| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/23/2013 09:18:25 AM · #1 |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 09:31:27 AM · #2 |
| They're right. All three of my images in voting are scoring over 5. I am a corporate pawn. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 09:56:51 AM · #3 |
"Volume may be up, but creativity is down – and at the risk of shocking the army of selfie shooters, I have to tell you that this is by design. Our supposed acts of creativity are just another node in corporate production. Such is the real tragedy of the death of Kodak: it exposes the devil's pact between our own narcissism and the brutal business models of Silicon Valley, whose young potentates turn out to be far less generous than George Eastman."
makes you want to stop using the phone on your camera.(camera on phone, rather)
Message edited by author 2013-08-23 10:04:12. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 10:51:06 AM · #4 |
I think, ironically, Jason's own article falls victim to his mantra of "volume is up, creativity is down". Is anybody, ANYBODY, pining for the days where we only had film? Where you couldn't see your results for days? (I can see the headlines back in 1985..."one hour photo processing...photography volume is up, creativity is down".
Let's put a positive spin on it all. The ephemera of everyday life is being captured like never before. People generations later will have a unique insight into how we lived and what we did. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 11:02:58 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
They're right. All three of my images in voting are scoring over 5. I am a corporate pawn. |
Perhaps the collective consciousness of DPC is simply beginning to appreciate your work. Or, your experimentation could be moving in a direction that has more popular appeal.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2013 11:49:07 AM · #6 |
That's the most self-important, argogant tripe I've read in a long time. We're taking the same pictures we've always taken -- just more of them. Instead of taking one picture of the butterfly -- I'm taking 35 to get it right. Who cares?
My honeymoon pictures includes a picture of a banana sitting on the dashboard of the car. We assume that we were trying to take a picture of mountains or something else out of the windshield, you really can't tell, but it's a nice picture of a banana on the dashboard. The model hasn't changed. People are taking the same pictures they've always taken. Look at people's photo albums. Have they really changed?
Put a camera in someone's hands, and they're going to take pictures of whatever they want. Just because it was film, doesn't mean we didn't waste our pictures, and that we took extremely creative shots that were beautiful works of art. We may get more junk because we're taking more shots, but we also can experiment more because we don't have to pay through the nose for it. We can get the better shot, because we can see we didn't do it right, and we can adjust.
It sounds like a photographer that's just angry because regular people get to take pictures. Poor thing...
|
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:04:51 PM · #7 |
I agree -
and if anything, being that the general populous my be haphazardly taking pictures, high-quality creative shots are quite recognizable as being special.
Originally posted by vawendy:
That's the most self-important, argogant tripe I've read in a long time. We're taking the same pictures we've always taken -- just more of them. Instead of taking one picture of the butterfly -- I'm taking 35 to get it right. Who cares?
My honeymoon pictures includes a picture of a banana sitting on the dashboard of the car. We assume that we were trying to take a picture of mountains or something else out of the windshield, you really can't tell, but it's a nice picture of a banana on the dashboard. The model hasn't changed. People are taking the same pictures they've always taken. Look at people's photo albums. Have they really changed?
Put a camera in someone's hands, and they're going to take pictures of whatever they want. Just because it was film, doesn't mean we didn't waste our pictures, and that we took extremely creative shots that were beautiful works of art. We may get more junk because we're taking more shots, but we also can experiment more because we don't have to pay through the nose for it. We can get the better shot, because we can see we didn't do it right, and we can adjust.
It sounds like a photographer that's just angry because regular people get to take pictures. Poor thing... |
|
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:14:25 PM · #8 |
A few errors in the piece... Film is still in production. Secured and first tier creditors are going to get 100% of their money.
As for creativity... I believe it is still there. I believe the problem is data overload. We are bombarded by so many images, from so many sources, there just isn't time to find the "good stuff". The DPC model works against creativity as well. Three challenges a week, means racing from subject to subject, if you try to do them all.
Shooting for scores is the antithesis of creativity. To shoot for others, means you are not shooting for yourself.
I find that I am shooting more film. It encourages me to think about the composition, the light, the exposure, the reason I am creating a photograph in the first place. No blasting through 50 shots as I try different angles, chimpimg, and then blasting through 200 more till I get something I like. Just can't do that with film. You have to try to see like the camera and the film, to anticipate the results.
Disclaimer: I am not a good photographer, and know it. Much too busy with life to give it the attention it would need. At the same time I do appreciate great images, and creativity. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:19:12 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
Shooting for scores is the antithesis of creativity. To shoot for others, means you are not shooting for yourself.
|
This is VERY true of DPC.
