There are too many images.

funkaoshi

funkaoshi

Well-known
Local time
3:02 PM
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
323
“There are too many images,” he said. “Too many cameras now. We’re all being watched. It gets sillier and sillier. As if all action is meaningful. Nothing is really all that special. It’s just life. If all moments are recorded, then nothing is beautiful and maybe photography isn’t an art anymore. Maybe it never was.” -- Robert Frank.
 
There are certainly too many "bad" images, but this is mostly an internet phenomenon.

If we exclude the internet, then there are no more images than before, in fact probably less since Frank's time with all the "picture" magazines and their photo essays.
 
Today there are many more people taking photos and the net makes them more easily accessible for viewing. When you are inundated with photos this way it lessens the impact of all photos be they good, bad or indifferent. It is all just life but there still are beautiful moments of it recorded. Which ones they are is a personal choice. Not all photography is art nor is it meant to be.

Bob
 
I hate the term 'too much' or 'too many'

I hate the term 'too much' or 'too many'

Consider the word 'too'. Used in this sense, it say that something is to a degree that exceeds normal or proper limits.

I've always tended not to like such statements, because they are almost always personal opinions stated as if they were fact.

Examples:

He is too fat. Really? How fat, exactly, is 'too' fat? Who sets that limit?

He owns too many cameras. Really? How many cameras ought he own, and who decides that number?

He has too many hobbies. He smokes too much. He eats too much. He talks too much. He argues too much. And so on and so on.

So now there are too many photos in the world, are there? Well, tsk, tsk. I must have missed class the day that the 'correct' number of photos was given. How many is that, exactly, can someone tell me?

No?

Well, let's play devil's advocate for a moment. If there are too many photos in the world, what do we do about it?

Shall we restrict photography?

Shall we not allow people to publish their photos on places like Flickr or Smugmug or RFF Gallery so that no one's eyes are offended by the huge number of photos out there?

If there are indeed 'too many' photos in the world, what action, precisely, are we called upon to perform?

Oh, nothing, you say. No action. It's just a general observation made by a man who is a very famous and important photographer.

I see.

Well, then here is my general observation. People who say that someone else has 'too many' of any given thing or does 'too much' of any given action are generally expressing a desire to control that person's possessions or activities. That's literally what the statement means. You have too much [fill in the blank] means "I wish you had less of it, and if if it were up to me, you would have."

I'm not all that fond of people's attempts to control others' actions by announcing what they have 'too much' of. Let me know when Robert Frank is put in charge of setting the number of photos that can exist in the world.
 
Emperor Joseph II: My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect.
Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you are attempting to make a career of photography these days, there are too many photographers competing for the same positions. There are so many talented people posting so many fantastic photos to the web that the impact of any one photo or photographer is blunted. And there are too many people with both lack of talent and lack of skill selling photography (whatever the form), to the point of diluting the value of photography. There are, in fact, too many photos and too many photographers.
 
bmattock said:
Well, let's play devil's advocate for a moment. If there are too many photos in the world, what do we do about it?

Shall we restrict photography?
Click to expand...

There is a "qualifier" in Frank's statement.
Too many images around, that makes individual images less important.


edit: As "Pickett" just said so well.
 
Last edited:
"Nothing is really all that special. It’s just life..."

I don't see anything wrong with this

image.php
 
I linked to the Vanity Fair article the quote is from. The article is an interesting read. It's about his trip to China. And yeah, bmattock, I think you need to read his quote more carefully.

And ElectroWNED, would that photo be as interesting if you had all the frames leading up to and all the frames that follow? Because that's the point Frank is making here. The image you picked actually makes Robert Frank's point perfectly.
 
I was there on Sunday. Spent about 1 1/2 hours there. It was very cool to see some of his original contact sheets. I'll be there again before it ends.

msheppler said:
I'm just going to jump in here and say that if your in the DC area you have to see the Robert Frank show at the National Gallery of Art.

http://www.nga.gov/exhibitions/frankinfo.shtm

Believe me, this is a once in a lifetime event. The photographs in this show are stunning!
Click to expand...
 
Micky D said:
There is a "qualifier" in Frank's statement.
Too many images around, that makes individual images less important.


edit: As "Pickett" just said so well.
Click to expand...

Less important to whom?

Would the Mona Lisa be less important if there were more paintings?

Would the David be less important if there were more statues?

And yet somehow, the photo of the flag raising on Mount Suribachi is less important because of the proliferation of photographs?

I'm not sure how to spell it, but picture me snorting in derision. Not at you, but at the very notion that important photos would be somehow diluted in importance or beauty because there are lots of other photographs.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
If you are attempting to make a career of photography these days, there are too many photographers competing for the same positions. There are so many talented people posting so many fantastic photos to the web that the impact of any one photo or photographer is blunted. And there are too many people with both lack of talent and lack of skill selling photography (whatever the form), to the point of diluting the value of photography. There are, in fact, too many photos and too many photographers.
Click to expand...

There are too many songs, and too many songwriters and musicians, too.

In fact, I was listening to the Beatles, and that Guns n Roses song I heard the other day diluted the impact of "Hey Jude." Very disappointing.

Bottom line: there are too many damn people. We need to fix this problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Aziz said:
I was there on Sunday. Spent about 1 1/2 hours there. It was very cool to see some of his original contact sheets. ...
Click to expand...
Check out the expanded version of the Americans (the book). It has over 80 pages of Frank's contact sheets.
Someone might suggest that 80 pages of contact sheets is too many pages of contact sheets, but to me, it's not enough!
/
 
Last edited:
bmattock said:
Would the Mona Lisa be less important if there were more paintings?
Click to expand...

If that girl was a pro model and everybody and his dog had painted her, YES!

Be that as it may, I won't intervene in any more threads with you.
Try to learn how to discuss Bill, and not argue for arguments sake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom