Graywolf wrote: >It is interesting that everyone has a different idea of who photographers >are.
Excellent point. Hence my hesitation in responding more on the thread earlier, as I detected we were all talking about different sets of people. I will say that many people, even those w/o technical mindsets or a photography background readily share their digital images online, w/o getting prints, or prints are an after thought. I can say somewhat the same for myself. I have yet to print any images from my backbacking trip last year and I shared the photos with the other two guys by CD. I will get around to prints of a couple of them. http://www.photo.net/photodb/presentation.tcl?presentation_id=328456 One of the guys I went with gave me a stack of 4 x 6 prints back from his disposable, but since photography is largely about seeing and sharing, I think the ease with which one can share photos digitally, which in turn are disseminated to others, is going to make printing a low-volume proposition. I also tend think that most photographers, snapshooter, amateur, pro, with any computer savvy would use the web and digital presentation, online or CD, as their FIRST avenue of getting the picture out there. Back to judging, it's somewhat of a shame. No ill intent towards those of you judges participating in the thread, as we live in a world that often dictates to us. I would guess the 1 to 3 seconds spent on making snap decisions does not do justice to many fine photos, and it allows those with immediate impact to 'make the grade' even though they may be flawed. I see that same syndrome all over in the Pentax gallery being compiled. The digital rush. Tom C. >From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: Judging Photos >Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 12:08:33 -0400 > >It is interesting that everyone has a different idea of who >photographers are. To you, Dave, they are the mass of snapshooters. To >Mike they seem to be the average camera club Joes, and to Mark they are >the art elite. I would submit that the perceptual cultural level of each >of those groups has not changed much over the years, decades, or even >centuries. Media for the first has always been sensationalized, the >second has always been interested in technical perfection without much >imagination, and the last in the long term financial value. Only the >last has had the funds to preserve their collections and thus they have >become the defacto classics. > >Of course it has become a lot cheaper to preserve stuff these days, and >since the proportions seem to be about 90, 9, and 1% respectively, Elvis >and Starwars memorabilia will probably be the art standards of the future. > > > >David J Brooks wrote: > > That could be true Mark. > > > > Many of the people i know around here have P&S's and are always > > hitting the local Wally World or Shoppers Drug Mart and printing out > > all of their pictures as 4x6's except one would quess, the clunkers. > > > > Volume rates are $0.19 per, with no developing fees, so i suppose they > > see it as a cheap way of presenting prints to friends. > > > > Dave > > > > On 5/1/07, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Tom C wrote: > >>> I think that's part of Mike's point possibly. The web now seems to >be, > >>> pretty much, the defacto presentation medium for many photographers, > >> Nope. For most average joes, the print is *still* king, thought it > >> might seem surprising to us. And at the other end of the spectrum, > >> pros and fine art photographers, print is still *the* medium. We in > >> this forum don't perceive this because we're a self-selected group of > >> people who are more web-aware. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >> [email protected] > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > >> > > > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
