Who decided that HDR’d, over sharpened and super saturated colors are the aesthetic for contemporary photography? I attended a recent presentation by a professional photographer and was presented with many such examples of “photographic art.” Some other curmudgeon (Bless his heart) asked the above question while I sat there stunned from the visual assault. Apparently, some photographic associations are rewarding this type of aesthetic in their competitions. Novice photographers are getting the idea this type of “look” is good photography. It is an under-reliance on skill in the field and an over-reliance on post processing to carry the day.
I lament the end of the photographic world as I know it. I also lamented (and survived) the demise of fiber paper, prime lenses and manual focus. I am concerned the end might be much closer than I think it is. In my old fogeyness, I expect photographs to have a certain look that reflects a photographic aesthetic. Silly me. The teachers from that school of photography are almost all gone. The new teachers of photography do not come from the ranks of film photographers, but from the ranks of the software manipulators.
Those that teach photography in the digital age are creating an aesthetic evolving at the same rapid pace as the technology that creates the pictures. There is little time to go through the refinements of the process because we are barreling headlong on our way to the next software release. There seems to be a concentration on utilizing the latest features just because they are there and not necessarily because they help make a better looking photograph. My big fear is that the folks that decide “what makes a good photograph” no longer will be able to recognize a good photograph and substitute a judgment rendered on the most creative use of photoshop.
I am a bewildered observer. For the most part I am happy in knowing the trends will come and go quickly. I am fearful that the future will be no better. When photographic teachers emerge from the field of software manipulation I have reason to be wary.
Yes, I'm fed up with needlessly super saturated photos too. If they are that way for a reason, fine (I like the work of Martin Parr). But behind the bright pingy colours, often there's very little else. It's like a cake that's nearly all sugar; it's ultimately unsatisfying. Photos like this will get a 'like', then the viewer quickly moves on to the next one, never fulfilled.
I think that a good photograph is so arranged (composed, shaped, coloured) that the viewer pauses and studies it; that's the whole point of making it.
Posted by: Roger Bradbury | January 21, 2021 at 07:21 AM