“I can’t get over the feeling that pictures taken with a camera in a phone that everyone owns [iphone] have no value.” – Excerpt from APhotoEditor, Drowning in Photography
Sorry APE, forgive me for being prescriptive, but you’d better get over that feeling.
Just because “everyone’s doing it” — because there are a lot of photos out there in the world — doesn’t mean photography is headed for the shitter.
Two counter points cutting through to some clarity:
1. A similar argument “everyone’s doing it so photography is now lowbrow” was used in 1895 when Kodak developed roll film that could be loaded in daylight. The professionals argued that craft was now “completely lost to the amateurs”. Obviously that played out as an error in thinking, since nearly all the modern photographic “masters” have grown into being since this time in 1895, not before.
It’s just like your favorite band getting famous and then hating them for it, or talking shit about Nike and wearing Converse high tops – there’s no truth there. Nirvana changed music forever, regardless of how popular they became, and Nike owns Converse. The complaint about value is more about protecting the egos of hipsters, than a reflection of reality.
Now, before all photographers who have to work harder to make a living because of this (of which I am one) get mad, … we should remember #2:
2. Sure professional photographers must work harder today to differentiate their work, but that’s the case with almost every profession that invokes technology, or the fusion of technology and creativity. It gets harder to make the “same as it used to be” living over time in a crowded market. But this is not something that only photographers have to contend with. Almost ALL these such markets are getting more crowded. What marketplace stands still for its masses? None. Welcome to a nearly ubiquitous truth.
So, as I advocated in my Dasein Project, it might not be what some photographers want to hear, but let’s think of this a little differently. I prefer to make the argument that the snapshot has become perhaps the most human, the most important photography of our modern era. Professionals are still relevant for making statements and defining brands, genres, and movements, but it’s the snapshot that is today carrying the most metaphysical weight. Sure they’re everywhere, but that doesn’t make them worthless.
A great quote from a paper by Mia Fineman, photography curator at the Metropolitan Museum in NYC, comes to mind…
“We take snapshots to commemorate important events, to document our travels, to see how we look in pictures, to eternalize the commonplace, to extract some thread of continuity from the random fabric of experience. We try to impose a kind of order, but sometimes the process backfires, and the messy contingency of the world rushes back in, bringing with it a metaphoric richness that parallels that of dreams. The amateur photo-album is an anthology of errors: there are tilted horizons, amputated heads, looming shadows, blurs, lens flares, underexposures, overexposures, and inadvertant double exposures. And while not every bungled snapshot is a minor miracle, some seem to tap into a sort of free-floating visual intelligence that runs through the bedrock of the everyday like a vein of gold.”
So let’s reconsider the snooty position. Of course curators are important, whether that’s your friends Tumblr site or the MOMA, but with more cameras and more photos than ever before–and even BETTER photos–shouldn’t it be said that we’re not drowning in photography at all, that we’re perhaps getting metaphorically rich off more and more of these veins of gold?
——
PHOTOGRAPHY IS DEAD. YOU CAN NOT MAKE MUCH MONEY IN IT UNLESS YOU ARE ALREADY A WELL KNOWN PRO
Excellent. This is really good. Really. Great way to look at things. I wrote about this before…how pros think our industry is the only one facing these changes. Truthfully we are one of the last facing it. Change comes. Adapt or fade away.
Eloquently put, Mr. J. That “drowning” mindset stems from a selfish place, and is counter productive for everyone involved! But if a more selfless attitude is adopted, then the metaphysical “rich” mindset will take hold; adding a few more King Midas’ to our world can and never will be a bad thing. I am so grateful to live in such a rich time.. for if it was 1894, I would be seriously bummed (left) out..
Add into all of this those Art schools which are pumping photographers out by the thousands for 50k-100k for their tuitions so they can make 20K in payment. Who was it that said, you have to make 100K in order to net 20K in actual payment because the rest goes back into the business?
I agree and disagree at the same time.
Yes we are drowning in photographs and yes the digital age has devalued the photograph. There are even more disposable than ever. More a more people are getting semi-professional camera and taking work away from pro’s. In my small town alone a number of armature photographers have started charging rock bottom prices because they can afford to and because its not their main source of income. They never take it out of Auto setting and the camera does all the work.
My wife decided to take up photography a year ago. Through her online degree course and learning from myself she has finally realized the true value of a photograph and what it really takes to make a living from photography.
Now with the iphone, yes it has a value as far as a record of our time but that record is only good providing the record is kept safe. With film you got a print and a negative that was stored away in an attic that someone could find.100 years later people found them. How many pictures will be around in 20 years time as online storage goes off line, hard drives break and CD’s fail.
Also if you look at what is being taken with the Iphone/Smart Phone the majority of the images are teenage girls photographing themselves in a bathroom mirror or their car. If those images do manage to stay around i wonder what it will tell future generations about us ?
I disagree that the majority of iphone/smartphone pictures are teenage girls taking photos in a bathroom mirror. Also, digital pictures must not ONLY live on online storage, hard drives, CDs, or other media you’re talking about. I print a lot of my digital images. Who’s to say those can’t be found in an attic in 100 years?
Also, how do you know what modes these “armature” photographers use? If they can make some money at doing whatever they can do, they will do so, regardless of what that is. You’d do the same thing. As another poster said, we just need to increase what people value in a photograph.
erm when was the last time you looked at social media…Look at any number of teenage girls on Facebook and you will see an entirely different story.
No they must not live on online storage but look at what’s happening on the print world regarding the number of photolabs and processing facilities. It’s a known fact that less and less images are being printed. Even the printer manufactures have stated its in decline.
No i don’t do the same thing and i resent that statement.
As for the modes they use 9 times out of 10 i get a phone call asking me how they should take the pictures so yes i know.
I agree we need to increase how people should precieve the value of a photograph but it’s not by doing it this way or charging rock bottom prices
Which is why I make blurb books out of all my favorite images, for when the images disappear. LOL!