[Fontan]

Written 30 years ago, probably valid for the next 100. Speaking of being ahead of her time. Anybody liked it, hate it, or never heard of it?

[cardinal43]

Did you forget to attach something?

[Ratmagiclady]

I'm pretty sure I read or at least skimmed it, but I think it was back in some times when I was a bit too much pain to concentrate well or retain much: sweetie borrowed it for me or something. Maybe a memory-jog?

[A-z]

Read it in university when I was studying painting and was really getting into photography. I was reading a lot of critical essays at that time and I found this book both fascinating and very helpful in allowing me to evaluate my standpoint in producing 'art'. However, a couple of months after reading it I put down my camera and didn't take a single photo in 5 years! (long story)

That was 10 years ago - it's time to dust it off and re-read... Thanks for reminding me!!

[Fontan]

Did you forget to attach something?

Eh, no. The title is called "On photography." I first read it about 15 years ago.

[Fontan]

I'm pretty sure I read or at least skimmed it, but I think it was back in some times when I was a bit too much pain to concentrate well or retain much: sweetie borrowed it for me or something. Maybe a memory-jog?

Hm . . . . Let me see. Obvsiouly I cannot summarize it in a sentence here, but she seemed to be into putting the art of photography in terms of social context, as it as in photography became more of a mass art form because it becam so prevalent. Because photos are literally every where, she thought it was going to become a major force in defining cultures . . .

Does that bring you back some?

[Fontan]

Read it in university when I was studying painting and was really getting into photography. I was reading a lot of critical essays at that time and I found this book both fascinating and very helpful in allowing me to evaluate my standpoint in producing 'art'. However, a couple of months after reading it I put down my camera and didn't take a single photo in 5 years! (long story)

That was 10 years ago - it's time to dust it off and re-read... Thanks for reminding me!!

My pleasure! I was and am fascinated by her writing . . . .

[eddie1960]

here's a link to the google books page. ti was a collection of essays. i read some of the essays originally, but haven't read the book myself. time to hit the library i guess

On photography - Google Books

[Ratmagiclady]

Hm . . . . Let me see. Obvsiouly I cannot summarize it in a sentence here, but she seemed to be into putting the art of photography in terms of social context, as it as in photography became more of a mass art form because it becam so prevalent. Because photos are literally every where, she thought it was going to become a major force in defining cultures . . .

Does that bring you back some?

Yeah, actually, it does. I may have just skimmed it *cause* I'd already come to very similar observations and conclusions to what I saw, perhaps without the prognosticated sense of *importance* you're describing, here.

I've tended to see the image-saturation of *my* times as something that's really taken a lot of photography *away* from the import it once had, (Along with lots of other arts: painting was ahead of this *cause* of photography: people stopped paying attention when photorealism was available cheaply via photography: it's not really that peak quality suffers with all the automation, but people's *attention* does, and so does the signal-to-noise ratio in people's attentions... It's harder to get people to stop and look.

When I was coming up, it was hard to wave a camera *without* someone mugging and going 'Take my picha, baby!' nowadays, you're mostly just among the intrusions of a camera-filled society, almost even resented, unless you can really make it something special. Takes more than technical competence to get someone to actually stop and look at a *photograph,* too, which may have some effects, too, when it comes to people's attention and what they think of the world. They're biased toward big drama, and all.

[eddie1960]

Yeah, actually, it does. I may have just skimmed it *cause* I'd already come to very similar observations and conclusions to what I saw, perhaps without the prognosticated sense of *importance* you're describing, here.

I've tended to see the image-saturation of *my* times as something that's really taken a lot of photography *away* from the import it once had, (Along with lots of other arts: painting was ahead of this *cause* of photography: people stopped paying attention when photorealism was available cheaply via photography: it's not really that peak quality suffers with all the automation, but people's *attention* does, and so does the signal-to-noise ratio in people's attentions... It's harder to get people to stop and look.

When I was coming up, it was hard to wave a camera *without* someone mugging and going 'Take my picha, baby!' nowadays, you're mostly just among the intrusions of a camera-filled society, almost even resented, unless you can really make it something special. Takes more than technical competence to get someone to actually stop and look at a *photograph,* too, which may have some effects, too, when it comes to people's attention and what they think of the world. They're biased toward big drama, and all.

