Where are the great shots? Am I a cynicist or a realist?

[Jim Galli]

This thread may have been better off left dead. My original point was that it's 2019, no one cares about these pictures. That's perfectly OK. I'm still enjoying my cameras and especially my lenses. But anything that's getting any traction in 2019 is usually vomit. People are over pretty pictures. The only value is in the creative moment, whatever pleasure is derived, that's really all there is. And that's enough for me and probably for most of us. This is what we do, and that's as far as it gets. Nobody wants this stuff. I think I'm a realist. Portraits can have a bit more value of course. A good record of another human has some instrinsic value.

[pepeguitarra]

I saw the title of the thread and thought to myself: " Finally I get to see some great shots by the LFF members." Then I went through 12 pages with no avail. I may have to go back to Flickr.

[Corran]

People are over pretty pictures.

I think if you dig a little deeper, this is not true. There's a lot of successful (photographer) artists, working in large format no less, selling prints. The market is different, no doubt, and reaching your potential market is much different than it was (Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, etc.). Not everyone is successful of course - by which I mean, earning an income that allows one to only pursue photography - but surely that's understood and no different than it ever was.

I will say that earning a living as a portrait/wedding/event photographer is probably a little easier - as long as you have the marketing and people skills. But I don't think that's the point of your post. Most of the very successful folks in that genre, at least in my area, all take the same generic back-lit images in cotton fields and wooded areas with the same 2-3 Lightroom presets to make them have warm tones, and everyone's Christmas Card Photo looks the same. But it pays the bills I suppose.

More to your point original point - there are no "good shots" IMO, just what we see and what we then share. We all see differently. My dad, if he's with me on a hike, always asks me "what are you taking a photo of?" when I'm setting up to shoot some scene. He is always saying "I just don't get it" to me. He has never really understood "art" I think. It's too abstract.

[Corran]

I saw the title of the thread and thought to myself: " Finally I get to see some great shots by the LFF members." Then I went through 12 pages with no avail. I may have to go back to Flickr.

Actually, why is this in the Image Sharing subforum and not On Photography?

[andrewch59]

Build yourself a virtual Art Gallery and display all of those amazing photos! Have a walk-through so people can see them hung up on your virtual walls, with pricetags of course! Perhaps a few display shelves to show off your amazing collection of lenses and cameras. "Jim Galli's Photographic Emporium"
If you wrote a book, I would be one of the first in line to buy it! Would love to know about where you live and what one gets up to growing up in Tonopah! How you became so enamoured with photography, where you got your special skill set from as far as manipulating old broken down lenses, your stories on your site always entertain.

[Alan Klein]

I'm also late to this thread, but I think there is a problem in Jim's original question, which had to do with "great shots." Let me start with a quick personal "bio," which I will then tie to photography. I began racing bicycles when I was 16 or 17, and had just enough initial success to dream about making the Olympic Team. However, I learned fairly quickly that I simply wasn't good enough; in any given race I would finish ahead of 90% of the field, but I simply couldn't beat the top 10%. But I continued racing bicycles because I enjoyed the sport, and competed in Master's age-group events into my 60s. Now, looking back from age 72, even knowing I didn't have the talent to be "great," I still have wonderful memories of racing, even internationally (but still never ending on the podium), great friends, and I would do it all over again.

So let's switch to photography, something I also have been doing since I was 16 or 17. In fact when I was in my early 20s I bought my first view camera, thinking at the time that while I could have purchased an Ansel Adams print for the same money (back in the early 60s, $300 would have done it!), with the camera I could make the same prints. And just as in cycling, I soon learned that while I might be competent, I was never going to be great. There is a reason there has been one Ansel, I want to say one Weston (but he had talented sons), one William Clift (a personal favorite), and so on. The point is that it is very, very hard to be great, or to make a really great photograph. It's a nice goal, but one rarely met, and that's why I find fault with the original premise. All any of us can do is do the best we can.

As to the issue of re-making the iconic image, I was given what I think of as excellent advice: when we are at a location, and we see the obvious (or iconic) image, take it. Once that is out of the way, now explore and find the less obvious images, the ones that say something to you personally. Most of us are attracted to the classic images, so feed that urge first, and then go to work for yourself.

Very good advice Peter. Your experiences in life naturally lead me to the oft quoted expression it's not the destination that counts, but the journey.

[Alan Klein]

PS: and have fun along the way.

[Jim Jones]

There are probably many more great photographs made public each year now than in any time over the past 170 years. It has merely become increasingly difficult to sort them out from the chaff. A site like this, which often presents photographs that inspire and educate, attracts wannabes who do neither. An editor like Alfred Stieglitz could reject those, but in doing so, would deny us the joy and elucidation of fine photography that does not meet the editor's preferences. Let us rejoice in having this site just the way it is.

[Peter Collins]

Where are the great shots? You could say Point Lobos for one, because Edward Weston found great shots there. But he didn't need Point Lobos to be a great artist who used the medium of photography. The proof is in his images of peppers, toilets, nudes, and more.

Art, and great shots, are more complicated than geography and scenery. I love to do photography, but I don't think of myself as an artist. Or, if my wife insists that I am, then a very minor and modest talent. But for myself, I know this: I don't want to do what's been done, likely much better, by others. They may inspire me, but I will not duplicate.

So for me there's nothing compelling--in terms of images to be made--about going to Yosemite, for example. I go to enjoy Yosemite, and maybe I will see something to photograph, or maybe not. And also for myself, I know this: I can find locations on Rio Grande Boulevard in Albuquerque, my home town, that may be the beginnings of a great print. That's just 3 miles from my home.

[dvoort]

Brilliant idea!! Serious, would love to see that.