There IS an abundance of creativity here... however, it seems that most people are overly concerned with scores.
While I do enjoy getting higher scores, and trying to beat my average...
I welcome the challenges. It gives me another reason to go out and shoot... and to be more creative in my photos.
Ultimately, I am shooting for me, not for my score.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:19:58 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
"Volume may be up, but creativity is down – and at the risk of shocking the army of selfie shooters, I have to tell you that this is by design. Our supposed acts of creativity are just another node in corporate production. Such is the real tragedy of the death of Kodak: it exposes the devil's pact between our own narcissism and the brutal business models of Silicon Valley, whose young potentates turn out to be far less generous than George Eastman."
makes you want to stop using the phone on your camera.(camera on phone, rather) |
I pretty much agree with the writer, but I say this as someone who started out shooting and developing my own film 30 years ago. In ways I think it's also why I don't have a camera phone. Maybe I'm just old fashioned...or a snobby purist or hybrid combo there of...I don't know. I do love digital photography though.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:28:09 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
A few errors in the piece...
As for creativity... I believe it is still there. I believe the problem is data overload. We are bombarded by so many images, from so many sources, there just isn't time to find the "good stuff". The DPC model works against creativity as well. Three challenges a week, means racing from subject to subject, if you try to do them all. ... |
yes, yes, and yes.
as for the resurgence of film, digital facilities are proving to be great enablers.
in all, we need to become better and better choosers. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:35:56 PM · #12 |
I think that is overly cynical and simply not the case.
Doing something to please the masses does not mean it is void of creativity.
I'm not saying it is the end-all be-all of creativity, but just because the masses respond well to something, doesn't mean it isn't creative.
YES, sometimes mass-appeal has nothing to do with creativity, or TRUE creativity, but there is not a direct correlation either way -
but if you are assigned a cover for a magazine and given specific topics and limitations - and a review board has to approve it .. it doesn't mean it will be less creative than anything else. In fact, working within limitations ENCOURAGES creativity and requires it.
Originally posted by Denielle:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Shooting for scores is the antithesis of creativity. To shoot for others, means you are not shooting for yourself.
|
This is VERY true of DPC.
There IS an abundance of creativity here... however, it seems that most people are overly concerned with scores.
While I do enjoy getting higher scores, and trying to beat my average...
I welcome the challenges. It gives me another reason to go out and shoot... and to be more creative in my photos.
Ultimately, I am shooting for me, not for my score. |
Message edited by author 2013-08-23 12:37:10. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:42:29 PM · #13 |
Hmmmmm. I agree with some of this writer's observations, but not all. I guess I'm a bit different in that I recognize completely different types of photography in myself. I don't carry my camera around; my photography is more planned, intentional. I use my phone for those impulse images of things that strikes my fancy when I'm out and about. And I would never have embraced photography in the way I have had it not gone digital. Too much of a princess to put my hands in icky chemicals.
The fact that EVERYONE is a photographer has both good and bad consequences. While there is an over-abundance of me-too-ness, originality is easier to detect, if harder to find. Change is inevitable, and technical advances may have been the end of some expressions, but are the beginning of others. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:43:26 PM · #14 |
And who says "shooting for yourself" is creative?
It's almost backwards.
Masturbating is not creative. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:58:14 PM · #15 |
We obviously all take the topic of photography and creativity seriously.
I'm not really sure if this article covered too much - or too little.
I assume the business of stock photography has changed with Flickr, Getty and istock all being pretty much the same company now. So are people selling photos? And if we compare the number of people making money on photos to the days where everything was film, how does it compare?
It is fair to weep over change and to dislike the fact that things change for the worse -
The fact that corporations seem to rule the planet is forever troubling - but to say that creativity suffers because of it is not wrong. Creativity and art itself are often born of conflict and struggle - so it isn't going anywhere.
Message edited by author 2013-08-23 12:58:58. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 12:58:57 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Let's put a positive spin on it all. The ephemera of everyday life is being captured like never before. People generations later will have a unique insight into how we lived and what we did. |
I can see a lot of frustrated future archeologists holding up shiny polycarbonate discs complaining "It says there are pictures on this, but I can't see any!"
Originally posted by ambaker:
I find that I am shooting more film. It encourages me to think about the composition, the light, the exposure, the reason I am creating a photograph in the first place. No blasting through 50 shots as I try different angles, chimpimg, and then blasting through 200 more till I get something I like. Just can't do that with film. You have to try to see like the camera and the film, to anticipate the results. |
Ever see a fashion photographer at work? When I've seen any examples they were using burst mode, or a motor drive which advanced the film continuously as the shutter button was held down.
