Will there ever be another photographic movement?

[AnselMortensen]

We’ll need a manifesto:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_manifesto

Of course, we would have to agree on our “intentions, motives, or views.” What are the chances of that?

Good luck with that!

We can't agree on the meaning of the word "the" here...never mind pre-soaking or Kodachrome.

 

[Pieter12]

I disagree with that. There are alot of means to view work online of "professional photographers" who actually get paid to take photographs for various websites.

And then see the "amatuer snapping" on photocrowd or even deviant art, provided you overlook the cartoon porn crap. That is actually superior to most of the "elite" photographers these days.

There isn't much money in taking photos for websites, you won't see the best commercial work there (except when it is image advertising). The pros are shooting for ads. Wedding photography has become lucrative, a lot of pros are doing that work, too. And editorial work has usually been one of the best creative outlets. And of course those who shoot photography as an art form don't necessarily show up on the internet.

 

[redbandit]

There isn't much money in taking photos for websites, you won't see the best commercial work there (except when it is image advertising). The pros are shooting for ads. Wedding photography has become lucrative, a lot of pros are doing that work, too. And editorial work has usually been one of the best creative outlets. And of course those who shoot photography as an art form don't necessarily show up on the internet.

im showing and feeling my age now. Dong a gig as a photographer for a website doesnt make as much money as you would think. I used to be online friends with Kate Lambert who owned several adult sites under the steamgirl domain.. back 2018 she was only paying her photographers 1200 a MONTH and expected 1 shoot per week minimum.

 

[Pieter12]

im showing and feeling my age now. Dong a gig as a photographer for a website doesnt make as much money as you would think. I used to be online friends with Kate Lambert who owned several adult sites under the steamgirl domain.. back 2018 she was only paying her photographers 1200 a MONTH and expected 1 shoot per week minimum.

Did she at least provide the models for that pittance? I assume it was work for hire (poison for a professional photographer) and the photographers had no rights to the images.

 

[jtk]

There isn't much money in taking photos for websites, you won't see the best commercial work there (except when it is image advertising). The pros are shooting for ads. Wedding photography has become lucrative, a lot of pros are doing that work, too. And editorial work has usually been one of the best creative outlets. And of course those who shoot photography as an art form don't necessarily show up on the internet.

Depends upon the websites you're talking about. Many website photos are extracted from videos. Some videographers are highly paid and others are totally unpaid.

In ancient times I made most of my living with studio food photos. Today that high priced work is mostly unnecessary because phones in the hands of people who don't identify as "photographers account for most of what you see. Photos by bloggers and friends etc.

 

[Pieter12]

Depends upon the websites you're talking about. Many website photos are extracted from videos. Some videographers are highly paid and others are totally unpaid.

In ancient times I made most of my living with studio food photos. Today that high priced work is mostly unnecessary because phones in the hands of people who don't identify as "photographers account for most of what you see. Photos by bloggers and friends etc.

Videographers usually do "work for hire"--so the footage and rights belong to the client, meaning if a still is pulled from a video, the maker gets nothing. Food photos used for advertising are still made by pros working with food stylists (who are the real heroes of food photography), not amateurs and their iPhones. Yeah, small restaurants and yelp reviews have crappy amateur shots, but anyone placing media online or publishing a magazine or cookbook will use a pro. Although I did read about a restaurant that had set up a table with lighting for customers to take a snap of their food to post online!

 

[redbandit]

Did she at least provide the models for that pittance? I assume it was work for hire (poison for a professional photographer) and the photographers had no rights to the images.

I almost bit at the gig, but i was making ALOT more per month in a normal non photo job, and i couldnt afford to relocate to vegas.. etc.

But it was a flat rate, website owned all images and rights. For hire gig. She wanted like 4-500 stills per shoot, and perhaps 60 minutes of "finished quality" movie, so perhaps 5 hours of video shot per week as well.

At the time I think she was nice and listed the photographers name next to each "click to view this photo shoot" link.

 

[Arthurwg]

None of the above would constitute a photographic "movement" - just usage and market trends.
Movements are essentially relevant only in the world of art and publishing.
The trends may affect what eventually becomes a movement, but they aren't the movement themselves.

Absolutely correct. A "movement" requires an idea or a group of ideas, conscious or unconscious, that coalesce. This may include groups of people who know or are aware of each other, as well as those who work independently but share the same zeitgeist.

 

[Arthurwg]

My partner (also a photographer), who I've just consulted, tells me that today's photography "movement" is focused on the self, and that person's immediate environment, friends and activities, sort of a development from Nan Goldin.

 

[faberryman]

My partner (also a photographer), who I've just consulted, tells me that today's photography "movement" is focused on the self, and that person's immediate environment, friends and activities, sort of a development from Nan Goldin.

Without more, that sounds like what would be on most people's iPhones, so it sounds pretty vague. Nan Goldin had a certain style and point of view. She was not a movement.

 

[Pieter12]

A "movement" requires an idea or a group of ideas, conscious or unconscious, that coalesce.

Certainly won't happen with this group.

 

[George Mann]

Certainly won't happen with this group.

Why not? I already have a group plan that is easy to agree upon.

 

[Arthurwg]

Without more, that sounds like what would be on most people's iPhones, so it sounds pretty vague. Nan Goldin had a certain style and point of view. She was not a movement.

You're right, she was not a movement. I'm talking about what followed.

 

[jvo]

It seems like digital technology has shattered many of the artistic boundaries we tried to define in the past. In the earliest days, the complex technical demands of photography naturally limited the number of active practitioners and it was easy to identify a few interest groups as 'movements'. Then time went by, taking pictures became easier and easier, stylistic genres multiplied and the lines between them started to blur. Now that smartphone cameras have eliminated most technical and financial restrictions, anyone and everyone can be a photographer who actively defines and promotes their own approach as a distinct style. That's way too many to keep track of , so maybe we could just call it the 'me' movement.

artistic boundaries require visual literacy... with today' technology you can make lots of good pictures. given the sheer quantity, combined with a visually uneducated populace, ("we have have seen the enemy, he is us" - pogo), and demassification a la' toffler, any movement may be apparent only in hindsight!

 

[jtk]

My partner (also a photographer), who I've just consulted, tells me that today's photography "movement" is focused on the self, and that person's immediate environment, friends and activities, sort of a development from Nan Goldin.

Interesting to think about Nan Goldin in context of smart phones. Did her work presage Instagram?

 

[Arthurwg]

There's a new documentary about Nan Goldin that's coming to Taos eventually. I must say that I don't love her work.

 

[jtk]

There's a new documentary about Nan Goldin that's coming to Taos eventually. I must say that I don't love her work.

Not necessary to love anybody's work. Not sufficiently interested in Instagram OR Goldin to investigate. Plenty of photography of all sorts, all over the place. I committed some today.

 

[VinceInMT]

The site (no affiliation) www.thisiscolossal.com is sot of an aggregator of interesting work in the visual arts. The posted a piece the other day looking at photography stories that received the most feedback in the past year. There is some interesting work but I am not sure I could lump it all into a defined movement.

The Photography Stories Colossal Readers Loved Most in 2022​

 

[jtk]

artistic boundaries require visual literacy... with today' technology you can make lots of good pictures. given the sheer quantity, combined with a visually uneducated populace, ("we have have seen the enemy, he is us" - pogo), and demassification a la' toffler, any movement may be apparent only in hindsight!

jvo...yes, "sheer quantity" is exhausting and I may understand what you mean about Pogo and Toffler, and you are almost correct about "hindsight." However...I've been reading about Stieglitz and the people around him. which leads me to suspect that the "movement" he inspired/invented is still with us (with me) and might actually be the bedrock of much of today's best (IMO) photography, including a little of my own.

I think this has something to do with a distinction between snapshooting and photographing (and printing) intentionally.

 

[jtk]

I don't mean to be negative about hobby work, but I do think hobby-as-"art" is a mistake.

jvo's "visual literacy" idea doesn't seem to me to relate to "art," and even less so to photo hobby.

 

[faberryman]

I don't mean to be negative about hobby work, but I do think hobby-as-"art" is a mistake.

What is hobby-as-"art"? Why is it a mistake? For whom is it a mistake? What are the consequences of such a mistake, and to whom?

 

[Pieter12]

What is hobby-as-"art"? Why is it a mistake? For whom is it a mistake?

Are we getting into the what is art discussion again (it seems inevitable)? I have seen jigsaw puzzles, glued and varnished, on people's walls. I guess for them it is art, or at least a symbol of achievement.

 

[jtk]

I don't think about "them" or what "they" think is art, and I certainly don't attribute "symbolism" to the work of others, though some do evidently enjoy it.

For answers to some questions I suggest Alfred Stiglitz and the immortal movement in which some of us will always participate.

 

[jtk]

Alfred Stieglitz - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[VinceInMT]

There is a fairly new video that offers a crash course in the history of art movements over time:



It is only 20 minutes or so and, as such, lives up to its title, “A Brief History of Art Movements.” In the many examples, photography is not mentioned and I think this is due to that medium‘s existence alongside the other mediums (drawing, painting, sculpture, collage, etc.). That, for me, answers the subject query by the OP which infers that photography had its own movements, separate from the rest of the art world. During the Dada movement, photographers produced work in that genre (Lazlo Maholy-Nagy) just like they did during Surrealism (Man Ray), and Abstract Expressionism (Aaron Siskind).