. For sure people are taking selfies but even so called 'serious amateurs' and even those who consider themselves pro are doing the same thing, posting up hundreds or thousands of images a year. What happened to the portfolio for those serious or the neat digestible album for those less serious? It died because people forgot the value of singular powerful image anchoring much more about what is captured therein than just one point in time, they have forgotten what the purpose of a good photograph is. In fact people aren't taking photographs at all, they are taking a very staccato form of a motion picture of their lives viewed in the 3rd person. In this sense the selfie stick is perfect equipment. I have long predicted that its only data bandwidth and technology in general that is keeping such imagery as still images, very soon all will be replaced by video clips and soon after that by constant live streaming from your google or apple glasses which will replace the mobile phone. Imagine that your entire life viewed from your PoV uploaded into the cloud. Its a terrifying thought but its probably only a couple of years away from becoming a common reality.
 
ChristopherCoy said:
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.
Click to expand...

so are people who re-interpret their negatives when they print them fauxtographers too ?
that would put ansel adams in that boat... most of photography is done afterwards/
and what about people who have a lab do everything for them. HCB would be a fauxtographer as well ...
and 99% of the people who shoot color negative or chrome film.

NJH said:
What happened to the portfolio for those serious or the neat digestible album for those less serious? It died because people forgot the value of singular powerful image anchoring much more about what is captured therein than just one point in time, they have forgotten what the purpose of a good photograph is.
Click to expand...
i was told that some of the folks making hiring and firing decisions for photographer - talent these days
don't want any of that ...
ad agents don't even want to see your book they would rather look at your instagram feed.
 
ChristopherCoy said:
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.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly believe that serious photographers who use digital are less capable of producing an image "with a camera" than film photographers are/were, or that casual photographers using film are/were more capable of producing an image "with a camera" than casual digital photographers are?

Aside from your own bias toward your preferred technology, what causes you to think that?
 
I intend to follow this with great interest, I recall, and I have to confess that I don't remember where that "this is the most photographed generation in history and in ten years, there will be no record."
 
As Mark Twain said, “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.”
 
shuttergrinch said:
over in what aspect? photography would always be present. it could never be replaced with video or cgi.
Click to expand...

it isn't too uncomon for a digital video to be made for web-streaming and stills plucked out of the stream. it has been like that for a decade ...
photography ( old with chemicals ) has already been replaced with video and cgi, its just that the 150 people who
regularly post on this website don't believe it, don't want to believe it ( hopefully you realize i am joking ), or they are in a branch of photography, like alternative process work
where the cgi_DV stream work hasn't caught up to yet LOL
... although about 15 years ago i saw a series of framed images at my local chain upscale coffee shop
that begins with star and ends in s ... well, the decor included large, digitally made faux gum over platinium on glass plate images ... so maybe i mis-spoke ? :smile:
 
Last edited:
digital videos especially 4k resolution videos has been saving many photographers when they miss a shot on an event like a wedding. because a screenshot or crop frame by frame of a 4k output is much a larger file from the taken from a the photo. anyhow, people in this forum still do believe in the process and I don't think they would give up just like painters didn't when photography came in the picture. it always go down by choice and not by conformity of the norm.
 
MartinCrabtree said:
989600004026_Color_Bakery_Canvas_Print__God_Is_Dead_-_Nietzsche_is_Dead.jpg
Click to expand...
lol
 
Tim Stapp said:
I intend to follow this with great interest, I recall, and I have to confess that I don't remember where that "this is the most photographed generation in history and in ten years, there will be no record."
Click to expand...

I first heard these predictions a long time ago when a book: "The Faceless Generation" was published. It was about Kodacolor, manufactured at that time, that would fade in a matter of a few years. It was this book that started us thinking about things like "archival". It didn't affect my photography much as I was shooting B&W developed in a wet darkroom. My prints from those days are still "fresh" looking. So my answer to the pessimists in this discussion is quit shooting color, shoot B&W, process it in a wet darkroom and your pictures will outlast you, your children, grandchildren and on and on and on......OK, OK, I admit my Kodachrome, and Agfachrome CT18 slides don't show fading but my Kodacolor prints from long ago are now pink, imageless pieces of paper............Regards!
 
My local CVS store has the "Kodak" digital print kiosk that offers instant prints from digital sources at very reasonable prices. I believe the printing method is a pigment transfer system similar to dye sublimation, and prints of mine that have been in direct daylight for ten years show no signs of fading. The image quality is very good, streets ahead of vintage minilab color prints from color negatives. This leads me to believe there is still money to be made from the retailing of color prints and that photography is not "over" at all.
 
My photography is both-and, not either-or. Since the summer I've shot 35mm mono and colour, medium format mono, colour print and transparency, as well as digital on iPhone, DSLR and mirrorless cameras. I have a strong affinity to the film image that I'm prepared to compromise whenever necessary. Today I shot a roll of 100 ASA Fomapan on an XA3. Last week I received a couple of hundred small enprints from an online printer who is both cheap and good. I dislike the virtual nature of the digital image, and getting small prints made from almost every file is like going back in time. The low price also allows me to hand out small prints in exactly the way Wenders believes is dead.

The most important thing is not film or digital, but making prints that enable an image to live on once the camera that made it, the hard drive it was stored on, and the computer protocols that created it are all ancient history.
 
jnanian said:
photography ( old with chemicals ) has already been replaced with video and cgi, its just that the 150 people who
regularly post on this website don't believe it, :smile:
Click to expand...

This has raised an interesting question for me. How many members of Photrio still develop and darkroom print photographs. I'd probably rather not know as it might be a frighteningly low number.

pentaxuser
 
pentaxuser said:
This has raised an interesting question for me. How many members of Photrio still develop and darkroom print photographs. I'd probably rather not know as it might be a frighteningly low number.

pentaxuser
Click to expand...

Hardly scientific but you can count me as one.
 
pentaxuser said:
This has raised an interesting question for me. How many members of Photrio still develop and darkroom print photographs. I'd probably rather not know as it might be a frighteningly low number.

pentaxuser
Click to expand...
Don't know, but Harman/Ilford still sell lots of photographic paper.
Even if what was a $40.00 box of paper just a few years ago is now a $100.00 + box of paper.
 
Count me in, color and b&w in the darkroom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:
Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom