Will there ever be another photographic movement?

[MattKing]

And some musicians create original music and some play in cover bands.

Sometimes covers can be good:

And yes, I know that wasn't a "cover band".

 

[MattKing]

This question is probably more about whether photography in general may appear to coalesce into something that could be referred to as a movement.
I doubt it will, because it is doing more fragmentation than coalescing.

 

[VinceInMT]

Sometimes covers can be good:…
And yes, I know that wasn't a "cover band".

After I wrote my comment I also thought about all the symphonies in the world who play “classical music” are really cover bands.

 

[faberryman]

It seems like I see a lot of contemporary photographs that look as if they are done in the same style. I'm not sure what the difference is between a lot of photographs that are done in the same style and a movement. Perhaps a movement requires an overarching philosophy.

 

[Pieter12]

I don't know if it qualifies as a movement, but there seem to be a lot of staged self-portraits being done by women. Alienation and the plight of women in society tend to be the motifs, many times the figure itself is turned away from the camera to represent "every woman" or to grant anonymity. To me, it looks like it may come from the work of Francesca Woodman and grown from there.

 

[jtk]

This question is probably more about whether photography in general may appear to coalesce into something that could be referred to as a movement.
I doubt it will, because it is doing more fragmentation than coalescing.

Fragmentation? I think "photography" is diversifying: more/different voices are being heard.

Somebody on Photrio just asked for input about a good mirrorless dslr for shooting his yoga instruction on Youtube. He actually got what seemed a good answer....right here on Photrio.

Diversification is happening everywhere, even on Photrio !

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

How many more times does Mt. Everest need to be climbed........"I" haven't photographed El Capitan yet from my own tripod holes. To me, it's not the subject nearly as much as it is the act of photographing it. Asking in general.......does photography need a "movement "? Does film photography need a movement?

I think that's a good point, Chuck. When an amateur musician plays old tunes, enjoys the music, etc. he's not creating anything new. But he's playing his instrument and enjoying the results. He puts his own feeling into it as best he can. Hopefully, others share the enjoyment with him.

Well, it's the same with photographers. It's fun and creative to make your own pictures. So what if it's the Empire State Building that's been photographed billions of times? You get to put your own angle on it. Or not. You can claim it as your own. If your kid's in the picture, better still. And unique.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

A movement I see is a style of non-importance. Created by an abundance of social platforms and cellphones, people take pictures as part of their social functioning and let it end in the phone. No editing, cropping, printing or showing otherwise.

When I asked my cousin if I could see her vacation trip to Europe, she said they were all in her cell phone to be thumbed through. Photography has become for many just another ordinary activity unrelated to art, like brushing your teeth every day.

 

[markjwyatt]

...Some would suggest that once everything in the world is photographed, what else is there to do? ...

There are always new people, and people and nature changes. There are different ways to photograph the same thing. Not all photography is straight documentary photography.

 

[Pieter12]

For some, photography (that they produce) is and will be about documenting their lives and experiences. It need not go any further than that, art is not a consideration.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

There are always new people, and people and nature changes. There are different ways to photograph the same thing. Not all photography is straight documentary photography.

Shooting family and friends will always be popular.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

For some, photography (that they produce) is and will be about documenting their lives and experiences. It need not go any further than that, art is not a consideration.

Shooting family is art if you define art as something that stirs the inner self and our emotions. When you look at a picture of someone you love, you fall in love all over again.

 

[Pieter12]

Shooting family and friends will always be popular.

Popular does not define a movement, except maybe a generic "popular" one. I doubt very much that that was what the OP was asking about.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Popular does not define a movement, except maybe a generic "popular" one. I doubt very much that that was what the OP was asking about.

I wasn't answering his question. The thread has moved on.

 

[Pieter12]

Shooting family is art if you define art as something that stirs the inner self and our emotions. When you look at a picture of someone you love, you fall in love all over again.

For me art has to be intentional. If I look at bird and it stirs me, is the bird art? No, it's a bird. If looking at the bird stirs me and I make something representing that emotion, be it a photograph, painting, sculpture, poem, music or song, then that might be art.

 

[AnselMortensen]

Back on topic...
I tend to think of a 'movement' as a group of people espousing the same general ideals, kinda like Stieglitz, Photo-Secession, f/64, Pre-Raphaelites, Pictorialists, etc.
Usually at night, in cafés or coffee shops, smoking cigarettes, drinking espresso or Calvados, wearing berets and reciting poetry and wanting change.

It'll never happen...around here the cafés and coffee shops close in the afternoons and smoking indoors is illegal.

 

[eli griggs]

History decides when 'movments' or fads have occured, IMO, naming your work as part of any specific social era, could be confusing to others, and different periods.

If you do street photograph, just say that, the category covers all the basics, if those and enough similar photographs are latter pulled together by art historians or editors, and sorted as a particular movement, well, that's just dandy, but today and tomorrow you, IMO, are simply doing photography under the broadest lable applicable.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

For me art has to be intentional. If I look at bird and it stirs me, is the bird art? No, it's a bird. If looking at the bird stirs me and I make something representing that emotion, be it a photograph, painting, sculpture, poem, music or song, then that might be art.

You're defining art from the perspective of the creator. I define art from the perspective of the viewer. If it stirs the viewer, it's art. It doesn't matter what the creator thinks. In fact, he might not even think of it at all. From the standpoint of art, it doesn't matter what the creator thinks or doesn't think? It has no effect on whether it's art.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Back on topic...
I tend to think of a 'movement' as a group of people espousing the same general ideals, kinda like Stieglitz, Photo-Secession, f/64, Pre-Raphaelites, Pictorialists, etc.
Usually at night, in cafés or coffee shops, smoking cigarettes, drinking espresso or Calvados, wearing berets and reciting poetry and wanting change.

It'll never happen...around here the cafés and coffee shops close in the afternoons and smoking indoors is illegal.

I'm old enough to remember the beatnik generation, the hippie generation, the lost generation. Maybe when the economy suffers soon, and people lose their jobs and have time to hang around, another generation of artists and movements will immerge. A good revolution stirs the souls.

 

[cliveh]

One of my students was about to attend a university interview to study photography and she asked me "what should I say if they ask me what is your favourite movement in photography". I suggested she say focusing the camera or perhaps pressing the shutter.

 

[Cholentpot]

I'm old enough to remember the beatnik generation, the hippie generation, the lost generation. Maybe when the economy suffers soon, and people lose their jobs and have time to hang around, another generation of artists and movements will immerge. A good revolution stirs the souls.

We had this happen in 2020 and there's been an explosion of new film shooters. It's just that you don't have the perspective while it's actively going on. Call it the 'Back To Film' movement. It's going on all around us. You just need to look.

 

[Pieter12]

You're defining art from the perspective of the creator. I define art from the perspective of the viewer. If it stirs the viewer, it's art. It doesn't matter what the creator thinks. In fact, he might not even think of it at all. From the standpoint of art, it doesn't matter what the creator thinks or doesn't think? It has no effect on whether it's art.

I agree. Art is in the eye of the beholder. But most art is intentional and a lot of what the creator may consider art is not appreciated by many beholders.

 

[Pieter12]

Artistic movements have often originated from gatherings of creative people--in cafés and bars, but also in homes and apartments. There are still "salons" being held, even if they're not called that and artistic and philosophical discussions still occur among many.

 

[Don_ih]

You now see a lot of trends but not necessarily "movements". I think a movement requires ideological guidance, and that is missing from photographic trends. Using film is a trend. There's not much ideology involved. Ideology relates the activity and the result to something it's not. It draws in the political, cultural, historical, etc. So there is always the possibility for such things. However, the photographic world is much larger now than it ever was before - as are all the "worlds" of art. How many photographers did you need to have a movement 100 years ago? 15? You still need that many - but it's very unlikely anyone else will notice them.

 

[MattKing]

Fragmentation? I think "photography" is diversifying: more/different voices are being heard.

Somebody on Photrio just asked for input about a good mirrorless dslr for shooting his yoga instruction on Youtube. He actually got what seemed a good answer....right here on Photrio.

Diversification is happening everywhere, even on Photrio !

Whether you prefer the word fragmentation or diversification, it probably doesn't matter. Photography seems to have fewer shared "icons" or goals - at least compared to how things seemed when I was young and less confident in my preferences.
It occurs to me though that neither fragmentation nor diversification are entirely appropriate terms, because they somehow imply a central unifying core and change that originates there. There really isn't any such centre any more - it is just what there was and is a collection of things and actions loosely described as the "world of photography" which is continuously being impacted by a meteor shower of unrelated influences that have a visual component - with photography some times pushing or reflecting back.
Photrio (and Apug before it) has been in a constant state of diversification since I joined in 2005. Some core things have remained unchanged, while others have evolved tremendously. And of course, for a fair number of photographically related subjects, Photrio isn't a core resource - a bit of functional specialization is actually a good thing. If a member here finds that the community isn't particularly interested in the parts of photography which most interest that member no one will mind if that member reduces their time here and looks elsewhere.
As I've posted several times, photography is a big tent.