I also agree but for the life of me I've never heard/seen anyone on any of the socials say that the picture is good BECAUSE it is shot on film. All I've seen/heard is enthusiasm for what film has to offer in it being an aesthetic choice or because of process reasons. If these young photographer's pictures suck that's probably due to inexperience. Labeling them "hipsters" and accusing them of saying their pictures are good.....etc etc is both unfair and unwise. Kodak and Ilford need to sell film. The more people that buy film the better. Discouraging young people like this will mean none of us get to shoot on film.
@@jameskelly4196 Maybe you just haven't met/heard any people saying that. I have not either, but I can guess it's similar to other myth, if your photograph sucks, transfer it to black and white and it will be art. However, you might be right saying it's because of inexpirience.
@@jameskelly4196 Agree, Good can be good on Film or on digital, As well as Bad. It's not bad nor good because of it. Sometimes people sanctify the medium, Both film shooters and digital shooters. That's what I dislike in these film forums and channels: You see bad photographs. On film. This just makes it "bad photographs made on film". It's just going to be making bad work more expensive.
I absolutely loved this. Thank you both! This is exactly the type of videos needed today to complement all those “photography” channels which just review gear in 90% of their videos. Thank you for taking the time to do this.
If those are the only channels you're seeing, then stop searching for them. The algorithm only gives you what you're looking for. Try channels like Make.Art.Now, The Art of Photography, PhotoRecTV, Nick Exposed, Mango Street, Sean Tucker, Thomas Heaton, Ben Horne, Jamie Windsor, Kevin Mullins, Andrew Kearns, Brandon Li, JR Alli, Jessie Driftwood, Mark Denney, Nigel Danson, Simon Baxter, Lindsey Adler, Kris Antoinette, Jessica Kobeissi, Sorelle Amore, Julia Trotti, AOWS, Dan Mace, Michael Widell, Evan Ranft, Joe Allam, Brandon Van Son, Greg Snell, Tyler Stalman, Yellowscale, This Guy Edits, Negative Feedback, Camera Conspiracies, etc. These are mostly content-driven channels with a sprinkle of gear talk (to draw in that audience), but overall I find these the most relaxing, entertaining, informative, or charismatic channels.
Telling it as it is, busting the myths and drawing away the curtain of falsity to reveal the realities of photography today. IMO, Marc and Dan are the best value photography RUclipsrs out there.
One of the best commentaries I have listened to in decades, so many great points, especially on the intoxication of social media "likes"! Photographers really are gypsies of the art world. I don't think any other media has changed as much in the last twenty years...
I've seen so many cases where "photographers" will carefully craft a FaceBook audience comprised of individuals who know just enough about photography to respond to safe and/or "pretty" pictures. The photographer then provides a daily barrage of 35-40 pictures that, accordingly, pull in numbers of likes, emoji, and monosyllabic pandering. None of which speaks to the real essence of the image. As the photographers continue to photograph for what he knows others want to see, he will never establish a personal statement as his vision is defined by those he entertains for predictable and ego fulfilling praise. It manifests itself into a strange symbiosis.This is a valuable channel as it gets to the meat of creative processes. Among other things, this channel sends out a strong message; If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. Kudos to Marc and Dan!
This is a fantastic channel! I really learn something new from each one of the videos I've watched so far - I have a lot of time and knowledge that I need to make up!
Really interesting conversation, Well done ... think dan is quite unique in the topics he talks to about , making projects /documentaries/ story telling , haven’t come across these conversations to often .. on the you tube
The photographic "craft" has become easier with modern equipment. Exposure, auto focus etc have given people the ability to shoot a technically "perfect" photo. This does not address the artistic or documentary content of a photograph. They are completely separate issues. It's only when the craft and the content come together that a photograph has merit beyond just being a snapshot.
What a great video Marc and Dan! Thank you for this. One question: Dan mentioned a photographer and his book but I couldn't find it or maybe didn't understand his name nor the title.. "Joel Perez and Talaxisomething..?' Thanks again!
Really good conversation! Helps to avoid misconceptions and puts photography in a perspective that helps you navigate your artistic journey as a photographer: )
@@marcsilber for people with k knowledge and experience its is so crucial to not destroy the "young" people through false or harmful advice :) ! keep up the good work Sir :)
A lot of film photographers on youtube are more people who play and have fun with vintage tools than artists. Their videos can be fun when they manage to transmit the pleasure they have shooting film. But I have to agree, only a fraction of them are great photographers, no matter how successful they are on social media. I often see them showing a lot of pictures that they would not keep on their hard drives if they were made on digital.
