Time Article: "The Next Revolution in Photography Is Coming"

[emraphoto]

I can't even read that thing - on Chrome it displays without a scroll bar. If the content is as flawed as the coding, simply forget about it...

the content is worth a read, in my opinion. i am not sure that folks realize but this is one of the voices of World Press Photo. having an increased perspective allows us to understand and interact with photography and how it develops. with integrity we hope.

as for the copy and the site, welcome to the modern newsroom.

 

[JChrome]

the content is worth a read, in my opinion. i am not sure that folks realize but this is one of the voices of World Press Photo. having an increased perspective allows us to understand and interact with photography and how it develops. with integrity we hope.

as for the copy and the site, welcome to the modern newsroom.

+1.

Automatically discounting something new is perhaps the sine qua non of the majority of this forum... But on the flip side, folks here revel in old technologies which is something I do as well so I don't mind it so much.

I agree with the spirit of the article. There is lots of new data being recorded now. The more interesting question is how to use this data in meaningful and artistic ways. So we are recording it, now what?

I am really convinced VR is going to fundamentally alter the way we consume media/information. Lots of interesting things happening in that space.

 

[Richard G]

Sorry, it was Trueman Capote, not Gore Vidal.

 

[Richard G]

+1.

Automatically discounting something new is perhaps the sine qua non of the majority of this forum... But on the flip side, folks here revel in old technologies which is something I do as well so I don't mind it so much.

I agree with the spirit of the article. There is lots of new data being recorded now. The more interesting question is how to use this data in meaningful and artistic ways. So we are recording it, now what?

I am really convinced VR is going to fundamentally alter the way we consume media/information. Lots of interesting things happening in that space.

Who says we automatically discounted it? I read it. Many of us read it. Just because I have a couple of old cameras doesn't mean I can't read. I quickly discounted it, not automatically. His reputation should not influence my appraisal of the piece. Those black and white prints he consigns to the dustbin of history I'm keeping thanks. This iPhone reads my thumbprint. But that has nothing to do with photography that I do.

 

[goamules]

Apparently, if there is one thing deader than photography, it's editing. I think this is about the 3,721st consecutive article I've read online that has basic proofreading errors: "The digital sensor replaced to optical record of light with a computational process that substitutes a calculated reconstruction using only one third of the available photons."

Like Marek above, I am increasingly content with becoming part of an obsolete alternative - to just about everything.

I concur, online writing skills are atrocious. Maybe there is a connection. The people that write these articles are immersed in technology, and don't want to do anything the "old, hard way." Including learning to write.

Instead, they use technology as a crutch, cranking out last minute sound byte articles using cliched analogies, on their smart phones at 1AM. Just as their articles imply that kludging together a bunch of digital imagery in Photoshop is somehow going to be better "photography." It's not, it just easier.

 

[marek_]

It reminds me of watching Blue Peter (a children s program on the BBC) were they would have an article on some new technological concept, design at some polytechnic by some second year students - some concept vehicle/car for the future were the doors slide underneath and we don't have to touch a single pedal, dial, button or switch. We don't have to do anything anymore. Wow - what an interesting place. The author of the article seems to have brought up points that are mostly at odds with human nature - how we function, our senses, our involvement in our immediate surroundings. He also comes across as though he's become aware of some new piece technology and got over excited, and needs to tell someone before he bursts. Yes, technology finds it's way and I'm sure some of what he's written will come to fruition. But disregarding so wholeheartedly what has been before is a big mistake. It also make him sound like an idiot.

 

[nongfuspring]

The author of the article seems to have brought up points that are mostly at odds with human nature - how we function, our senses, our involvement in our immediate surroundings.

Which points specifically?

 

[JoeV]

Fortunately, for the types of changes he prognosticates are coming to the medium, traditional methods will always remain a subset.

~Joe

 

[MCTuomey]

I'm going to go out this weekend, drink beer, listen to some fine music, and try to capture some good data with my computational devices because:

Computational photography ... allows the visual image to create a picture of reality that is infinitely richer than a simple visual record, and with this comes the opportunity to incorporate deeper levels of knowledge.

I'll post my infinitely richer, deeper photos shortly, once i figure out how to advantage myself of this opportunity.

 

[krötenblender]

i am assuming you know who the author is?

He is... a bad writer.

 

[David_Manning]

There are SO many different genres in photography, that I think sometimes the industry and insiders get caught up in the relentless pursuit of perfect technical photography.

I showed my mother some Daido Moriyama photos and she couldn't believe they were taken by a world-renowned photographer! She's a great example of someone who equates technical perfection with professional, high-quality photography.

