Is Photography screaming?

[domenico Foschi]

Due to the revolution of the internet suprehighway, and the proliferation of magazines, photography now has reached a diffusion at a magnitude never anticipated.

It has been in my thoughts for a while now, that although the potential of these tools can achieve grandiose results, by exposing excellent work, the reality is that you also see a lot of work of inferior quality.
In fashion magazines and other publications aimed to young people especially, you see over and over images that try to follow the stream, trying to please the viewer and not considering the main object of the creative act: expression.
The older man in me, now remembers photographers like Elmut Newton, Penn, Avedon, and more who at their times were the real "Punk Rockers" of photography, not only disregarding the establishment, but actually changing it with their unique vision.

Nowadays, there isn't much really stimulating, just sometimes shocking images trying to shock the public, and that in my opinion is trite and empty vision.
There are many excellent visionary photographers out there but the publishing industry for the majority is not up to the challenge and play it safe.
The internet has been a great tool for artists to put their work out there and that is a very positive step toward self promotion, the only disadvantage is that the Internet is so vast that it is very easy to be invisible due to the high number of photographers work in electronic format.
I have felt that just because of these trends, photography has been cheapened and very few people have an objective view of this medium.

Art galleries, are also guilty partecipants of this phenomenon, since as we know, many of them accept work that sells, not necessarely good work, but how can we ask them not to be a business and instead being a promoter of high quality work?
How many times have you been asked by a gallery to do more work of a portfolio that sells that you abandoned years ago, stifling the new ideas that you are eager to put on paper?

These are thoughts, my personal ones, and I am trying to get your point of view in the event you see things I don't from your own personal perspective.

[Marko]

Domenico,

This is not limited to photography - the very same trends you describe have been noted in virtually all the other activities every time some new technology arrived. Each time that happens, the activity in question becomes less exclusive and the barrier of entry becomes lower for more people.

This inevitably results in more people then ever participating in the activity, not all of them educated or even talented enough, and this is always seen as a cheapening of the activity in question. Another major effect is that the results can also reach much broader audience then ever before, one of the results being mass commercialization and consumerism.

The upside is that the top results can also reach incomparably wider audience than ever before. You may indeed become harder to find among the many by prospective clients, but the moment you set up your shop on the Internet, your presence become global. Also, keep in mind the statistics - the percentage of both the top artists AND the sophisticated audience is roughly the same globally as it is locally, but the actual numbers are huge.

This can only be good for you, as it is for everybody involved. I wouldn't worry about it all, the market will inevitably separate into layers and essentially regulate itself once the initial rush subsides.

[Bill_1856]

Yes, the world is going to hell in a handbasket -- again!

[domenico Foschi]

The world is really what we make of it, and unless yours is sarcasm, I wouldn't paint the picture so dark.

To answer Marko, I am aware that things never stay the same, everything develops in Cycles and this is what we are experiencing now.
The problem is that I am active now and I don't know how long the trend will last!

[Walter Calahan]

I can't get enough skate board photographs. Grin.

[Marko]

To answer Marko, I am aware that things never stay the same, everything develops in Cycles and this is what we are experiencing now.
The problem is that I am active now and I don't know how long the trend will last!

There is no problem - once you understand the trend, ride it, don't fight it.

[Daniel_Buck]

I see alot of so-so pieces (even entire portfolios of so so work), but I also see alot of very good pieces and galleries. Not everyone is going to be good at it, but they probably enjoy it just the same :-)

[Mike Chini]

I see lots of photographers with portfolios consisting of 1 or 2 (at the most, usually) truly good shots. Even in some of the more reputable photo publications, there is just so much imagery of empty driveways, building facades and purposely out of focus portraits of some Mexican woman holding fruit etc. What bothers me the most is when good work is ignored and mediocre work is highly acclaimed. It bothers me because good art will encourage and inspire more good art and that's how movements are formed. Unfortunately, the opposite seems to be true as well. So many people go around thinking that they are following paths to greatness rather than working on art from a more fundamental place and using the unique abilities we all possess.

[MIke Sherck]

I'm a firm believer in Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap. Given that, when it so happens that I've spent too long in the 90% zone and overloaded on 'way too much crap, I get to feeling as you seem to be feeling.

It takes me some time in the presence of that 10% of work which I perceive to be worthwhile to get over it. I urge you to find something you'd place into the worthwhile category and spend some time enjoying it. Best of luck and work on that sense of humor: it helps.

Mike

[tim atherton]

is this kind of work "good art"?

















because it certainly is about working on art from a more fundamental place and using the unique abilities we all possess. I think?