Photographer Mark Meyers just wrote up a nice enough story aimed at driving awareness fear in professional photographers … fear about the future of their career, their well-being, their jobs.
Depicted in that article this image at left, which was completely generated by the author of the post using an emerging 3d modeling software called Blender. The quote that stands out from the article is this one:
“If you are a photographer that makes a living shooting still-life photos, this should scare you…”
Bullshit. Unless of course…
You take the kind of photo that actually requires no personal vision…or
you’re unwilling to evolve with the industry…or
you’re somehow deluded that photography should be bound to wait for it’s sectors that can’t evolve…or
you’re unable to comprehend the definition of photography expanding into new horizons.
In which case it SHOULD scare you because you should be replaced.
Because whether the camera is 6 megapixels or 60, it’s a point and shoot or a dSLR, or … gasp…the “camera” is a dude sitting at a desktop computer…these tools are JUST TOOLS and cannot create compelling content without a human driver, a storyteller, a visionary at it’s helm. And those photos are the only photos you should be aiming to create…unless of course, you’re ok being replaced by a lower priced pork belly.
This might seem like tough love if you’re hearing this for the first time. Apologies. But, get used to hearing no. If you’re an aspiring amateur or new pro, it’s fair to be disappointed, frustrated, or to find yourself in a position where what’s sitting in your lap is something different than you thought you signed up for. But it’s not smart for any of us to feel entitled — to complain about an evolving creative marketplace or desire to freeze an entire industry in time. Whether we like it or not, all industries march on.
Consider this your prime opportunity to start (or continue) to differentiate yourself, your work, your vision from that of your peers.
—-
(via petapixel)
Software is a tool and someone has to put that tool in action. Like a camera is a tool. Yes.
—
Nicolae Cioloca
-Fotografie-
Code generators have to be coded. Plus, code generators only get you so far then you have to finish it out.
I remember hearing about “code generators” that would replace programmers but I never saw that happen either.
These are some good points Chase and I think you are saying almost the same thing as Mark Meyer, just emphasizing different aspects.
It is nice to talk about creativity, but we should remember that there are large, profitable niches in this field where photographers have earned a pretty decent living with impeccable craft and hard-earned knowledge where shocking originality and creativity were not the most important thing. Open up a glossy fashion magazine this month and look at the exquisite photos (if they are indeed photos) in the Rolex ads. There is nothing particularly creative about them. But they are perfectly lit and composed, leave just the right amount of room for text, and are sharp in all the right places. They are impeccable and this is HARD to do. If this is photography, the photographer probably has some serious overhead in equipment and probably makes a pretty healthy fee for shooting these. To compete with this photographer you would need to dedicate some serious time and money,
The same image can be rendered. The question is: who is going to do it and how much is that work going to be worth. Photographers who want to keep creating these images might evolve, but the difference in skills between shooting studio still life and rendering still life are pretty extreme. Many are not going to keep up regardless of how creative they are. Are established photographers going back to school? Also, the overhead is much lower for rendering. It seems much more likely that the ad agency will hire a young talented designer who has some Maya skills and give him the work. And maybe that’s okay, but it’s one more niche that no longer belongs to the photographers.
I think the original article is right on the money—photographers need to understand what it really is they are doing. They need to understand that the camera isn’t just a tool for creating realistic images, it’s a tool, no THE tool, for capturing the real world and a creative way. Photographers who focus on that won’t be touched by 3D rendering at all because it is a different paradigm and a very important way.
Blender is amazing! Photorealistic Lux renderer, I see it as another tool to add to photography. Started to learn, thinking about building sets in 3D shooting green screen or expanding real sets with 3D. It’s will give us so much possibilities and it is only ours creativity that sets limits. I am not afraid!
What is stopping anyone from creating an application that builds on the construct of human understanding to be able to create images with creative integrity. What does humanity, a construct made up of trillions of organisms living in symbiosis have that a machine or program could not in theory also have? With time I believe even creativIty can be replicated. We have the human blueprint all that’s left is to build it.