And I remember reading that the average National Geographic photo-essay was culled from about 10,000 frames.
Also remember that between cards, hard drives, back-up system (and the time to use it), upgrades/expansion, etc., digital frames are not "free" and may actually come close to the cost of film (without prints) ... |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:01:45 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by tate:
Masturbating is not creative. |
It CAN be. And coincidentally, often involves photography. I see a potential career path here...
|
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:03:04 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by tnun:
in all, we need to become better and better choosers. |
I resonated with this.
In a digitally polluted universe, wading through the hogwash is weary HOMEWORK full of noise and distractions that leaves my poor brain with nothing but shredded fragments!!! I wring out instagram for my kids like doing the laundry! Perhaps the invention of the internet should have deleted the word "creativity" along with that now mythical concept of "privacy."
YES...to becoming "better choosers" and truly you have a gift for understatement!
P.S. But, as a happy hypocrite...I do love my camera phone...::beams::
|
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:07:48 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by tate:
The fact that corporations seem to rule the planet is forever troubling - but to say that creativity suffers because of it is not wrong. Creativity and art itself are often born of conflict and struggle - so it isn't going anywhere. |
This has ALWAYS been the case. It wasn't THAT long ago that all art was commissioned and sanctioned by the church, arguably history's largest corporation. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:09:08 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Originally posted by tnun:
in all, we need to become better and better choosers. |
I resonated with this.
In a digitally polluted universe, wading through the hogwash is weary HOMEWORK full of noise and distractions that leaves my poor brain with nothing but shredded fragments!!! I wring out instagram for my kids like doing the laundry! Perhaps the invention of the internet should have deleted the word "creativity" along with that now mythical concept of "privacy."
YES...to becoming "better choosers" and truly you have a gift for understatement!
P.S. But, as a happy hypocrite...I do love my camera phone...::beams:: |
If you want to become a better chooser, then I can help.
Build yourself a camera from old airplane bits, make sure it weighs enough to require at least two people to move it, and then use it.
Trust me, I'm REALLY choosy when I use that thing, mostly I don't even want to unload it. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:18:22 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by tate:
And who says "shooting for yourself" is creative?
It's almost backwards.
Masturbating is not creative. |
... perhaps you aren't doing it right? couldn't resist.
Data overload is the issue. There is no shortage of creative and talented photogs, but the whole art of photography, what is called photography, has perhaps been watered down? or expanded to people who could never have access to it- so its probably a trade off. Some kid in the projects has the potential(that rarely existed before) to be the next(or current) Cartier-Bresson, and to pay for that, we have a glut of social media selfies and instagram.
Perhaps the overall internet limits creativity, even here on this site. I once read, in some thread, that rather than think up a way to meet the challenge,(which is presumably one of the very reasons to be here)-instead-googling and copying other photographer's ideas was the way to be successful.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:20:47 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
Originally posted by tate:
The fact that corporations seem to rule the planet is forever troubling - but to say that creativity suffers because of it is not wrong. Creativity and art itself are often born of conflict and struggle - so it isn't going anywhere. |
This has ALWAYS been the case. It wasn't THAT long ago that all art was commissioned and sanctioned by the church, arguably history's largest corporation. |
The church got a lot more bang for it's buck than Starbucks and Target. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:24:18 PM · #23 |
I wonder if soldier in Afghanistan worries about creativity, viewing images of his child moments after the birth.
There are hundreds of similar scenarios that maybe show the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:32:51 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by see:
I wonder if soldier in Afghanistan worries about creativity, viewing images of his child moments after the birth.
There are hundreds of similar scenarios that maybe show the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.. |
Most people take pictures to record a moment but when that picture ends up on the internet it seems to be judged as some kind of art project. Not everything that comes out of a camera is meant to be hung on a wall. Trust me I have shoe boxes full of pictures of me and my sisters that would never be hung up.
BUT with new technology I could be doing something fun, take a shot of it with my phone and send it to a friend 1000 miles away so they can share the moment. |
|
|
|
08/23/2013 01:42:40 PM · #25 |
I had a darkroom in my basement in college.
Then in my apartment after I graduated I built another one.
From a creative perspective, it was a pain in the ass.
And I can tell you without hesitation that my interest and level of creativity simply exploded when I used my first decent digital camera.
If it weren't for affordable digital cameras, I probably wouldn't have made a penny on photography and wouldn't have nearly the portfolio I have today.
My life would suck and I would have killed myself at least 3-times â€Â¦ and killed myself again.
Sorry too much coffee ;P |
|