I fell into the trap of making pictures that 'satisfy' 'social' media years ago...glad I got out of it and doing what I like again instead of doing what other people like. Thanks god that I do not have to do photography for a living.
You can use Instagram and not fall for the lure of the likes. Instagram, like many things in life, can be useful and inspiring. It all depends on your approach to it. If it weren't for Instagram I'd never get to see Peter Turnley's work in NYC covering the covid crisis. There's wonderful stuff on IG you just have to be selective and know your own mind.
Ha. There are folks doing it and enjoying it but they are fewer and farther between, sadly. It's a grind out there and the virus has changed the playing field once again.
I love these "mind shifting" videos with Dan. The philosophy behind real photographs, As opposed to snapshots. A-100 Megapixels of junk, Is just a-100 Megapixels of junk...
At the beginning, I was listening and trying to be open-minded about what Dan was saying on what defines "great" and I had hoped it was more to do with the actual skill & expressive quality of the photographer and less to do with how that photographer compared to previous photographers in history. But I let him speak, waiting for him to explain where this definition comes from and then 6:05 Oh hell no, this is so elitist! The museums, and those who are part of the upper echelons of the social heirarchy, are the ones who can tell US (the socially uncouth) what great art supposedly is? Why? Bc regular humans can't emotionally connect to a photo? Bc those who are misperceived as uninformed & unrefined, need historical context to know "great" photography, when the best photography is that which compels the viewer to feel something. How are social media 'likes' different from in-person feedback? Why are online sales of digitally uploaded photography, inferior to museum auctions or photo show sales? This guy almost sounds threatened by changing trends and comes off like he's desperately clinging to the past, under the guise of historical preservation. Sigh, I'm gonna continue to watch and hopefully I see the conversation develop into something of substance, in which case I'll edit this comment. Edit: Ok the conversation improved, and thankfully Marc would chime in and give his tidbits, which felt less cynical & discouraging.
I feel like we're misunderstanding the evolution of photography and how newer generations are choosing to immerse themselves, as compared to previous generations who had to rely on publications or gallery art to even be exposed to it. Photography has become less exclusive. And while some may not know who Annie Leibowitz is by name, they certainly know her photography. The name isn't important, I'm sure that one photographer in Hawaii has had exposure to famous work. And there are plenty of RUclips and Instagram photographers who speak highly of Ansel Adams or Sir Donald McCullin, so they're not completely without historical context. People have become less trusting of what elitists think is "great", many prefer to change that definition to suit the tastes of the ADHD culture we now live in. Mainly, the reality is that newer generations want to consume art (or information) on their own terms. It reminds me of how media has evolved to a point where the public has a general distrust of journalists, and now rely on independent online journalism for unbiased coverage. This is important bc we're no longer dependent on elitists to define reality for us. It's fantastic that social media has made photography accessible to everyone, this is a good thing. The perceived negatives are that some photography online is full of HDR, color saturated, overexposed & highlighted photos, or reiterations of a current trendy style. And there's nothing wrong with this, if this is intentional & recreated, much like the photography of Gilles Peress. Photographers are breaking the mold with unique styles, such as Andy Gray's ICM photography, the Luminescent style of Brandon Woelfel, or the intentionally hyper-processed photos of Sergio Ramelli. While these styles are not to my taste, I respect their uninhibited rule-breaking. Also no, photography itself isn't hard, bc all Art whether painting or singing, is your personal form of expression. What they mean to say is Photography BUSINESS is hard, much like converting painting or music into a business, you have to convince other people to accept and buy your artistic interpretations. You have to convince people that recording a drill or chainsaw into your composition is now considered music or that a red dot on a white background is fine art. Societal consensus always changes, so forget this idea of "great", people redefine what's great everyday. It's up to US as creatives to make others see our own artistic perspective, otherwise we have no variety.
Thanks for you in depth observations. Shows that your really engaged. When it all boils down there are no rules to art especially when opinions enter in. We have a vision and a message as artists and try to bring meaning.
