Reading around, it seems photographers are destroying places of beauty. Indeed such people should not be called photographers for photographers merely record what is there and do nothing else. Sadly there is a new breed of photographer out there - the vandal photographer.
It seems that since cameras have become so good that competition now is to produce the most unusual photograph. This leads to people making videos of themselves eating four course dinners complete with crockery, wine glasses etc while driving at 70mph down the road. That and people setting up cam in pristine areas then lighting campfires where no campfire should ever be just to get a photograph.
All this bad behaviour is driven by an urge to get "+1" or "like" or comments on their photos and videos when put online onto whatever website. There's an addiction out there and it's all about attention. It's as though the world has suddenly acquired ADD.
The internet has destroyed photography as much as digital cameras have. Now that there's no technical challenge left to making a great photograph and now that the photos can be shared instantly with the millions that use the internet, there's no challenge in publishing a photo. This has reduced the inherent value of a photo from being something of artistic value to being little more than wallpaper.
Are these worn out shoes, art? Are they worth photographing? Is anybody going to want to look at them? Is anybody going to want to bug them? The answer to all those questions is NO. It serves to illustrate what mass production and mass consumption of photography has done. It has become as pointless as the photo above.
These days, since photographs are over shared, the goal is instead of producing photos for others to comment on, to produce photographs for yourself. The satisfaction is in knowing your photographs are better without feeling the need to confirm that by showing them to others. Have we really as a species become so weak that as are dependent upon the approval of others?
Sure. I can do pretty pictures and seek the approval of others. I can do that. I don't do that though. Truth be told, many people would click +1 or "like" on just about anything. Those affirmations mean nothing. I might just as well put the photo below up and call it "art".
Yes. It's a turd! That's pretty much what modern photography has become, thanks to digitization and the internet. Look on your favorite social media sites and you'll see worse images than a turd.
It just seems to me that this thing we call the internet is causing so many of the world's problems. It's definitely the drug of the new millennium. People spend from the time they get home from work hunched over their tablet or computer until they go to bed. They spend as much time as possible at work, playing with Facebook and the like on their phones. Look around any workplace and the telltale blue screens are visible. Indeed, such is the addiction and the withdrawal if the phone is not present that many have mini panic attacks when they're not permitted to play with their toys.
Look online and see in photographs every perversion known to man plus a few new ones. Advertisers use photographs for a good reason - a photograph conveys a feeling, a vision and turns that into desire. Look at women's clothing - women see the image and like what they see and go to buy the clothes whether they need them or not. They want to feel they're in the picture. Men's magazines do the same thing - display stuff that men might like and they buy it, particularly if the photograph makes it seem that rugged men would own it. Just as women want to feel desirable, men want to feel rugged.
Indeed, going further, its quite likely that the increasing availability of images and websites of various alternative lives is driving an explosion of alternative lives. The vast majority of people are not free thinking and can be persuaded to do whatever is desired without much difficulty hence the frequent comparisons to sheep and lemmings.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the number of genuine homosexuals (of either gender) and transsexuals (of any gender) would be a lot lower without images and the internet. While I accept that there is a genuine percentage of both, there's likely a lot of lemmings that have been swayed into it by what they have seen online.
Indeed, the whole concept of gender is nonsense. Physical gender exists but the rest is all made up. Where does it say that a man cannot wear lipstick, eye liner and a pink tutu? Indeed I remember some boys from my highschool that wore mascara and dyed their hair. Where does it say a woman cannot wear jeans and a pair of combat boots? Indeed, I know women that do.
I'm not saying that we're going to see the next US President in a frock but with continual exposure to images of alternative lifestyles, I'm sure the lemmings will swing that way. My prediction is that if western society doesn't fall in the same way the Roman Empire did, we will in 20 years or so, having been exposed to images on the internet see men and women wearing the same clothes.
It seems that since cameras have become so good that competition now is to produce the most unusual photograph. This leads to people making videos of themselves eating four course dinners complete with crockery, wine glasses etc while driving at 70mph down the road. That and people setting up cam in pristine areas then lighting campfires where no campfire should ever be just to get a photograph.
All this bad behaviour is driven by an urge to get "+1" or "like" or comments on their photos and videos when put online onto whatever website. There's an addiction out there and it's all about attention. It's as though the world has suddenly acquired ADD.
The internet has destroyed photography as much as digital cameras have. Now that there's no technical challenge left to making a great photograph and now that the photos can be shared instantly with the millions that use the internet, there's no challenge in publishing a photo. This has reduced the inherent value of a photo from being something of artistic value to being little more than wallpaper.
Are these worn out shoes, art? Are they worth photographing? Is anybody going to want to look at them? Is anybody going to want to bug them? The answer to all those questions is NO. It serves to illustrate what mass production and mass consumption of photography has done. It has become as pointless as the photo above.
These days, since photographs are over shared, the goal is instead of producing photos for others to comment on, to produce photographs for yourself. The satisfaction is in knowing your photographs are better without feeling the need to confirm that by showing them to others. Have we really as a species become so weak that as are dependent upon the approval of others?
Sure. I can do pretty pictures and seek the approval of others. I can do that. I don't do that though. Truth be told, many people would click +1 or "like" on just about anything. Those affirmations mean nothing. I might just as well put the photo below up and call it "art".
Yes. It's a turd! That's pretty much what modern photography has become, thanks to digitization and the internet. Look on your favorite social media sites and you'll see worse images than a turd.
It just seems to me that this thing we call the internet is causing so many of the world's problems. It's definitely the drug of the new millennium. People spend from the time they get home from work hunched over their tablet or computer until they go to bed. They spend as much time as possible at work, playing with Facebook and the like on their phones. Look around any workplace and the telltale blue screens are visible. Indeed, such is the addiction and the withdrawal if the phone is not present that many have mini panic attacks when they're not permitted to play with their toys.
Look online and see in photographs every perversion known to man plus a few new ones. Advertisers use photographs for a good reason - a photograph conveys a feeling, a vision and turns that into desire. Look at women's clothing - women see the image and like what they see and go to buy the clothes whether they need them or not. They want to feel they're in the picture. Men's magazines do the same thing - display stuff that men might like and they buy it, particularly if the photograph makes it seem that rugged men would own it. Just as women want to feel desirable, men want to feel rugged.
Indeed, going further, its quite likely that the increasing availability of images and websites of various alternative lives is driving an explosion of alternative lives. The vast majority of people are not free thinking and can be persuaded to do whatever is desired without much difficulty hence the frequent comparisons to sheep and lemmings.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the number of genuine homosexuals (of either gender) and transsexuals (of any gender) would be a lot lower without images and the internet. While I accept that there is a genuine percentage of both, there's likely a lot of lemmings that have been swayed into it by what they have seen online.
Indeed, the whole concept of gender is nonsense. Physical gender exists but the rest is all made up. Where does it say that a man cannot wear lipstick, eye liner and a pink tutu? Indeed I remember some boys from my highschool that wore mascara and dyed their hair. Where does it say a woman cannot wear jeans and a pair of combat boots? Indeed, I know women that do.
I'm not saying that we're going to see the next US President in a frock but with continual exposure to images of alternative lifestyles, I'm sure the lemmings will swing that way. My prediction is that if western society doesn't fall in the same way the Roman Empire did, we will in 20 years or so, having been exposed to images on the internet see men and women wearing the same clothes.
