[honey bo bo]

No matter how good your images are, they will never be what you were out there enjoying in the flesh. In a way, it's a shame folks settle for the pictures. That's why we guide, the real joy is in being there.

There is a multitude of people that can't be there for a multitude of reasons. Photos for over a century have put them there in mind if not body to enjoy and marvel at the moment. A grand babies first dance recital , the summit of Everest, 4000 feet underground in a gold mine, a pack of Wolves running down a deer, Dirt track racing from the 50's , Gun crews mustering to action stations on a Navy frigate, receiving a gold metal at the Olympics, University Graduation Ceremonies to name a tiny few. People cant be there because of health, danger and a million reasons. A photo becomes extremely important to an individual , a group , a population, a world each no more important than the other. And we will continue to register our past ,present and future with photo's ; there is no substitute.

[micromacro]

Who is he addressing, specifically?

It feels like his talk is for students.

[gaweidert]

Someone needs to remind the artistic community that if it wasn't for photography, they may never have been impressionism, or all the rest of the "modern" art movement. Photography freed up artists to so something other than paint or sculpt portraits, still life's, landscapes etc. Lets face it, a well done photograph has the same elements as Piet Mondrian's painting of squares and rectangles. It needs balance, composition, juxtaposition etc. Otherwise people may consider Mondrian's paintings the work of a person who doesn't really know how to paint.

And why is a Van Gogh painting more valuable than the landscape by some painter named Tomas that my in laws got for us at one of those traveling "art" shows where sofa size paintings can be had for as little as $39? Both are pretty.

[wildman]

I guess for me the use of images is a sort of a dialogue between myself and others and like any other language it has form, grammar and ultimately meaning to others.

It's no accident we primates can recognize our self in the mirror along with the crows and some parrots apparently. We are self-aware and aware of others and not just as objects.
Our environment is not just a passive physical state but has meaning to us and we want to convey that meaning to others. That's where the art of photography comes in.
An image without meaning to the viewer is stillborn.

So for me, at least, photography is sort of the ultimate "show and tell" game.

---

Last edited by wildman; 04-03-2017 at 09:25 PM.

[goatsNdonkey]

I don't have the sort of internet connection this morning that would allow me to download a video, but I think just the title assertion is of value if it leads to this sort of discussion, which I find very interesting.

Obviously, to PFers who are professional photographers of some kind, the assertion is false, since some number of clients are paying money for your photos.

But even to the amateur and new PF member it is false if you have received positive comments or a "like" for some picture you posted here.

Still, for people who might have a false idea of how taking pictures might very easily lead to fame and fortune, or some other sort of acclaim, the challenge might be a useful one to consider. In that context, I think it might be more useful to rephrase it as a pair of questions:
1) Why should anyone care about your photography?
and
2) Who, if anyone, might you want to care about your photography, and why?

There is some of my photography that is meant mainly for myself, for my learning about seeing and/or equipment and technique. It's practice, potentially artistic practice, and in some cases shareable here, but not really intended for any larger audience. And of course, there are family snapshots, with limited aim and appeal.

There are some other pictures, particularly ones that capture something about the face of my region, something I have given a lot of attention to for decades, more often in writing than in visual art, that do have an imagined, potentially intended audience -- an audience of people who share that interest with me, an audience potentially including people ready to have that interest sparked into awareness. I am not, right now, seeking that audience actively, however. Maybe later. So for now, when I stand back and look at those pictures, now as viewer, not as picture maker, I am their stand-in, and I know that we care about the better pictures of this type.

But why would such people care? Those pictures would remind them about how the world changes and about how remnants of life decades earlier remain all around us. And some of those pictures would say something about, in spite of all of the change and decay, what still has the potential of renewal.




[image cross-posted]

[BrianR]

The deliberately inflammatory all caps title wasn't a good start, but I'm in agreement with much of what he's saying. As an aside, wtf is the point of a talking head video? Why not just write a more coherent and less ambly hunk of text for people to read? I found he talked too fast and had trouble following him at times. I had to slow the speed down to keep up.

I liked the bit about "no more easy photos". By far the photos I've been most satisfied with are ones that involved planning and weren't just random encounters. I've cut way back on just carrying around the camera in the hopes I find something awesome. More and more my photography is deliberate and intentional, and I think that's worked for me (this is not a knock against any other approach, do what works for you).

I'm also on board with the "body of work" or "projects" aim. A portfolio that works together on a larger scale is way more powerful than a lone photo (if I ever figure out how to put together such a portfolio, I'll let you know). Easier to tackle for my little brain are smaller photo projects. A photo of a frog? Swell I guess. But a long term series documenting its lifecycle and role in the ecosystem becomes way more interesting, and can be a teaching tool for local wildlife enthusiasts. It's not mattering on a grand scale in the art world, but the idea of doing something with my photography time besides firing it out to the already heavily saturated interwebs is satisfying.