I was writing a long message, to pretty much say the same thing you are. These guys are making up myths I never heard of just so they can express there view. The just cause it's on Film it's nonsense. People are enjoying film and they are posting there progress I bet at the end of 100 rolls they will see where they started to now. And be happy with the growth they have made etc. And see there progress. People aren't just posting up film photos to say its art. They are posting the best photo they took they day. That's all, nothing more nothing less and in time they will get better and one day it can be art to your standard. I support all the Hipsters going to film and Kodak giving them a platform. It brings more people into the art, and it will introduce them to great film photographers from back in the day. But I wouldn't take people like these advice, cause art is art regardless of the Medium..
I watch some of these very popular youtube hipsters and I cringe almost every time because of just how bad their photos are. Almost without fail, they are disciples of the Steven Shore, Joel Sternfeld, Alex Soth, William Eggleston branch of photography, but also almost without fail they fail to copy that style successfully, let alone develop their own style. Part of the reason is that they have to produce content. Hence, instead of showing one good photo out of a roll of film (or three rolls of medium format film), they show way too much of their work, which almost inevitably is bad on average for lack of selectiveness. In addition, Winogrand said that you have to bounce your work off of intelligent work and work. While I do have the sense that the film hipsters look at intelligent work (making episodes about photo books), my sense is they do not do enough work. Case in point, one of these hipsters said in a recent video that he tries to go out and shoot at least once a week (probably shooting three to five rools of medium format, i.e., at most 60 shots). At that rate, you get better very, very slowly. In a 1980 or so interview, Winogrand said that he goes out to shoot just about every day, and that was after shooting on the street for 12 years and a successful commercial career of 15 years before that. If you want to do it right as a photographer (not as a youtuber), you have to do it with the obsession of Daniel Arnold or Peter Turnley or people like that. There is no substitute for putting the work in. My concern, however, is that the hipsters' bad work might get sanctioned by the art world eventually, solely because it is popular due to having a large audience. In the end, even artists and the gatekeepers of the art world are subject to having to put food in the fridge.
Those are all amazing photographers but to your point, they already made their mark. But all of this is somewhat nonsensical when you throw RUclips in the mix. You can build a huge following of people who simply don't know about any of the names you listed. That's how this system works.
@@DANIELMILNOR505 No doubt. I once commented on the post of an instagram curator/moderator for an account/hashtag with more than 100k followers that one of his own photos reminded me of a Munkacsy or a Kertesz (I think it was Kertesz's balcony shot from Mauritius, a late work). He responded that he had never heard of the guy and would check him out. After checking him out he replied that he found the guy amazing and would keep an eye out for him. This was, mind you, one of the guys "curating" the work to be presented for that collective account/hashtag.
I don’t know if I’d say their photos are bad, but most of them are definitely boring. It’s a trend/ phase for most of them I think; expensive medium format cameras (Mamiyas) or Leicas and Kodak Portra film. All their photos look the same. It’s all entertainment, nothing to learn from them.
the hardest step to realize, when you be aware the first time that someone isnt seeing anything at all in a picture you made and you see so many delicate things in it, colors shades gradients lines axis form all in a certain relation to each other, the emotion behind the content. and they dont see anything at all. and then comes the second one. then the third asf. you realize noone gives a fuck.
4 года назад+1
Beside a exceptional photographer, Daniel Milnor thoughtfulness is impressive👍
Oiiiiii, no dissing The film Hipster kids :). They are just hyped and super loving their art and work they make using this old medium and the cameras and are very enthusiastic about it all,.including the history, the old books and printing, ..... film isn’t what it used to be , its something different now !!!!! ... just like playing records or driving a 70’s car or bike or wearing old clothes .. these kids need old blokes like dan , Bob and you too to help them with their art, they need help, guidance , encouragement and as well as reference material and knowledge ... most will be interested in how it was like to shoot film and the techniques and methods that evolved with it to get the most out of it back in the day .. Steve 0’nions is the only old bloke that helps and distributes this sort of knowledge , the film photography world needs more people like this ... these young people would love to learn and have the knowledge from the 60’70’80s and how to get the best from film when Dan was shooting :D...
