an interesting editorial on the state of photography today

[Frank_E]

as the OP for this thread, I am somewhat surprised how much interest it attracted
1990 views and 60 replies at the time of this posting….

here are two more blogs on the topic
the one immediately below is directly related

http://www.randomhouse.ca/hazlitt/bl...pathy-skeptics

the other one is indirectly related
but I love the work of Martin Parr
so am interested in his comments somewhat around the same issue
it deals more with why people photograph
as opposed to the merits of what or how they photograph
but in my opinion it is a good read anyways….

http://www.martinparr.com/2012/too-much-photography/

[Wayne]

N+1

if what the judges say is true, then the contest should be utterly embarrassed, and they should fire all of their marketing staff. After all, they have been in existence for over a decade, and they cannot attract a single photographer skilled enough to submit a series of photos worthy of being awarded a prize. That should tarnish their brand beyond repair. Hey everyone, we held a photography contest, and we have so little standing in the world that nobody of substance showed up!

This does not reflect well on the judges either that they did not have enough pull to to attract even one qualified photographer to submit their images. If i were one of the judges i would want the entire thing to just go away.

[Bill Burk]

I kept asking myself, "What does this have to do with Eliot Porter?"

Then I realized I clicked on the wrong thread.

[David N Docherty]

This article echos the bemoanings of my mentor-teachers during a recent year of photography school. The old guard had little regard for the current state of the union, and admonished best they could to understand and apply good form and content.

[KenM]

Bit late to conversation, but I thought I would add this as an FYI:

http://www.banffcentre.ca/media-rele...y-competition/

[Bill Burk]

Thanks KenM,

Glad to see the fee could be refunded if asked, otherwise it goes to good cause.

Last week at a scout camp I browsed through an old photo album and realized the old guard knew how to organize pictures into stories, better than I have seen lately. Simple example was morning flag ceremony where the flags and each scout may be clearly seen. While I know the shots I took from the back row will only have the backs of everyone's heads and will look very ordinary.

At least (because of thinking of this thread) I did take one series that tell a story, a commissioner showing the knots to wrap cord around a hiking stick to make a handle.

[ic-racer]

But none of them managed to tell the simplest of stories.

Reminds me of 'stock' photography. If any image even hinted at any meaning it would be useless as generic representation.

[I4YM]

“They take the picture and then they show it to the people in the photograph: ‘Look, I’ve captured us. I’ve captured our moment.’ And after they’ve shown them the picture, I know it will never be put on a wall. It was more about getting the stamp of approval.”

This bothers me. No one is printing for preservation.

[Brassai]

Article is more a condemnation of the quality of people today than anything else. Everyone in a hurry skimming over their lives. Congrats to the judges for withholding prizes they didn't feel were earned.

I loved the line "the stain of the real." I'm not sure that is exactly why young folks are getting all tatted up these days but it applies in other situations.

My take is people get tattoos mainly because they saw those stupid cable TV shows. It's really that crass. As for the article, I agree with most of it. The shift has been people now take photos for instant use where once they took them either for a historical record or for self fulfillment.

[Jac@stafford.net]

My take is people get tattoos mainly because they saw those stupid cable TV shows

I had to smile when I read that.

Today that might be true for a significant number of people. There are strong exceptions.

I am one