If you could never share your images

[jaomul]

I'd still shoot, but it wouldn't have the same holds on me that it does now. I am not so pushed about sharing on social media like Facebook and Flickr, though I do enjoy it a little and share here sometimes, but I love printing photos and showing them to people,be it portraits of themselves or that sneaky animal shot up in a tree hiding.

If I lost that final part it would be a big loss to my interest in photos and photography

 

[waday]

This seems like a rather extreme premise. People have been sharing pictures in some way since tintypes.

I have to agree--I'm not one for extreme, unlikely hypotheticals. It may stem from being a vegetarian and getting these types of questions quite often, such as: "if you were on a deserted island, would you eat meat/fish to survive?" I don't know what I'd do, because I'll likely never be in that situation. If I am, and I get out alive, I'll let you know what happens.

Same answer here. I don't know what I'd do, but if I'm ever in the situation, I'll let you know. I like to think that I'd keep shooting, but the wife and I routinely share our love of hobbies with one another. If I can't do that, yes, it probably would impact me.

 

[jcdeboever]

For me only, I feel pretentious at moments .

 

[Rick50]

I haven't backed up my images for a few years. I was aware that all of those thousands pictures could be gone in a second. Valuable memories, some good shots, fails...never mind. So what? I'll make new ones.

I backed up most of my images recently, but I still haven't backed up shoots I did a couple of months ago till today...

I'm not attached to things I create. They are mine but they don't belong to me. The same is with writing. I wrote lots of words. They're mine, they came out of me, but as soon as they are written they don't belong to me anymore.
It's just the way I look at the world.

I don't think you need to prove something to yourself, I think you can be "aware" of things. Why would you prove anything to anyone?Including yourself.

You nailed it!!!!! Making new ones is where the fun is.

 

[table1349]

I'm a narcissist and an attention-whore.
I'd find a totally different hobby.

We thought that you already had.

That REALLY needed some kind of warning. I just spit my water everywhere.

 

[Trever1t]

I understand your question BUT art is created to share, always and from the time our ancestors started painting hands on cave walls.

Art is not photography but photography is an art. I suppose I'd still shoot landscapes but how would I hide them, at the very least I'd hang them in my home.

No, art is meant to share. Do o get a rush from likes, yeah I do. Should the praise not be as important to me as it is, not influence what I share, yes indeed, guilty!

 

[chuasam]

Most of the pictures I take are for myself. Am I allowed to make money off my images ?that will determine the price of my gear.

 

[clel miller]

I have a couple hundred thousand images I've never shared....just shot, and developed, and stored, either as negatives, or slides, or digital files. I just like the click! sound. Even if the internet blew up tomorrow, I'd still be shooting images. I got tired of routinely sharing pictures on-line a couple of years ago. After having shared 10,000 images and receiving a few million page view counts, sharing pics just doesn't matter any more.

Every silver lining has a dark cloud.
Definitely the sad truth.
While helping to (hugely) escalate the interest in photography, digital technology has also assisted in devaluing it.

 

[Overread]

No because if no one could share photos I'd never even have known to pick up a camera. How on earth would I have known that the camera could produce such amazing result and that I could even attempt to get near to such results if I didn't see the works of others first?


Ok so sure lets say that this mystical disaster happens right after one picks up the camera - or after one picks up enough skill to be confident with the camera. Eh of course I would. Part of photography is the moment; its enjoying that moment and capturing the photograph.

However we are, at our core, social creatures. Even the most isolationist people cannot ignore that we are designed to function within social groups. Thus any hobby or interest which lacks any sense of community attachment or social worth or even just exchange and sharing can lose its appeal. Photography is not like reading a book or watching a film; photography is about creativity. It's about the person not discovering or learning something so much as it is about them creating something and that in itself is about contribution. You create to contribute and thus there's a desire for others to see that contribution and to give it value - or rather to add to its value.



Sure I'd keep shooting probably; I've got lots of shots that I've never shown and might never show because I enjoy the act of photography itself. However I also respect that there's a difference between choosing not to show* and being forced not to show or denied. The former is a choice and option; the latter is an ultimatum which is very different.




As for how much we shoot for others and for ourselves that is an open ended concept that has no fixed rules.

*being to lazy to edit