Daniel Milnor yer I know what your are alluring too . But come on dan , painting and drawing utilise many different materials and instruments, surely it’s ok for photographers too .... variety is good no ? Whether it be, phone, digi, 35mm, medium. Large , pinhole , polaroid/ toy or wet plate and tintypes ... maybe we need to encourage people to tell stories will slightly different tools to inject a different interest and aesthetics as part of those stories . .. sometimes what tool you use is an important part of the story ... ps there is a lot of guff about digi or digi shooters talk a lot of guff too :) .people will be people... in world were uniformity ,control , predictably are becoming the norm .. surely we need the artists and photographers to keep trying different things both old and new ... I say bring all the old knowledge styles and methods back , embrace them, use them and develop ,enhance them and learn them all, .. mix and match , different styles can compliment one another .. I think it would be cool for those commissioning work and projects to specify it be done on tin types, pin hole or large formats- or Polaroid to inject some randomness and variety in the images we are bombarded with , wouldn’t these be impactful in a different way , maybe having much more randomness in visual aesthetics ( not just the high saturation over Sharpe images we get as the norm) encourage us all to think in slightly more unique ways...maybe we in general should stop thinking of the old methods as old /antiquated methods and just as different or alternative methods and as viable options for something fresh , clothing /homeware fashion often revisits past decades and we don’t all eat fast /convenance food all the time , sometimes you really enjoy having an old fashioned cooked roast /chilli/curry meal ... finally politics is having a kicked in the butt being disrupted by the alternatives like , trump and bern . Maybe photography needs shaking up too ... be more Kline ..:)
@@gui4j I think something got lost in translation. Personally, I don't care what people use. I just made a 16x20 print from four acrylic paintings. MIxed media is great. But it's not the message. The print I made isn't about the technique I used to make it. Nor are my books about what camera I used. As long as people are happy and making what they want, I say go for it.
@@DANIELMILNOR505 thanks exactly the type of work we need to be talking more about , especially on social media .. alternative processing ./ alternative creativity/ alternative projects
I love Dan's insights but i think he is wrong about the film youtubers, at least about the ones I found. Most of them (Villem, McDougall, MattDay, NegativeFeedback and so on) watches classic work, has an idol, and don't think they are putting out excellent images every week. But the youtube videos are mostly about inspiring people to go out and shoot. Or daydreaming about going out and shooting. The videos are "tv series"-like entertainment, and with the analog tech they found this chillout vibe, niche if you will. And most of them prints, puts out zines, does everything Dan says we should do, and some of them are getting better photos also, i mean Villem is like 21 or something, he is at the start of the journey and i think he has some really good photos sometimes. Of course there are channels that are like "shot on film, i'm cool", but there are shit digital photography channels also with horrible advice.
Rules are made to be broken by people who truly have something of value to say. For the rest of the crowd have you ever noticed how those with the least to say that is truly of value spend the most time saying it?
I really hope Dan’s wife misses this video. My wife would bury me in the backyard with her brownies. Another rule of photography, don’t critique your wife’s cooking if you want to live to make digital images another day.
Led around like sheep. The most talked-about American old schools photographers became popular back in the days without social media when photography was not yet such a hugely popular hobby as it is now. Those people had their own styles, beliefs and much simpler ways to make their work stand out. They just needed to be different and to have a gift of the gab. In 2020, if a “photographer” tries to emulate the styles of those people, especially in B&W photography, its stupidity. Most enthusiasts are led around like sheep by social media and Google to idolize and emulate such old school professionals from a bygone era. Consequently, there is hardly any originality. Look at the cleverly created Instagram culture that brainwashed the herds of sheep worldwide to produce Instagram style pics...where every hardcore IG’er is pursuing the same style of editing. Its a Dumbing Down, easy peasy process to make amateurs feel like “professionals”. Thank goodness for social media, most jobless young ones can call themselves “videographers” and “photographers” and the country is filled with them. Its a convenient outlet for jobless people.
No1 issue with photographers in the USA and causing so much unnecessary topics and noise on social media. JOBLESSNESS. Many Americans have no choice but to become “photographers”, and then trying to be “exceptional” by being smartasses on social media😂😂
I love this quote "The camera is a sketch book, an instrument of intuition and spontaneity"
Our friend Henri CB
"Don't shoot what it looks like, shoot what it feels like" ❤️
👍
"just because an image is made on film, doesn't mean it's good."
I couldn't agree more.
I also agree but for the life of me I've never heard/seen anyone on any of the socials say that the picture is good BECAUSE it is shot on film. All I've seen/heard is enthusiasm for what film has to offer in it being an aesthetic choice or because of process reasons. If these young photographer's pictures suck that's probably due to inexperience. Labeling them "hipsters" and accusing them of saying their pictures are good.....etc etc is both unfair and unwise. Kodak and Ilford need to sell film. The more people that buy film the better. Discouraging young people like this will mean none of us get to shoot on film.
