Do you "Instagram" your photos for mass appeal?

[JBrown]

I am in the camp of photography has no right or wrong "artistic" style and how photos are post processed is a matter of taste no matter how bad it is. Obviously there can be technical items which are wrong.

With that said I recently tried the Nik software suite and thought to myself its instagram for photoshop. All joking aside I can see its uses on getting you close and then taking it the rest of the way. However, I recently got linked to another photographers website and was looking at their work and thought they essentially applied the filters and then left it that way. Apparently the person is somewhat successful and it got me thinking, if instagram is the new hot thing that apparently the masses enjoy, it would seem evident to give them that style of photography.

I personally am still working on mastering the technical aspects and havent developed what I would call a style yet. I was curious if from a business perspective if anyone has adopted a style that has more mainstream appeal vs their own, specifically in how they post process.

 

[Derrel]

Instagram and its 16 filter choices is a HUGE deal right now. Simply a big, big tide, against which it is almost impossible to swim. In the last year, I've taken an experimental approach to how I process the images, in order to appeal to a, shall we say, a "younger demographic". From the feedback I've received, it seems to be working. Times and tastes change, and trends come and go, fads rise up and become widespread, then drift away. We see this in television programming quite a bit, as well as in fashion. Remember bell-bottom pants? They were hugely popular at one time.Same with hot pants. Crew cut haircuts. Bee-hive hair for women. Sideburns. Peace symbols. Why would we allow out photography to remain as bland and as "straight" and as boring as it was back in the 1960's?

WHat I have found is that NON-photographers often like very exaggerated processing effects, and they like them a LOT. What I have also seen is a trend toward utterly ridiculous levels of software application being applied to basically, crap-level images. And I do not mean the Instagram set...I mean people who ought to "know better" just juicing the daylights out of regular images, and somehow being very happy with the stuff they are churning out.

In many ways, I think the so-called ignorant masses blithely using those 16 Instagram filters are producing some better and more-authentic, gritty, and aesthetically pure photography than the majority of "photographers" today are producing. Which I find ironic.

 

[JBrown]

Instagram and its 16 filter choices is a HUGE deal right now. Simply a big, big tide, against which it is almost impossible to swim. In the last year, I've taken an experimental approach to how I process the images, in order to appeal to a, shall we say, a "younger demographic". From the feedback I've received, it seems to be working. Times and tastes change, and trends come and go, fads rise up and become widespread, then drift away. We see this in television programming quite a bit, as well as in fashion. Remember bell-bottom pants? They were hugely popular at one time.Same with hot pants. Crew cut haircuts. Bee-hive hair for women. Sideburns. Peace symbols. Why would we allow out photography to remain as bland and as "straight" and as boring as it was back in the 1960's?

WHat I have found is that NON-photographers often like very exaggerated processing effects, and they like them a LOT. What I have also seen is a trend toward utterly ridiculous levels of software application being applied to basically, crap-level images. And I do not mean the Instagram set...I mean people who ought to "know better" just juicing the daylights out of regular images, and somehow being very happy with the stuff they are churning out.

In many ways, I think the so-called ignorant masses blithely using those 16 Instagram filters are producing some better and more-authentic, gritty, and aesthetically pure photography than the majority of "photographers" today are producing. Which I find ironic.

Being somewhat new, that is where I find myself questioning what to do with post processing. On the one hand from a technical standpoint I am trying to post process to get proper white balance, contrast and overall produce a pleasing image. Then I look and see others using the "instagram" approach throwing all the technical stuff out the window and pushing in all the saturation and contrast that they can. I wish I could they all look bad, but some turn out ok. I agree that its seems to the be the current trend in photography.

Derrel, I dont know if you shoot for a living, but I concur that the masses do seem to greatly prefer the over the top processing. Have you changed your processing the accommodate this?

 

[bhop]

I mostly just use instagram for fun, "just something I saw that I thought was cool" types of shots from my phone. Occasionally, I put something from one of my 'real' cameras, but generally i'm not getting much more attention than my flickr or if I were to share it on facebook..

Instagram can be pretty powerful if you use it right. My friend is an artist and created a following on instagram that has led to him selling prints and making some extra cash..

 

[runnah]

instagram is like vanilla ice cream. Boring until you dump a bunch of toppings on it.

 

[Derrel]

Here is a recent article entitled: The Age of Narcissism-Digitized and Homogenized. The explosion of the [simulated] self-portrait on Instagram, by Kathleen Hay.

Interesting reading. What I have found is that younger people quite often really LIKE what I consider to be almost clownish, ridiculous color.

 

[jake337]

I try not to use the filters. I only use filters if the image was taken with my cell phone. If I do use the filters, with a human being in the picture, I almost always use "willow" and "inkwell". The other filters aren't so friendly with skintones.

 

[vintagesnaps]

Are the masses buying your photos? or potentially going to buy your work? I'd think about where and how you're marketing your photos whether you instagram them or not. It probably depends on what you photograph and where you intend to sell them and who your potential customers would be.

You might want to read the Terms & Conditions before you get too far into it so you're informed about how your photos might be used. It seems it could be possible to edit your photos to suit your style yet incorporate what is a popular trend or style (for example using it with a particular type subject).

 

[Vautrin]

nik software is sooooo much more than instagram like filters. granted, color efex pro can have some "cheezy" effects, but they offer an entire workflow that can do amazing things to your image. i extensively use their workflow: define noise removal => viveza light control => either color efex pro or silver efex pro

the key is you can change sliders and do all kinds of things. you visualize in your head, hey what if the trees had move detail, use their details extractor, brush around a person so their skin doesn't get lizard like, and CREATE in a way that was impossible before.

the downside is it's easy for a photog to take one of their "pre-mixed" receipes and avoid being creative. i can't tell you how many galleries I've walked into and just thought "bleach bypass" or another filter when I saw the image