[SET Man]

Hey!

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/05/the-death-of-photography-has-been-greatly-exaggerated/
 
   Hmmm, I didn't know photography is dead or evening dieing. I'm not sure if I get this article. I do agreed that video will not be replace still photography. And yes, it is true that we or at least me, memorize thing as "still" image.

   But I have to say that the way photography is not is very different than the pre-digital day... I would say before 2000. There's more photographs taken today than ever. Some will be just "another snap shot in my memory card" It is very different now.... last week I went through one of my negative binders, looking through it, seeing old contact prints, some prints and those negatives feel very different than when I'm looking for digital photo where I have to turn my computer on and go through my HDD. Well, when is comes to picture taking for me even today in digital photography world I'm still shoot picture with my "film mentality"

   I don't think photography will ever die. It's just the way we take and share pictures will be different. Photography is one of the greatest invention of all time... to be able to capture a moment in time to be view later and past is on to generations to come is quite amazing if you thing about it.

Take care,
Buddy



 

[thunderbrick]

Photography is photography, whether film or digital.  Writing with light.  Digital is wonderful at cutting costs and helping to share images, but we now live in a world where images have become just another commodity and anyone thinks they have the right to use other folks' work.  The profusion of hundreds/thousands of images on a card versus a roll of 24 or 36 exposures gives people tremendous range of action but also cheapens a higher percentage of shots (among non-pros).  As we are bombarded with images I think image fatigue can set in, numbing us to spectacular works that will stand the test of time.    50 years from now will we hold in our memories historical images from now the way we respect the works of Ansel Adam, Weston, Bresson, Eisenstadt, Bourk-White and many others?  Or will current works be forgotten.

PS obviously replaces superb artists in the wet darkroom, so it's just a change in tools.  Video?  Meh.

[SET Man]

Photography is photography, whether film or digital.  Writing with light.  Digital is wonderful at cutting costs and helping to share images, but we now live in a world where images have become just another commodity and anyone thinks they have the right to use other folks' work.  The profusion of hundreds/thousands of images on a card versus a roll of 24 or 36 exposures gives people tremendous range of action but also cheapens a higher percentage of shots (among non-pros).  As we are bombarded with images I think image fatigue can set in, numbing us to spectacular works that will stand the test of time.    50 years from now will we hold in our memories historical images from now the way we respect the works of Ansel Adam, Weston, Bresson, Eisenstadt, Bourk-White and many others?  Or will current works be forgotten.

PS obviously replaces superb artists in the wet darkroom, so it's just a change in tools.  Video?  Meh.

Hey!

  Oops, I dropped "not" in my sentence... I meant video will not replace still.

  Anyway, good point about "image fatique" I hate when my friends or co-workers try so show me "a" photo what they are talking about but ended going through tons of photos before get to the one that they talked about. 

  As for the old Masters.... I think they will always be well... Masters for years to come. Not long ago I went to Bill Brandt at MoMA and I very enjoyed it. To see old traditional B&W prints like that it is just wonderful. Maybe is just me.

Take care,
Buddy

[nathanm]

Anyone who wants to make 'art' type photos has the challenge of their work being mixed in with the trillions of ordinary photographs that exist.  Although photography is incredibly convenient and even technical quality is also convenient, it still needs an intentional hand to make something that's more than a slice of the real world.

This new trend of short-loop animated GIFs is kind of interesting.  It's sort of inbetween still and video.  What would be really cool is if you could have that on a large scale.  So imagine a photo on a gallery wall that looked as crisp as any regular print, but all or part of the image moved slightly.  Sort of like the Harry Potter newspapers.  Perhaps OLED tech will get us there one day.