@@jameskelly4196 Maybe you just haven't met/heard any people saying that. I have not either, but I can guess it's similar to other myth, if your photograph sucks, transfer it to black and white and it will be art. However, you might be right saying it's because of inexpirience.
@@jameskelly4196 Agree, Good can be good on Film or on digital, As well as Bad. It's not bad nor good because of it. Sometimes people sanctify the medium, Both film shooters and digital shooters. That's what I dislike in these film forums and channels: You see bad photographs. On film. This just makes it "bad photographs made on film". It's just going to be making bad work more expensive.
I do think we are bombarded with so many images now they've lost their impact
I absolutely loved this. Thank you both! This is exactly the type of videos needed today to complement all those “photography” channels which just review gear in 90% of their videos. Thank you for taking the time to do this.
If I never talk about gear for the rest of my life it will be too soon.
Absolutely
So glad!
If those are the only channels you're seeing, then stop searching for them. The algorithm only gives you what you're looking for. Try channels like Make.Art.Now, The Art of Photography, PhotoRecTV, Nick Exposed, Mango Street, Sean Tucker, Thomas Heaton, Ben Horne, Jamie Windsor, Kevin Mullins, Andrew Kearns, Brandon Li, JR Alli, Jessie Driftwood, Mark Denney, Nigel Danson, Simon Baxter, Lindsey Adler, Kris Antoinette, Jessica Kobeissi, Sorelle Amore, Julia Trotti, AOWS, Dan Mace, Michael Widell, Evan Ranft, Joe Allam, Brandon Van Son, Greg Snell, Tyler Stalman, Yellowscale, This Guy Edits, Negative Feedback, Camera Conspiracies, etc. These are mostly content-driven channels with a sprinkle of gear talk (to draw in that audience), but overall I find these the most relaxing, entertaining, informative, or charismatic channels.
Telling it as it is, busting the myths and drawing away the curtain of falsity to reveal the realities of photography today. IMO, Marc and Dan are the best value photography RUclipsrs out there.
wow ted, blush! 🌟 we need you in facebook.com/groups/AYPCLUB
One of the best commentaries I have listened to in decades, so many great points, especially on the intoxication of social media "likes"! Photographers really are gypsies of the art world. I don't think any other media has changed as much in the last twenty years...
I've seen so many cases where "photographers" will carefully craft a FaceBook audience comprised of individuals who know just enough about photography to respond to safe and/or "pretty" pictures. The photographer then provides a daily barrage of 35-40 pictures that, accordingly, pull in numbers of likes, emoji, and monosyllabic pandering. None of which speaks to the real essence of the image. As the photographers continue to photograph for what he knows others want to see, he will never establish a personal statement as his vision is defined by those he entertains for predictable and ego fulfilling praise. It manifests itself into a strange symbiosis.This is a valuable channel as it gets to the meat of creative processes. Among other things, this channel sends out a strong message; If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
Kudos to Marc and Dan!
hahah thanks Phillip, now where's that shovel?
This is a fantastic channel! I really learn something new from each one of the videos I've watched so far - I have a lot of time and knowledge that I need to make up!
Glad you found us!
I agree with so much of this. Everything may have bee photographed, but your vision is your vision and it can be great!
yes that's so true, your viewpoint and how you capture is uniquely yours!
Great interview. Thank you.
Great stuff Marc! Love your talks with Dan because of his straight talking, tell it like it is style. Keep up the great work.
🙌
Another great video! Thanks Marc, thanks Dan.
My pleasure!
Love the AG23 reflection in the glasses. That’s not by accident, I’d guess...
Robin Breyl You know me, always on a PR operation.....about to start a film series about the Zine and the contributors.
Looking forward to those !
noticed this as well... haha.
Really interesting conversation, Well done ... think dan is quite unique in the topics he talks to about , making projects /documentaries/ story telling , haven’t come across these conversations to often .. on the you tube
Thanks! 🌟 we need you in facebook.com/groups/AYPCLUB
Unfortunately not a face booker, not down with Facebook at all .. this is and the gram is about as much social media as I want :P.
Fascinating conversation, thanks for sharing!
Our pleasure!
Thanks again both.
You bet! 🌟 Sue, we need you in facebook.com/groups/AYPCLUB
"You can do whatever you want as long as you justify it." Another way of saying what I was taught in art school: Be intentional.