There is a huge demand for an image-chain that will pop out perfect likenesses of reality instantly to publish or share. So what. There are also photographic artists who disregard the medium altogether to share their vision. I think most of us are somewhere in between...and that's the real beauty and democratization of the photographic medium.

I think the author is talking about the future of reality/photojournalism in print, as emraphoto mentioned above (hi, John).

The rest of us shouldn't get wound up about this...if it doesn't affect our own photography, who cares what anyone says?

 

[furcafe]

Agreed. Stephen Mayes has been involved with these issues for quite some time (e.g., http://www.aperture.org/blog/toward-new-documentary-expression/).

Out of all the two pages of posts in this thread there are none that actually respond to the content of the article at all.

The point of the article is to talk about the use of metadata in photography the and (now virtually unlimited) power of post processing which is changing our relationship to the medium by (further) undermining the idea of facticity in photography. These ideas surely can't be controversial to anyone, what is getting everyone's backs up is that it has been bookended by clumsy and vaguely threatening sounding metaphors.

Nobody is coming to throw your Tri-X down the toilet, nobody is pooping on your hobby, please relax.

 

[emraphoto]

He is... a bad writer.

measured in a moment.

 

[konicaman]

That article was a lot of BS (no, that is not an acronym for Business School).
Intellectualism and half a bottle of vodka is not a good combination...
It was actually worse that reading Susan Sontag 😀

I am tempted to ask the ever important question: Why are we doing this?
And the answer (as it usually is): Because we can!

It reminds me of the "photographic" blogs with a few images and a lot of pages telling us the exact longitude and latitude where the the "photographer" took a dump, what his pulse rate was at that exact moment and so on and so forth.

 

[MCTuomey]

Poor writing aside, one of the author's points is that the change in medium technology creates the possibility for enrichment of photography as art, in content, form, and impact. Remains to be seen whether this possibility can be realized or squandered as just another instance of technical virtuosity.

The point of the article is to talk about the use of metadata in photography the and (now virtually unlimited) power of post processing which is changing our relationship to the medium by (further) undermining the idea of facticity in photography. These ideas surely can't be controversial to anyone, what is getting everyone's backs up is that it has been bookended by clumsy and vaguely threatening sounding metaphors.

Yes, this has been part of "modern" thinking since the Dadaists (exemplified in photography by Man Ray and others), or roughly 8-9 decades. The author's tropes are tiresome and don't work to engage readers, his tone coming off as arch-prophetic, somehow controversial, and almost condescending, despite the validity of his main point.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

This is probably the worst article I read in quite a while. It is so badly written I don't even want to think whether I agree or disagree on anything the author tries to communicate.

GLF

 

[Ranchu]

Moisture is the essence of wetness, and wetness is the essence of beauty. - Derek

 

[JChrome]

Who says we automatically discounted it? I read it. Many of us read it. Just because I have a couple of old cameras doesn't mean I can't read. I quickly discounted it, not automatically. His reputation should not influence my appraisal of the piece. Those black and white prints he consigns to the dustbin of history I'm keeping thanks. This iPhone reads my thumbprint.

Who said you didn't read it?

No, I said you all automatically discounted it. Adding little quips about it without considering the essence of article.

If you did consider it beyond the surface and want to provide a worthwhile criticism, please let me read it.

 

[Ranchu]

There's nothing wrong with automatically discounting such *twadtle*, we don't owe the guy our attention. Either his majical software apps will be used, or not, what do I care?

It's not like there's a dearth of random people wanting to inform us that a photograph doesn't have to be a photograph, you can change it, but then you'd have to call it something else and think about it differnt. It's the easiest, and laziest thing to say. I'm sure he has better things to do with his time, and I'm sure I've better things to do then wallow around in his torpor with him.

 

[emraphoto]

I'll admit to never having heard of Stephen Mayes before today, but it's apparent he's been in the game long enough that several here are willing to defend him. From the outside looking in, I'd say the guy needs to let someone edit his work if he wants to be taken seriously by those of us who don't know enough to be in awe of him.

Nobody here has expressed awe or the notion that he is without human qualities thus demanding reverance.

Where 'who he is' becomes relevant is in response to the idea that we shouldn't be listening to him as he has not proven himself worthy of our attention.

It remains interesting to me how cynical the public response is to World Press Photo, when concerns of 'embellishment' arise, yet when one of the pillars of the organization speaks candidily about the challenges they face regarding such issues, with an obvious channel for engagement (which I believe to be the point) it is met with derision.

Anyhow, 'twaddle' and the such seems the overall climate here so I will leave iot at that. For the record, when Stephen Mayes speaks, a great many of the top flight photojournalists and documentary photographers of our time listen, including me.

Pointing out what I already know, Mikko and the Time Lightbox folks operate on a shoestring budget thus the copy may be flawed, seems to miss the point.