Skip to main content

Talking to young artists about the future of photography

This morning I had the pleasure of talking to a couple dozen art students at Booker T Washington High School for the Performing and Visual Arts in Dallas. Although it's a part of the Dallas ISD public school system, "BTW HSPVA" (for short) is a rare school: students have to audition for admission. And with only about 900 students total, it's one of the smallest public high schools in the system. Small, but there's a lot of talent there!

Anyway, I was there to talk to young art students about photography. It's an almost absurd challenge, because nearly everything I know about the art and craft and especially the business of photography is rapidly becoming obsolete. Of course, being me, I managed to talk for 45 minutes without difficulty, and while I'm not sure how all the students felt, I would have enjoyed staying for another 45.

I talked a little about how I'd started photography in high school myself and stuck with photography through college and beyond. I talked a little about working in the darkroom. I made the point that, back then, photography that went beyond snapshots simply wasn't possible for people who didn't have certain skills: you had to know how to read a light meter to set exposure, how it helped to know what to do in a darkroom, etc. Of course, some of that's not entirely true. Cartier-Bresson famously had no interest in the darkroom and a lot of professional photographers — I would guess it was the majority of them — handed their film over to someone else for processing. And especially after autofocus and auto exposure became common features of cameras, it was in theory just as possible for an amateur to take a good or even great photo back in, say, the 1980s, with a film camera, as it is today with a digital camera.

But the fact remains that the amateurs did not take over the field of photography in the 1980s or 1990s. I think digital photography was revolutionary because it eliminated — or seemed to eliminate — the risks involved in photography. First, with digital photography, taking photos because basically cost-free, because you didn't have to pay by the photo for film and processing. Equally important, with digital digital cameras, the risk of taking a bad shot disappeared. Shooting with film, at least if you were a professional and absolutely had to get the shot, well, you had to know what you were doing, so you could shoot with confidence. After all, you weren't going to find out until later whether your shots were properly exposed and in focus (or well composed, etc). But with digital, you could shoot without thinking, take a look, and shoot again if your first shot stunk. If cameras worked exactly as they do now but didn't allow you to see your photo instantly on the review screen, I don't think the world of photography would have changed the way it has.

A handful of the students I was talking to were photographers, and the rest of them were painters, sculptors. One young lady is a printmaker, making linoleum cut prints, something I did in high school and college for years and really enjoyed. I suggested to the photographers that studying a traditional art technique like drawing would help them with their photography. I suggested (more tentatively) that photography might help the other artists, too, by helping think hard about looking and seeing.

But my focus was on the uncertainty of the future of photography as a career. It's the youngest of the great art forms and the field of photography has been in nearly constant flux for almost 200 years; and it's now undergoing an upheaval. I don't know what the future will be. I do know that it will be made by photographers like these young students I spoke to today. It's not a great time to be in the business of photography, but it is a tremendously exciting time to be taking photographs.

Comments

  1. I thoroughly checked blog and the photos posted in this blog are very inspiring and sensational.
    family photographers perth

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wireless control of Olympus OM-D E-M1 with OI.Share app

The Olympus Image Share or "OI.Share" app for smartphones allows you to do some very neat things with the Olympus OM-D E-M1 camera, like control focus, shutter and other settings, download photos to your phone, and geo-tag your photos. The only problem with this partnership between camera and phone — at least for me as a micro-four-thirds and Olympus novice — was getting it to work.

The documentation provided in the app and in the user manual for the camera is typically bad. I wrote this blog article from the notes I started making as I was trying to sort this out for myself. I hope I save somebody else an hour and some worry.

Ingredients To get started you'll need to have an EM-1 and a smart phone with the OI.Share app installed. I'm using an iPhone 5 running iOS 7 and version 2.1.1 of the OI.Share app. I downloaded the app from the App Store.

Addendum 7 January 2015: This article was first published a little over a year ago, in December 2013. I just went through the…

Why DxO Optics Pro 10 stays in my toolbox

You can read this post here, or read my reposted version over over at Medium.


I've used over a dozen apps in the last decade to convert my raw files and process my digital images. Today I rely on four main tools to process my images: Lightroom 5.7, the Nik suite of apps (now owned and published by Google), onOne Software's Perfect Photo Suite 9 — and DxO Optics Pro 10. I want to talk about Perfect Photo Suite some other time; it's my replacement for Photoshop and I really like it. But today, I want to say nice things about Optics Pro 10.

Might seem an odd thing to admit, but I don't really want to use Optics Pro. It can't hold a candle to Lightroom for browsing and managing images. And it doesn't support layers (like Perfect Photo Suite) or much in the way of selective editing (like Lightroom, Nik and Perfect Photo Suite do). I'm able to get what I want from most of my images using Lightroom, or Nik or Perfect Photo. So most of the time, I don't need Op…

Why I switched from Lightroom to Aperture

Read today an excellent article, "Why I use Aperture instead of Lightroom," by Mel Ashar; it's posted at the Aperture Expert blog edited by Joseph Linaschke. Ashar, a landscape and architectural photographer, provides a useful catalog of some of the reasons Aperture is a strong choice for photographers who use Macs. He focuses on the file-management advantages of Aperture that arise from the fact that Apple controls an entire file ecosystem, comprised not just of Aperture, but of iCloud and the file systems on both Macs and iOS devices (iPhone, iPad).

Now, notwithstanding the advantages Ashar enumerates, the consensus seems to be that, Aperture as a photo processing app lags way behind Lightroom. I disagree with the consensus. In fact, shortly after the public beta of Lightroom 5 became available, I started looking again at Aperture and this time I really gave it the old college try. To my surprise, I discovered that I liked it. I liked it a lot. So, instead of upgrading…