RUclips should create a new MEGA Thumbs-Up for these priceless videos with Dan...
The photographic "craft" has become easier with modern equipment. Exposure, auto focus etc have given people the ability to shoot a technically "perfect" photo. This does not address the artistic or documentary content of a photograph. They are completely separate issues. It's only when the craft and the content come together that a photograph has merit beyond just being a snapshot.
What a great video Marc and Dan! Thank you for this. One question: Dan mentioned a photographer and his book but I couldn't find it or maybe didn't understand his name nor the title.. "Joel Perez and Talaxisomething..?' Thanks again!
Thanks for joining us! Dan..
Gilles Peress is the photographer he was talking about in case you are still wondering :D
🙏
Really good conversation! Helps to avoid misconceptions and puts photography in a perspective that helps you navigate your artistic journey as a photographer: )
🙏
@@marcsilber for people with k knowledge and experience its is so crucial to not destroy the "young" people through false or harmful advice :) ! keep up the good work Sir :)
We will! Thanks for your support!
Dan rocks,) Just because it’s made from scratch doesn’t mean it’s good. Lol
23:30 There absolutely are laws and rules in terms of what is beautiful in art and composition.
and what are they?
Love these videos
🙏
A lot of film photographers on youtube are more people who play and have fun with vintage tools than artists. Their videos can be fun when they manage to transmit the pleasure they have shooting film.
But I have to agree, only a fraction of them are great photographers, no matter how successful they are on social media.
I often see them showing a lot of pictures that they would not keep on their hard drives if they were made on digital.
I was looking for such talks about photography long time ago, I hope I can find more, I just get tired of gear reviews.
you've come to the right place!
This man has the most stylish collection of eyeglasses I have ever seen
😎 cool dude🤓
I fell into the trap of making pictures that 'satisfy' 'social' media years ago...glad I got out of it and doing what I like again instead of doing what other people like.
Thanks god that I do not have to do photography for a living.
You can use Instagram and not fall for the lure of the likes. Instagram, like many things in life, can be useful and inspiring. It all depends on your approach to it. If it weren't for Instagram I'd never get to see Peter Turnley's work in NYC covering the covid crisis. There's wonderful stuff on IG you just have to be selective and know your own mind.
Ha. There are folks doing it and enjoying it but they are fewer and farther between, sadly. It's a grind out there and the virus has changed the playing field once again.
You’re right. Like any tool it’s how you use it.
Thank you both for your inspiring talks.
Our pleasure! 🌟 we need you in facebook.com/groups/AYPCLUB
Gotta go make a Blurb book!
Yes, you are now under my spell...
@@DANIELMILNOR505 Actually this will be my third during quarantine.
I would have like a slide deck to see the list
I did find the show notes and the link for Dan’s Instagram page does not work
I don't have an IG account. What list? You mean the list of myths?
Daniel Milnor Yes, Marc put together the show notes that list the myths and truths. Thanks!
I love these "mind shifting" videos with Dan. The philosophy behind real photographs, As opposed to snapshots. A-100 Megapixels of junk, Is just a-100 Megapixels of junk...
🙏
I believe I met you Marc. Do you have a photo gallery in Carmel?
Not a gallery but my studio. Where did we meet?
At the Camera store in Carmel. But that was about 11 years ago. We were living in Monterey. I now live in Albuquerque NM
At the beginning, I was listening and trying to be open-minded about what Dan was saying on what defines "great" and I had hoped it was more to do with the actual skill & expressive quality of the photographer and less to do with how that photographer compared to previous photographers in history. But I let him speak, waiting for him to explain where this definition comes from and then 6:05 Oh hell no, this is so elitist! The museums, and those who are part of the upper echelons of the social heirarchy, are the ones who can tell US (the socially uncouth) what great art supposedly is? Why? Bc regular humans can't emotionally connect to a photo? Bc those who are misperceived as uninformed & unrefined, need historical context to know "great" photography, when the best photography is that which compels the viewer to feel something. How are social media 'likes' different from in-person feedback? Why are online sales of digitally uploaded photography, inferior to museum auctions or photo show sales? This guy almost sounds threatened by changing trends and comes off like he's desperately clinging to the past, under the guise of historical preservation. Sigh, I'm gonna continue to watch and hopefully I see the conversation develop into something of substance, in which case I'll edit this comment.
