Skip to main content

A Picture is Worth How Much? (Part II)

After a long two year absence from this blog, I feel the need to write a post on some recent rumblings which - by the time you read this, may be either old news, or a never ending story. In essence it is a follow up to my last post of February 2014, in that it follows the same line of thought, but adds a new variable to the equation.

Firstly, I took two years away from photography due to family responsibilities. While I could write a whole run-on blog post about being a care-giver for an elderly parent, it falls quite far afield of my purpose here, so I'll just say that the time away from the camera has allowed me to see my work for what it is (or was) more clearly, and to redefine what it needs to become and where I want to go with it in the days ahead. Call it a "forced introspection," it leads me to the point I want to make now.

In my previous post I ruminated on how the preponderance of photographic images has led to a 'devaluation' of photography. Sort of a Law of Diminishing Returns in the imagery realm, as it were. Now, as this is being written, many are claiming that the continuing wave of ever-smarter smart phones finally spell the death of professional photography. They are pointing to the newest iteration of the Apple iPhone as being the beginning of the end.

Do I agree with this theory?

 Yes. And No...

Yes, in that smart phones (ie "Mobile Photography") continue a trend started by digital photography in the late 1990's: That of democratizing photography. Now anyone and everyone can take pictures that - at least in their opinion - rival those taken by professionals. At the very least, anyone can create images that suit the needs of the time, without money leaving their pocket.
       It can be argued endlessly that these images will not possess the technical prowess, or level of expertise that a professional photographer will achieve. In fact, there is ample proof out there that a professional photographer will still take better pictures with an iPhone than an amateur will take with anything. However, it is not impossible to believe that the days of taking photography classes, getting a tax ID number, and hanging out a shingle proudly proclaiming oneself a professional photographer are at an end. Generalization has led to extinction.

Does it mean that photography is dead? No. It is entirely possible that professional photography will likely now include that done with mobile devices. There are certain situations and circumstances where carrying around a large bag of lenses and backup bodies is a cumbersome logistical nightmare - as well as a danger and liability in some cases. For example: Urban explorers and street photographers trying to be inconspicuous can get themselves around, and out of, a lot of situations when all they are carrying is a phone.
What I am seeing is this: The days of getting into photography strictly "to make money" are gone. The time of "producing a product" are gone. The mercenary idea of seeing photography only as a financial cash-cow are gone. People can make pretty decent images for themselves now. Reprints? Package deals? They can upload and share photos from the parking lot of the grocery store. The sad reality is that people don't care about how "professional" I am as a photographer: They think they can do just as well with their mobile device. 
       Think I'm wrong? Want proof? Try to sign up for classes at Hallmark Institute of Photography. Or Brooks Institute. Two of the most prestigious schools of photography in the United States. And which are now closed, permanently, as of 2016. 
      So how will professional photography live? It must be part of something bigger. Something more than just the picture taking itself. Its about creating, and making people want to buy something larger.  An idea. A feeling. It could be commercial, or strictly for creative expression. But is has to provide something that people want, and that they don't feel that they can create on their own. In short, those truly providing something innovative will reap rewards. Those merely looking for easy money have seen their day. Talk is cheap, and making images is now free. What is a picture worth? Time will tell...


Popular posts from this blog

So... What Are You Saying?

One of my favorite lines in the film La La Land (2016) comes when Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) gets fired from his gig as a restaurant pianist. Not wanting to accept his dismissal, Seb tells his boss, "I hear what you're saying, but I don't think you're saying what you mean."  It made me think about one of the most ubiquitous pieces of advice currently being given to photographers and others in the communications fields: "Engage your audience with compelling content."  The buzz phrase "Content Driven" is bandied across the Internet, and from the rooftops of skyscrapers by everyone who communicates a message, image, or concept to an audience of any kind. We are admonished to "...Tell a story to draw your audience in," and "reach them on a deeper level."
      While I would agree that these ideas are very true, I would also say that - left without any other qualifiers - they are vague. Let me put it this way, if you had a driving…

Everything Old is New Again...

Due to events that would take far too long to explain here, I now find myself working with a camera that I have not used for more than half a decade. Granted, it will largely be used only as a back-up at this point, but the question of why anyone would 'go back' to using such "antiquated" technology as a 10-year old (at the time of this writing) digital camera that is only 12.3 megapixels and has a max ISO of 3200 has an interesting series of answers. Let me cite the method to my madness.

The camera in question is a Nikon D-90 with a vertical grip. At the time it was released it was considered a top-shelf pro-sumer model, and it was the definitive purchase that pushed me from film into digital. At 12.3MP, it was quite the heavy hitter for it's time, considering it was not all that many iterations down the line from the days of the "5MP cieling", where even high end DSLRs were still climbing out of the 3.2 range. To show you just how far things have come…

Turning Day Into Night

Shooting at night is like having a clean slate. A very challenging clean slate. Why do I say it that way? Because as far as the camera is concerned, there is nothing there. We may know there are houses, cars, or trees in that moonlit space around us - but without adjusting the ISO to extremely high (and usually noisy) levels, the camera sees a blank, black canvas. In order to make it come alive, we need to paint with light.
      In the world of big budget films, this means using huge amounts of lumens and wattage to create either a large wash of psuedo-moonlight, or pools of selective light shining on specific parts of the scene. Either way, it means having lots of lighting - and lots of power - at your disposal. Maybe. And maybe not...       There is an age old trick that has been used by Hollywood for decades, and is even seen  in large-budgeted modern films such as Jaws (1976), Peter Jackson's King Kong (2005) and Mad Max Fury  Road (2015) among countless others. In this techn…