tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post5406108300150017713..comments2024-03-27T00:32:29.877-07:00Comments on Photos and Stuff: The History of the Digital Transitionamolitorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-14080539456162371302019-04-23T11:43:45.349-07:002019-04-23T11:43:45.349-07:00I like your idea,A.M.! "The best method I ha...I like your idea,A.M.! "The best method I have so far devised to tell this history would be to make up 2 or 3 or 6 archetypal, fictional, characters, and follow their trajectories through 2000 through 2020."Derrel Hewitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16711397011278495094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-69857026087561698352019-04-22T15:15:55.524-07:002019-04-22T15:15:55.524-07:00It seems to me that the writing of "history&q...It seems to me that the writing of "history" is easier once a bit of time has passed, so that one is indeed writing "a history", and not a description of the present.Derrel Hewitthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16711397011278495094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-14471615116030662972019-04-22T05:34:01.527-07:002019-04-22T05:34:01.527-07:00Wouldn't such a history be a description of ho...Wouldn't such a history be a description of how photography became the most common language on earth? Patrick Doddshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02542212200114555054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-69875314952552095722019-04-19T09:35:53.595-07:002019-04-19T09:35:53.595-07:00Maybe, but I'd add: with the advent of digital...Maybe, but I'd add: with the advent of digital, photography became too easy, and too ubiquitous, thus exposing the essential banality of the enterprise as a art medium, as if keeping a diary ever made anyone a writer, or going on holiday ever made anyone an explorer. So, short of finding something no-one had ever photographed before, the interesting things (i.e. the things that would attract the attention of the Gatekeepers) became (1) to handicap yourself with Ye Olde Processes, or (2) to ironise the essential banality of snapshots, or (3) to start seeing what digital could do that straight photography couldn't, without descending into mindless, preset-driven kitsch. Oh, like incredibly tasteful photo-collage, for example ;)<br /><br />But, as I say, don't underestimate the ability of historians to find retrospective patterns in apparent chaos. "Pareidolia", I think it's called...<br /><br />MikeMike C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11279776665185060446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-7915157594198842952019-04-19T08:55:24.216-07:002019-04-19T08:55:24.216-07:00That's kind of where I am at. Trying to grappl...That's kind of where I am at. Trying to grapple with it traditionally seems to boil down to: Well there were a lot of influencers who weren't much of anything artistically, and anyways are too numerous and indistinguishable to name. And there were a lot of photos made. It was very popular. And there were fads that came and went but in the end everything looked pretty similar, and everything got photographed. And there were filters? And social media?<br /><br />It just seems chaotic and directionless. Do you just boil 2000 through 2020 down to "and with digital there was a sharp uptick in popularity of photography, followed by a gradual decline, and also Facebook." and then leave it at that?<br />amolitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-32677361605581140752019-04-19T08:41:16.891-07:002019-04-19T08:41:16.891-07:00Well, nobody gives tuppence for the likes Thein or...Well, nobody gives tuppence for the likes Thein or Reichmann as artists, even now, though their role as "influencers" might come to be seen as significant or at least typical.<br /><br />One thing that strikes me as interesting, now I come to think of it, is the number of contemporary photographers I'd rate highly as artists who have clung to film in the digital era, or only come to digital quite late in their career. Perhaps that's because the photographers I think of as "contemporaries" are actually quite old, now... Or perhaps it's linked to galleries' reluctance to accept digital prints as a valid medium? Whatever, it's unlikely that anyone who does not make it past the Gatekeepers now will figure in any history books. Sally Mann or Alec Soth or Paul Graham will remain Names on the list: the future will decide who on the list is up and who is down.<br /><br />MikeMike C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11279776665185060446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-64926151371414243032019-04-19T07:55:55.156-07:002019-04-19T07:55:55.156-07:00Well, that's kind of the point isn't it? T...Well, that's kind of the point isn't it? To invent great men to carry the narrative will, I think, be quite a bit harder this time around.<br /><br />I may have beef with Ansel Adams and Alfred Stieglitz, but to promote Ming Thein and/or Michael Reichmann as the Great Men of their era would be ludicrous. It could happen, I suppose.<br /><br />The best method I have so far devised to tell this history would be to make up 2 or 3 or 6 archetypal, fictional, characters, and follow their trajectories through 2000 through 2020.<br /><br />"in 2000 Bill is 16 years old, aspiring to be a sports photographer..." <br /><br />and so on. It would be a radically different style of history, and could be entertaining as hell to read.<br />amolitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-46492102199952634402019-04-19T06:00:22.399-07:002019-04-19T06:00:22.399-07:00In a way, what you describe is simply the way real...In a way, what you describe is simply the way real life is turned into "history". Sure, no-one knows now what or who will be come to be regarded as notable nodes in the narrative, but they'll be there, somewhere, even if they have to be invented! (or, more likely, constructed like some Frankenstein's monster out of the leftovers). I doubt many private soldiers knew they were at the "Battle of Waterloo", for example, as opposed to just having a particularly busy day at work.<br /><br />Who knows what daft photographic fads came and went before digital, without leaving a mark on the official "histories"? Although you can get some idea by looking at copies of popular photo mags from the 1950s and 60s, or even something as aspirational as Aperture: end-to-end hilarity and bafflement! This is a different kind of history, though, like the study of office-work or household cleaning products, things The Chosen Exemplary Few rarely have to deal with. When it comes to our digital age (assuming a good proportion of our websites, blogs, social media, and actual photographs do survive) future historians are going to have a truly massive "noise v. signal" problem, though... History may need to have more in common with data-mining than story-telling.<br /><br />MikeMike C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11279776665185060446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-68604064917721453562019-04-18T16:41:05.095-07:002019-04-18T16:41:05.095-07:00A history of digital is complicated by it coincidi...A history of digital is complicated by it coinciding with the second democratisation of photography.<br />The first shattered the status quo and saw a leading photographer comment “Here comes the rabble” and give up photography within a year. An industry semi-collapsed and camera wielding men and women became a real social nuisance. On the other hand it led to pictures of subjects never seen before made by ordinary people. Aunt Mary and her tennis racquet, couples at home on the couch.<br />The assumption that's never mentioned in histories is that of progress. We see technological changes as the inevitable path to utopia, but I wonder if an assessment of the quality of what's being done with the tech is even possible. <br />The first wave of photography's democratisation, say 1880 - 1910, seems to me to also coincide with a disappearance of most of the great men and women in photography, compared to what came before and after. <br />If the emergence of digital follows a similar track, we'll need to wait another 15 years before much can be said about what has really happened.David Shttp://davidsutton.co.nz/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-86631368525933210372019-04-18T14:10:43.116-07:002019-04-18T14:10:43.116-07:00The Great Man is actually a pretty well establishe...The Great Man is actually a pretty well established and formal "method of historiography" which has also been broadly criticized. Wikipedia has a decent primer.amolitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15743439184763617516noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-654754338632526091.post-68214183092567398702019-04-18T14:01:42.355-07:002019-04-18T14:01:42.355-07:00Well-stated review of the contemporary world of &q...Well-stated review of the contemporary world of "photography." Your term Great Men reminds me of the "Great Photographers" who expound their self-professed expertise and drivel on the infamous Dpreview. Sadly, that site probably epitomizes what has happened to the world of contemporary imaging. No textbook needed, just peruse over there......Kodachromeguyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09234925040052813302noreply@blogger.com