Do we take them like they used too?

Godfrey's first post nailed it I think. Remember that old saying; 'The difference between amateur and professional photographers, professional's have bigger wastebaskets.'

Oversimplification to be sure but basically true.
 
btgc said:
I have thought why news portals (more concentrating on local ones) are mediocre at everything except speed of adding and updating articles. Articles are lousy and full of typos, twenty pictures are lousy and differ in minor nuances instead of three stong ones. Is this the same issue? I mean, in days of past when people bought newspapers to read what new has happened, they voted for journalism with money each day, or each other day. Today people pay for internet and expect using content for free.

Sometimes I think - who pays for this portals, what are their goals? Their owners have communication channels, it's like a honey coated spoon - put it on the ground and bugs and ants will come for free lunch. If ants aren't used to find their own food they depend on spoon (owner of it) and after some time they will either accept lower class honey, then sugar syrup or just....die hungry? So masses got free news and mediocre journalismU - that's in general.
Click to expand...

I am not sure if this is true about all of the market. The New York Times, The Guardian, GEO, The Daily Beast (Newsweek online), The LA Times etc. are all supporting some super talent. With that said, your comments do seem 'sage like' when one considers the bulk of the market.

Again, I don't blame those unwilling to pay. There are many reasons behind this. 'Not paying' does remain a fundamental problem though and I highly encourage all to consider supporting those they feel are worth it. However little they can.
 
emraphoto said:
what is killing journalism is the fact that people aren't paying for it. there are many issues in between but the fact remains, people aren't supporting it financially.

not making a judgement, just stating a fact.
Click to expand...

Right, that's what I was getting at. People expect the news right now and for free on their tv or computer. We don't have to wait for the nightly news or the morning paper to find out what's going on out there.
 
Pherdinand said:
Seriously, i think nowadays most photographers try to make up for the missing content and inspiration with some deep philosophy and overabstractized titles/messages.
Like this title that you refer to. Seriously, do you think HCB or Capa or Newton or Adams or whoever your classic favorite is, would come up eith a title like "surplus and solitude in the breadbasket"? Not trying to be an asshole here, but seriously.
Click to expand...

That's the second worse thing about browsing through Flickr, the pretentious titles that someone will add to their photos, hoping to make a boring poorly framed and technically lacking shot into some sort of art.

The number one thing that bothers me there? Photos of a blank frame half exposed from the end of the roll getting dozens of comments, awards and favorites. WTH is that all about?
 
Nope. Too much self-awareness and intent is coming out in "modern" photography. People aren't using their vision or reliance on seeing - they're letting the gear drive things and reacting against the results. Soul-killing feedback-loop driven cerebral photography.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom