Is exposure to and study of good photography a bad thing?

[Derrel]

SNIP>>>>For me personally I do feel overwhelmed looking at stuff like 500px and even much of the photographs posted up here. The inspiration sort of ran out (overtime) and became a thought that there is so much greatness out there how could I impress or gain any compliments from other photographers.

This is a thought that some bloggers and thinkers on photography have brought up recently--the idea that people are abandoning photography as a hobby simply because, as shefjr wrote, "how could I impress or gain any compliments from other photographers"? Because today, photos are being created at a fantastical rate. I read an article last week and it stated that 10 percent of all the photos ever taken, were taken in the year 2012. It stated that half a billion photos are taken/made/shot every single day!

The upshot being that with so,so many images being created every day, it has become clear that advancing above the crowd is now extremely improbably, even for talented shooters. And for many people, if they are not getting the recognition from their so-called audience, then there is no motivation to continue in photography.

This speaks to the motivation AND the mindset of people. Some people have a gotta' be the best, or it's not worth doing attitude, while others are happy to enjoy an activity without being ruled by an obsessive-compulsive mindset of excellence-or-quitting, of taking their ball and going home the minute they are not automatically promoted to team captain. So, there ARE people who have different motivations, different expectations of being given "recognition".

 

[fjrabon]

I think the bigger issue is that many times such an environment shifts what we strive for from "artistic" abilities, to quantifiable things that allow us to one up or "win." Like a lot of shots on here are praised for how well it shows off the camera's ability. Like "stunning sharpness" or "wow, can't believe the shadow detail there" or "man, that 6 light set up is great!" or "man, can't believe you were able to get that bird in such sharp focus!" Composition is normally limited to "should of used rule of thirds!" and content is basically limited "hot model (insert very blunt sexual innuendo)!"

Now that isn't to say those things aren't important, but I think, and I've said as much here, that what gets commented on and thus what a lot of people here then strive for, becomes things that are obvious and in some sense measurable. It's like people are afraid to comment on something if it isn't verifiably correct. People are afraid to say something that somebody could disagree with without being refutable. We're afraid to actually talk about photography, and instead we talk about technical things, nearly exclusively, with the occasional reference to how hot a model is.

 

[Overread]

This speaks to the motivation AND the mindset of people. Some people have a gotta' be the best, or it's not worth doing attitude, while others are happy to enjoy an activity without being ruled by an obsessive-compulsive mindset of excellence-or-quitting, of taking their ball and going home the minute they are not automatically promoted to team captain. So, there ARE people who have different motivations, different expectations of being given "recognition".

I wouldn't say that it's a clear cut "I want to be the best" or "I don't care" approach but rather more that individual recognition is an element. Not the only element, not the only driving force but that as social creatures part of what we enjoy in things is sharing our skill, understanding and achievements. However in an atmosphere where there is increasing volume it becomes harder to be a contributor because there is so much out there of a presumed superior nature.

therefore one element of joy and reward for people (note I put one not the only) is lost within the hobby.

 

[Derrel]

In today's era of social media and widespread,networked image sharing, there are people desperately seeking those almighty up-votes, likes, and shares. These people LOVE the feedback from anonymous strangers...I see these folks on Instagram, desperately building bases of "followers", and then bombarding them with endless selfie after selfie...often not very good photos, but pretty girls still. Ego satisfaction through likes. It's part of the new era we live in.

I get that people today want recognition from their photography. That is precisely WHY sites like 500px are flourishing: polished turds that hit all the current cliches get up-voted very quickly. For those seeking those up-votes, the cliche methods and approaches bring them in in volumes. Lemme' see...vibrance +20, saturation +25, clarity +40 to +70, bonus points for a sunset shot, bonus points for a 10-stop ND filter. If the photo has a person, bonus points for a 27 year old or younger, beautiful female face. Bonus points for heavy skin smoothing. Bonus points for outlandishly involved, multi-layer "color toning". Bonus points for light that appears to come from no particular direction.

There are people who are involved with photography for deeply personal reasons, some for shallow reasons, and people everywhere in between on a wiiiiiiide spectrum. The imitators and dilettantes and noobs who want nothing but recognition carefully pick out the highest-scoring tropes and methods, and then slavishly set out to learn the "workflow" that will garner that recognition from the masses. In short, the people getting the most "recognition" in today's internet era of photography are the people whose work looks EXACTLY like the work of whoever happens to be getting the most up-votes on 500px.

I really don't care if those people, the vote-seekers, quit the photography game. Or if they stay in it. Whatever. I've been doing my own thing since '75. I don't f***** care what "Like-seekers" do. They can stay, or go, or whatever. They have no effect on us,really.

 

[bribrius]

This speaks to the motivation AND the mindset of people. Some people have a gotta' be the best, or it's not worth doing attitude, while others are happy to enjoy an activity without being ruled by an obsessive-compulsive mindset of excellence-or-quitting, of taking their ball and going home the minute they are not automatically promoted to team captain. So, there ARE people who have different motivations, different expectations of being given "recognition".

I wouldn't say that it's a clear cut "I want to be the best" or "I don't care" approach but rather more that individual recognition is an element. Not the only element, not the only driving force but that as social creatures part of what we enjoy in things is sharing our skill, understanding and achievements. However in an atmosphere where there is increasing volume it becomes harder to be a contributor because there is so much out there of a presumed superior nature.

therefore one element of joy and reward for people (note I put one not the only) is lost within the hobby.

They are looking for it too much online, and not enough within themselves or their local circle in my opinion. with the start of all this high tech, online posting of photos local real relationships and communication has been somewhat lost. For those that have been doing this for years (you know since before we even had cellphones) it isn't so much a issue as even if you suck at this a certain element of not worrying comes in just doing it for years. In which they build circles on a more personal level and with that comes some confidence. For those fairly new to it, they might be concentrating all their recognition gathering online. For instance, i have known a few photographers over the years, some quite recently that complimented me on my work. And these are the ones that have been doing this for decades, or made/make a living on it.

So, my confidence level is boosted again. Not so much by online likes, but real people in real world. And i think that matters more. People can pretend they are anything they want online. You can look at a site, they can claim to be a photographer, they can have some amazing photos. But what you don't know possibly, is they really aren't much of a photographer and to come up with those twenty photos it took them a hundred thousand shutters. I am not saying that is a bad thing. But there is a lot of pretending online. People locally, i have a photographer who has been doing this for forty years give me a nod of approving. It carries a hell of a lot more weight. And he sees it for what it is, still has that darkroom stuff shoved away he does. So his "over view" of photography in general is much deeper rooted than some online likes or fan clubs. You know, there are people that love it and appreciate it in a deeper sense, and then there are people that just want likes. Chances are, if someone has been doing this for forty years they have a different mentality and aren't in it for the "likes" and actually love photography in general.

I am a little cocky just because i started as a teen shooting 35mm and polaroids. So my attitude might be kind of "you can blow me". Now , some of the real old timers before my generation that maybe dabbled in large format at very young ages or medium format are probably more of the mindset "you can shove it up your proverbial azz" and that is about the recognition they might need. LMAO

 

[bribrius]

In today's era of social media and widespread,networked image sharing, there are people desperately seeking those almighty up-votes, likes, and shares. These people LOVE the feedback from anonymous strangers...I see these folks on Instagram, desperately building bases of "followers", and then bombarding them with endless selfie after selfie...often not very good photos, but pretty girls still. Ego satisfaction through likes. It's part of the new era we live in.

I get that people today want recognition from their photography. That is precisely WHY sites like 500px are flourishing: polished turds that hit all the current cliches get up-voted very quickly. For those seeking those up-votes, the cliche methods and approaches bring them in in volumes. Lemme' see...vibrance +20, saturation +25, clarity +40 to +70, bonus points for a sunset shot, bonus points for a 10-stop ND filter. If the photo has a person, bonus points for a 27 year old or younger, beautiful female face. Bonus points for heavy skin smoothing. Bonus points for outlandishly involved, multi-layer "color toning". Bonus points for light that appears to come from no particular direction.

There are people who are involved with photography for deeply personal reasons, some for shallow reasons, and people everywhere in between on a wiiiiiiide spectrum. The imitators and dilettantes and noobs who want nothing but recognition carefully pick out the highest-scoring tropes and methods, and then slavishly set out to learn the "workflow" that will garner that recognition from the masses. In short, the people getting the most "recognition" in today's internet era of photography are the people whose work looks EXACTLY like the work of whoever happens to be getting the most up-votes on 500px.

I really don't care if those people, the vote-seekers, quit the photography game. Or if they stay in it. Whatever. I've been doing my own thing since '75. I don't f***** care what "Like-seekers" do. They can stay, or go, or whatever. They have no effect on us,really.

BINGO!!!!!!!!!! I have yet to meet a photographer that has been doing this for decades, and decades, that concerns themselves much at all with recognition unless it is for their photography business (money). Not that they don't care at all, but something else is deeply rooted in them that makes others opinions a little less significant. You old timers are worse than me (yea, 70's makes you a old timer sorry). One in particular i know if i tell him i like one of his photos he will say thank you. But both he and i know that it really don't mean a entire lot to him.

 

[Derrel]

A good portion of my comments today have been assuming something I have not stated explicitly: that much of what is considered "good photography" today is the stuff which is popular of Flickr and 500px, and other "aggregator" sites. I disagree with the idea that much of what is on 500px is good photography, because honestly, the vast majority of what I have seen on 500px is done by newcomers to photography; people who cannot compose well, have no idea of how awful their horizontal head-lopped portraits are; take flat-light images and process them hard; have no idea of what light direction means; and who are shooting cliche work. MUCH of the work that gets the most up-votes on aggregatror sites is kitschy garbage, or cliche stuff: sunsets, pretty flowers, focus stack juxtapositions of near/far with bad use of wide-angle lenses; in general, the kind of colorful, vibrant, dazzlingly sharp images that noobs like.

There is FAR too much very weak stuff that is being Photoshopped VERY hard, and which people are thinking is "good photography".

"Ohhhhh, pretty! Click! LIKE!" that is the atmosphere that we now have surrounding "good photography". The same people watching Keeping Up With The Kardashians and Real Housewives of Idiotville--those are in the main, the kind of people who are voting on what is "good photography". The thing is, the majority of the images are sh*+ images, with herculean processing efforts thrown at them! That is what "good photography" has come to mean at this time in the history of photography. This is the framework within which Overread's OP is being discussed, at least from my end: the era in which people who are not getting enough "Likes" are simply hanging it up.

 

[KenC]

I disagree with the idea that much of what is on 500px is good photography

This makes me feel lucky that I never bothered looking at it. Somehow I thought it probably wouldn't be worth the time.

 

[Buckster]

I honestly had no idea that so many people are so insecure, so self-centered, so in need of constant reassurance from everyone around them, so in need of "winning" even if it's just winning a pat on the head, but it does explain a few things to me that didn't make sense before.

It's always eluded me why we can't just be honest with one another and say what we really actually think, even if we're limited to dictionary words and not "curse" words. Nope, can't even use common dictionary words if there's the possibility that someone might take offense by it, plain truth or not.

As an example, in my world, "ignorant" isn't a bad word, nor a bad thing. It just means you don't know something, and you probably should, as it would benefit you. We're all ignorant of something - every one of us, everyone you will ever meet, without exception. But tell someone on this forum that they're ignorant, and you risk being banned. There are whole slews of words that work the same way. Modern "social species" egos are simply too fragile to handle such plain truth.

Now it also makes sense to me where all these "we", "us" pseudo-deep self-reflection type threads and questions are coming from, one after another, popping up and generating tons of discussion, while reminding me of some circle-jerk of naked guys on a mountaintop staring at each others' belly buttons for too long, seeking the answers to the universe. It appears that it's so that people can talk about themselves and polish their egos and give out excuses for why they're doing X or not doing Y, justifying everything you can think of, comparing themselves to others in every way possible, constantly seeking answers to questions that shouldn't even be a concern, and so on, and so on, and so on.

No wonder I'm mostly anti-social and don't give a hoot what anyone else is doing, nor what they think about what I'm doing.

 

[fjrabon]

I care about what other people think. Yeah, definitely I do.

But only to the extent that its a feeling that somebody "gets" what I'm doing. Is there reward to me when somebody says "hey, I really like what you did here!" to an image I feel strongly about? Yeah, sure. It's the same way I feel when I'm discussing something very personal and somebody says "I understand where you're coming from."

To me the worst thing I could think of would be changing what I do, for the purpose of getting likes/compliments or whatever.

To me, part of photography is about connection. It's putting a bit of myself out there and seeing how it connects with other people. It's fine if it just bounces around, not attaching itself to anybody, but that one time it does connect to somebody else, that's a pretty cool thing, to me. If I changed what I was doing for the sake of approval, then I'm not really connecting with anybody, I'm just reflecting them. If you do that, you've sort of become Andy from the office in his early episodes where he just mirrors everybody's expressions and emotions in hope that he's liked.

Photography is hard for me because first, I sort of have to figure out what I want to communicate. I have to figure myself out first. And that's not easy. Then once I've figured out what I want to say, I have to express that eloquently. And that's not easy. Then finally, you sort of hope somebody understands what you're saying and appreciates it and really gets it. And the vast majority of the time they won't. You have to sort of be okay with that not happening most of the time. But that makes the payoff all the more worthwhile when they do. Would I rather have a few real connections about images I care about, or a lot of connections over things I don't even really deeply care about. I personally want the former, but I also understand the lure of the latter.

It's sort of like the following scenario:

Imagine the person you are most attracted to, would you rather have a 10% chance of being with them, and being able to be yourself, or a 90% chance of dating them, having to act like somebody you aren't all the time.

 

[bribrius]

I disagree with the idea that much of what is on 500px is good photography

This makes me feel lucky that I never bothered looking at it. Somehow I thought it probably wouldn't be worth the time.

you might actually be shocked. Among the group on 500 px there is a very small sub culture (like .5 percent) that seek out old school photos and film photos. I have had hits on mine, just two last night who i am assuming of are the sort because they didn't pick out a single digital image to like just the film ones. Unfortunate for them, there isn't many old school shooters that post on 500px so i imagine they are looking long and hard for what they seek amongst the rest of the stuff. So Derrel is pretty much correct. But there is that little sub group, kind of a needle in a haystack that go on there searching. I hate to say it, but part of the reason it might be so small is that much of the older time shooters really just don't know technology, know about the site, or just don't want to get involved. A lot of it is over processed, well whatever, lot of it still looks good to (i am not the hard azz Derrel is lol) . But there is some real nice work on there. Stuff for pretty much everyone but you might have to go looking for it in your case as i know you seem more into the older film work.. Much of what you probably would like, won't have a lot of likes and might be buried pretty deep..

A for instance, i typed in the search "film". The vast majority that came up wasn't film. Then upon finding what was i had to separate out (try to find) what hadn't been photoshopped digitally after the fact even if it was film shot. Then after doing that you are only guessing what camera might have shot it. It helps if they tell you as i was looking for some of the older film cameras, but you have to read (if they are nice enough to write it) in the descriptions to sort out what might have shot it. Lot of the film shots appeared to me also to be after the fact post processed, as i mentioned. Shooting film just to say you shoot film then running it through photoshop after seems to be the new "in" thing. Ya just really have to LOOK.. Because even much of that wasn't straight film. You really have to LOOK and it can take some time.

 

[bribrius]

I care about what other people think. Yeah, definitely I do.

But only to the extent that its a feeling that somebody "gets" what I'm doing. Is there reward to me when somebody says "hey, I really like what you did here!" to an image I feel strongly about? Yeah, sure. It's the same way I feel when I'm discussing something very personal and somebody says "I understand where you're coming from."

To me the worst thing I could think of would be changing what I do, for the purpose of getting likes/compliments or whatever.

To me, part of photography is about connection. It's putting a bit of myself out there and seeing how it connects with other people. It's fine if it just bounces around, not attaching itself to anybody, but that one time it does connect to somebody else, that's a pretty cool thing, to me. If I changed what I was doing for the sake of approval, then I'm not really connecting with anybody, I'm just reflecting them. If you do that, you've sort of become Andy from the office in his early episodes where he just mirrors everybody's expressions and emotions in hope that he's liked.

Photography is hard for me because first, I sort of have to figure out what I want to communicate. I have to figure myself out first. And that's not easy. Then once I've figured out what I want to say, I have to express that eloquently. And that's not easy. Then finally, you sort of hope somebody understands what you're saying and appreciates it and really gets it. And the vast majority of the time they won't. You have to sort of be okay with that not happening most of the time. But that makes the payoff all the more worthwhile when they do. Would I rather have a few real connections about images I care about, or a lot of connections over things I don't even really deeply care about. I personally want the former, but I also understand the lure of the latter.

It's sort of like the following scenario:

Imagine the person you are most attracted to, would you rather have a 10% chance of being with them, and being able to be yourself, or a 90% chance of dating them, having to act like somebody you aren't all the time.

you know what annoys me? It isn't when someone hates one of my photos. It is when i hate a photo i took and others like it. And if i hear something like "hey, i really understand where you are coming from man". When i don't even know why i took the shot. so much for communication.

 

[The_Traveler]

Thus I put forward the view that we are too bombarded with quality; that we have too much inspiration and not enough building of contemporary networks. We don't have learning buddies; we don't have a class; we don't have a grouping - heck even in tutorials or classes the skill range can be very vast.

If we are being bombarded by quality, it sure isn't here.
What we are bombarded with is tons of words about technical stuff that in the end really doesn't matter - and a good amount of it by the people on this thread.
Instead of pictures that are meaningful, people talk about technical stuff because that's convenient and relatively easy.
Or they talk about folksy crap about themselves that has nothing of interest or relevance to what is going on.

Too many people are here because they want personal validation for what they did or what they knew.
Of course there are those who talk forever and never show anything or those who talk forever without saying anything.
Those who can't wait to mention that they shoot film or they're too busy to put in any effort here.

There are two or three people here whose work I look forward to seeing, the rest is total meaningless crap.

 

[Overread]

I would say that its not just TPF (although I find it interesting how many have used my post as an excuse to complain about the site....). My point was wider reaching and refereed to the internet, to TV, to magazines - to media and photography in general.

 

[Derrel]

I would say that its not just TPF (although I find it interesting how many have used my post as an excuse to complain about the site....). My point was wider reaching and refereed to the internet, to TV, to magazines - to media and photography in general.

Given the sort of rambling OP you started with, it's not surprising...it was very difficult to see what,exactly, it was that you were trying to say. Your OP was almost guaranteed to lead to a mess. You put a title on it, but the post itself was a sort of virtual open-ended free-for-all.

Copy your original post and then run it through this Hacker Factor Gender Guesser