Having a look through all of the new images that have been uploaded here in the past 12 hours or so, it struck me that the introduction of affordable digital imaging has a lot to answer for - most of it good, but a lot of it bad too.
Never at any time in the past has photography been as accesable to the masses as it is now. Anyone can pick up a camera and instantly enjoy the image they have just created. It doesn't matter anymore if the image is crap - it didn't really cost anything to press that button! Yes, the initial investment was high, but most people do not factor that into the equation, so to them the cost per shot is zero.
Turn back the clock a few years when photographers still used film. We couldn't see what we were producing and photography, even bad photography, was a skill that had to be acquired over time. And then we had labs that would correct our mistakes for us and make a wonderful job of it, particularly if shooting negative film.
But all that has changed now and image quality has suffered hugely as a result. I love digital imaging because of the control it gives me which I didn't have with film. But I learned the fundamentals shooting film and those fundamentals are still important. With digital imaging, additional, new fundamentals came along such as white balance although in truth this was something we had to take into consideration and correct for with film as well.
I feel digital technology has cheapend photography to such a degree that people no longer care about what they are producing. Or if they do care, they simply don't know the difference between a bad image and a good one. Just look at the huge number of images posted here in the last 12 hours - plenty examples of sunburnt plastic skin, bleached out highlights, blocked shadows, chopped off limbs and out of focus eyes.
What's sad about this is that there are some photographers out there that have really strong creative vision - much more than I've ever had - yet their work fails to impress because they've screwed up on simple technicalities like getting the expsoure or white balance correct or been sloppy with their focussing or went overboard on the post-processing of the image.
Surely, if it's worth taking the time and making the effort to create an image then it's worth doing correctly. What's the point in producing thousands of images that ultimately have a lifespan of less than a day?
People have spent thousands on photographic equipment and somehow expect to be able to take good photographs "out of the box". Spending extra money on things like monitor calibration or a course covering the fundamentals of good phoptography seems just a waste of money. In fact, the opposite is true - spending a little bit more and making that extra effort will help you make the most of you're investment and allow you to truly enjoy your hobby or profession. Start thinking more like a film photographer and make the effort to get the shot right first time. You'd be surprised what a difference it will make to your work.
- Thorsten.
