| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/01/2015 05:02:46 PM · #1 |
How much does the most widely accepted technology alter what we see as the ideal photograph?
I was down in Los Angeles over the holidays and saw shows at the Getty and the Huntington Both well curated shows of talented photographers yet they seemed as relevant as 14th century paintings.
I looked around at what other museum goers were shooting their pictures with and the vast majority were using their phones to take images with. There were a few SLRs, a smattering of mirrorless bodies, and almost no P&S digitals, and many many many phones. It seems the preferred has shifted as certainly as it did in the 60's and 70's from plate cameras to the SLR. Back then the shift in technology shifted what people were shooting with, and what people wanted to see in published images, what they wanted to see in galleries and what became the common aesthetic.
I get the feeling that while I was standing still technologically, the world's (and to an extent my own) ideal image has shifted and I can't put my finger on how it has.
Punching around on the net I found an article that comes close.
" All forms of art evolve over time in relation to society. What was once avant-garde photographic aesthetics are now symbolic of a past society’s values. Images containing socially ‘correct’ aesthetics, such as perfect exposure and centered in-focus subjects are now definitive of a past artistic generation. Today, photographs that a vast majority would have discarded because of ‘incorrect’ aesthetics are now highly celebrated by popular culture.
What aesthetics are generally associated with ‘wrong’ photographs? Compared to Fine Art photography, images with blurred focus, off-center composition, shifting light, imbalanced exposures, and subject issues such as odd facial expressions and entirely cropped features, contain these ‘wrong’ aesthetics. As well, the informal frontal flash of a point-and-shoot camera and drugstore over-saturated processing are classic indications of amateur photographic production. Ironically, as popular culture evolves parallel to contemporary photography, these ‘incorrect’ aesthetics have slowly become correct." It is a 5 year old article over at F-Stop
Has Instagram eaten the decicive moment?
Does your ideal image sway with the zeitgeist; or do you see your ideal as the lighthouse buffeted by the seas unchanging? |
|
|
|
01/01/2015 05:14:15 PM · #2 |
| That article kind of makes it seem analogous to what punk did to rock ... |
|
|
|
01/01/2015 05:53:08 PM · #3 |
| Buffeted by seas, unchanging :-) 'Dat be me! I *have* ditched the SLR for more compact gear, but that hardly counts... |
|
|
|
01/01/2015 06:27:58 PM · #4 |
Meh, the truly avant garde aren't worried about this - everything you've read is already out of date.
The new thing is to shoot without light, instead seeing the world in alternative ways. Or, at least, that's what I'm doing these days. :D |
|
|
|
01/01/2015 06:36:52 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Cory:
The new thing is to shoot without light, instead seeing the world in alternative ways. Or, at least, that's what I'm doing these days. :D |
Make yourself a radio telescope? |
|
|
|
01/01/2015 06:48:28 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Meh, the truly avant garde aren't worried about this - everything you've read is already out of date.
The new thing is to shoot without light, instead seeing the world in alternative ways. Or, at least, that's what I'm doing these days. :D |
I know what you're doing :)
On a separate note...
Brennan... you were in L.A. and didn't say "hi"...??? |
|
|
|
01/01/2015 06:57:09 PM · #7 |
|
|
|
01/02/2015 02:13:06 PM · #8 |
In response to the article referenced by the OP:
There is no such thing as avant garde photographic aesthetics.
Socially correct aesthetics is another way of saying lowest common denominator.
Photography has always been dominated by the technology of the camera. For some, photography will always be defined by a correctly exposed & sharply focused image. Some of these will not be able to resist pouring scorn on the heads of those who experiment with anything else. "That's not the way it's done!" they cry.
But what if instead of finding & capturing a decisive moment, correctly exposed, sharply focused, & well-composed--what if the camera was used to catch the passing of several moments? Or even used among other tools, & maybe not even the dominant tool, to create a composition that would challenge preconceived ideas of reality?
There are so many things to do with the camera other than taking pictures. Some few photographers on this website seem to be doing that--it's why I'm still here. Never give up! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/23/2025 09:14:42 AM EDT.