"Nobody cares" is an exaggeration, but how far from the truth is it many cases? Suppose I take the greatest photo ever of one of our local waterfalls. Locals ooh and ahh at it, fondly remembering splashing about the base when they were kids. They'd probably feel exactly the same way about the second greatest down to ten-thousandth greatest photo of the same waterfall. Why the heck would mine be notably more important than anyone else's? The next question is, should I care? The act of photographing something solely for myself is sometimes enough, but I think the ambition to give people a reason to care about your work can be a good driving force to grow as a photographer.

[monochrome]

My brother-in-law paints in watercolor and hand makes stringed instruments. My wife needlepoint and embroiders. My younger daughter cooks at a high level. My sister-in-law makes very nice clothes. Her children are accomplished / professional musicians. Another niece sculpts. My father hand made copies of early American furniture. My brother models railroads in minute detail. My older daughter and I photograph.

We all appreciate and collect the tools of what we consider artistic pursuits.

Very few people outside our immediate families know or care, and we don't care that they don't (which is the point of the video).

[goatsNdonkey]

My brother-in-law paints in watercolor and hand makes stringed instruments. My wife needlepoint and embroiders. My younger daughter cooks at a high level. My sister-in-law makes very nice clothes. Her children are accomplished / professional musicians. Another niece sculpts. My father hand made copies of early American furniture. My brother models railroads in minute detail. My older daughter and I photograph.

We all appreciate and collect the tools of what we consider artistic pursuits.

Very few people outside our immediate families know or care, and we don't care that they don't (which is the point of the video).

Many people would be surprised to know how many watercolorists, luthiers, sculptors, poets, and other serious artists are scattered among communities, across the heartland of the country, not just the coasts. But I think people who know that such people exist, do CARE about their artmaking going on--even if they know that they might not get to witness examples of their creations. These may simply be artists without an interest in self-promotion, something that it takes at least a little of to become known (even locally).

[monochrome]

My wife has published four mystery novels, one of which was > #50 on Amazon for 4 consecutive days. Ultimately the ncessity to travel to mystery conferences, sell books out of the back of her Subaru, deal with her publisher and editor (who changed characters and plot lines) and assorted other compromises - just for recognition - caused her to stop publishing. Now she is novelizing the life journal she inherited from an historically notable ancestor. DK if she'll ever publish it, but I've read sections and I can see why she's writing it. It is a story never told, based on source material, artfully done.

And no one will care because the truth doesn't fit the narrative.

IMHO most artists create for themselves. Sometimes serendipity coupled with drive and passion brings them fame, but most of the time art is a labor of private creativity.

Many people would be surprised to know how many watercolorists, luthiers, sculptors, poets, and other serious artists are scattered among communities, across the heartland of the country, not just the coasts. But I think people who know that such people exist, do CARE about their artmaking going on--even if they know that they might not get to witness examples of their creations. These may simply be artists without an interest in self-promotion, something that it takes at least a little of to become known (even locally).

[mohb]

I display my photos in a local community centre (my reward for helping run it) and the senior citizens(even older than me) love them and I give them free copies which they take home and hang in their homes. Does this mean they 'matter' or is this the wrong audience because they are not cultured in the arts and just like 'nice; photos?

[brewmaster15]

I get what he is saying and trying to say. Though I think he could have achieved it far more effectively than he ended trying to. I do think Its very few people that have created "Work That Matters" on a grand scale, went into it saying, " I am going to create "work that matters". Most probably went into it doing it because they enjoyed what they did and they were naturally good at it or driven by their personalities to perfect something or obsess over something. Some people just lucked on to the path. The creators ( not just photography) of "work that matters" often times were dead and gone before people even noticed their "work that matters."

I'm a hobbyist, I take pictures because I like capturing that moment in time and sharing it visually....It would be a fair guess that at the core, every camera nut feels the same, otherwise they would not be using a visual medium to communicate. And it is a form of communication,IMO. I also think that most/all photographers do "care" about other peoples images. They do try and see what the photographer saw, they do try and learn from the image....they do recognize the beauty in images. Its how we communicate....a dialogue no different than words if you speak the language. Its the whole purpose behind a forum like this. No, not everyone will get it when we post an image but some will. Heck, I posted old images from scans of slides I took 20 years ago and other photographers here got it. Conversation, dialogue etc followed. I could not ask for more....To me, that was work that mattered! I do know that was not exactly what the You tuber meant but maybe he should shut off the video and go take some pics for the fun of it...its probably how he started as well.

I will close off with two comments on the video that I didn't like.. He forgot to add that we already have far too many You tube videos that are "works that don't matter" (evil Grin) and he neglected to tell us what works that matter that he is pursuing? I really hate it when someone posts all doom and gloom , could have rounded off with at least some nods to some current Photographers he felt were actually doing "work that matters". It may not have turned off as many as he has.

Or Perhaps he should spend more time in pursuit of that "work that matters" and less generating you tube revenue dollars ?


Al