Pretty much my conclusion as well. I grew up and pictures had impact. I've had many photos affect me deeply, now video has dumbed down everything and people don't have the attention span to be drawn into a photo IMHO (or for that matter a piece of art, i think all arts are suffering from this not just photography). Given the technical abilities of cameras now almost anyone can fire off enough shots to get some technically good ones (monkeys/typewriters). Photography now suffers the same thing abstract art does....the my kid could do that syndrome (see Barnett Newman voice of fire controversy up here for instance)

in Music work i suffer the oh the singers girlfriend has a nice camera syndrome (yeah i know too bad she doesn't know how to use it i've seen your current pictures)

[Fontan]

Yeah, actually, it does. I may have just skimmed it *cause* I'd already come to very similar observations and conclusions to what I saw, perhaps without the prognosticated sense of *importance* you're describing, here.

I've tended to see the image-saturation of *my* times as something that's really taken a lot of photography *away* from the import it once had, (Along with lots of other arts: painting was ahead of this *cause* of photography: people stopped paying attention when photorealism was available cheaply via photography: it's not really that peak quality suffers with all the automation, but people's *attention* does, and so does the signal-to-noise ratio in people's attentions... It's harder to get people to stop and look.

When I was coming up, it was hard to wave a camera *without* someone mugging and going 'Take my picha, baby!' nowadays, you're mostly just among the intrusions of a camera-filled society, almost even resented, unless you can really make it something special. Takes more than technical competence to get someone to actually stop and look at a *photograph,* too, which may have some effects, too, when it comes to people's attention and what they think of the world. They're biased toward big drama, and all.

Oh goodie.

Yes funny how you mentioned that you came to the same conclusions, more or less, as I kind of felt the same. As I read on, I found myself constantly nodding and saying "yeah, no shit.". Then you put it in the framework of mind that Sontag must have been working with at the time of her writing, and you realize, or at least I thought that her line of thought was logical, and way ahead her time.

Also agree with you that these days it is difficult for me to think of our craft in any social contexts per se because photography has become so technical for the shooters, and rather mundane for the beholders. The gap is becoming rather large.

[Fontan]

Pretty much my conclusion as well. I grew up and pictures had impact. I've had many photos affect me deeply, now video has dumbed down everything and people don't have the attention span to be drawn into a photo IMHO (or for that matter a piece of art, i think all arts are suffering from this not just photography). Given the technical abilities of cameras now almost anyone can fire off enough shots to get some technically good ones (monkeys/typewriters). Photography now suffers the same thing abstract art does....the my kid could do that syndrome (see Barnett Newman voice of fire controversy up here for instance)

in Music work i suffer the oh the singers girlfriend has a nice camera syndrome (yeah i know too bad she doesn't know how to use it i've seen your current pictures)

Yes. Many people shooting from their hips at 9 frMes per second until their SD card is full, and picking one good pic out of a thousand and calling it candid photography or street photography . . It really blows in my opinion.

[eddie1960]

Yes. Many people shooting from their hips at 9 frMes per second until their SD card is full, and picking one good pic out of a thousand and calling it candid photography or street photography . . It really blows in my opinion.

i've shot from the hip occasionally but only with my da14 as it suites the frame of reference (and i can predict the FOV pretty well) - but 1 maybe 2 frames, i don't think i've ever had my drive set to other than 1 frame lol (well maybe 2 second delay and mirror lockup) or my holga (same thing) but the bluesman/javier drop to my knee is just as likely

Good street photography is tough, you need to have no fear of getting in peoples faces (particularly with a da 14 on the camera) it's something that it takes a long time to master i have a long way to go but it's a nice challenge

[Ratmagiclady]

Yes. Many people shooting from their hips at 9 frMes per second until their SD card is full, and picking one good pic out of a thousand and calling it candid photography or street photography . . It really blows in my opinion.

Interestingly, it's one of the most-photographed times in history, but the presence of *hard copies* is probably smaller than it's been since the Civil War.

[eddie1960]

funny you should mention that RML, repaap and i were just discussing the need to make hard copies for archival purposes on the single in april thread. i advised customers of that all the time and am horrible about doing it myself.