Edit: Ok the conversation improved, and thankfully Marc would chime in and give his tidbits, which felt less cynical & discouraging.
I feel like we're misunderstanding the evolution of photography and how newer generations are choosing to immerse themselves, as compared to previous generations who had to rely on publications or gallery art to even be exposed to it. Photography has become less exclusive. And while some may not know who Annie Leibowitz is by name, they certainly know her photography. The name isn't important, I'm sure that one photographer in Hawaii has had exposure to famous work. And there are plenty of RUclips and Instagram photographers who speak highly of Ansel Adams or Sir Donald McCullin, so they're not completely without historical context.
People have become less trusting of what elitists think is "great", many prefer to change that definition to suit the tastes of the ADHD culture we now live in. Mainly, the reality is that newer generations want to consume art (or information) on their own terms. It reminds me of how media has evolved to a point where the public has a general distrust of journalists, and now rely on independent online journalism for unbiased coverage. This is important bc we're no longer dependent on elitists to define reality for us. It's fantastic that social media has made photography accessible to everyone, this is a good thing. The perceived negatives are that some photography online is full of HDR, color saturated, overexposed & highlighted photos, or reiterations of a current trendy style. And there's nothing wrong with this, if this is intentional & recreated, much like the photography of Gilles Peress.
Photographers are breaking the mold with unique styles, such as Andy Gray's ICM photography, the Luminescent style of Brandon Woelfel, or the intentionally hyper-processed photos of Sergio Ramelli. While these styles are not to my taste, I respect their uninhibited rule-breaking. Also no, photography itself isn't hard, bc all Art whether painting or singing, is your personal form of expression. What they mean to say is Photography BUSINESS is hard, much like converting painting or music into a business, you have to convince other people to accept and buy your artistic interpretations. You have to convince people that recording a drill or chainsaw into your composition is now considered music or that a red dot on a white background is fine art. Societal consensus always changes, so forget this idea of "great", people redefine what's great everyday. It's up to US as creatives to make others see our own artistic perspective, otherwise we have no variety.
Thanks for you in depth observations. Shows that your really engaged. When it all boils down there are no rules to art especially when opinions enter in. We have a vision and a message as artists and try to bring meaning.
I was writing a long message, to pretty much say the same thing you are. These guys are making up myths I never heard of just so they can express there view. The just cause it's on Film it's nonsense. People are enjoying film and they are posting there progress I bet at the end of 100 rolls they will see where they started to now. And be happy with the growth they have made etc. And see there progress. People aren't just posting up film photos to say its art. They are posting the best photo they took they day. That's all, nothing more nothing less and in time they will get better and one day it can be art to your standard. I support all the Hipsters going to film and Kodak giving them a platform. It brings more people into the art, and it will introduce them to great film photographers from back in the day. But I wouldn't take people like these advice, cause art is art regardless of the Medium..
I think people only think of coffee table books because they have seen them.
Why does it matter if a photograph is great or not, esthetics and pertinence recycle and are a function of cultural zeitgeist.
I watch some of these very popular youtube hipsters and I cringe almost every time because of just how bad their photos are. Almost without fail, they are disciples of the Steven Shore, Joel Sternfeld, Alex Soth, William Eggleston branch of photography, but also almost without fail they fail to copy that style successfully, let alone develop their own style.
Part of the reason is that they have to produce content. Hence, instead of showing one good photo out of a roll of film (or three rolls of medium format film), they show way too much of their work, which almost inevitably is bad on average for lack of selectiveness. In addition, Winogrand said that you have to bounce your work off of intelligent work and work. While I do have the sense that the film hipsters look at intelligent work (making episodes about photo books), my sense is they do not do enough work. Case in point, one of these hipsters said in a recent video that he tries to go out and shoot at least once a week (probably shooting three to five rools of medium format, i.e., at most 60 shots). At that rate, you get better very, very slowly. In a 1980 or so interview, Winogrand said that he goes out to shoot just about every day, and that was after shooting on the street for 12 years and a successful commercial career of 15 years before that.
If you want to do it right as a photographer (not as a youtuber), you have to do it with the obsession of Daniel Arnold or Peter Turnley or people like that. There is no substitute for putting the work in. My concern, however, is that the hipsters' bad work might get sanctioned by the art world eventually, solely because it is popular due to having a large audience. In the end, even artists and the gatekeepers of the art world are subject to having to put food in the fridge.
Those are all amazing photographers but to your point, they already made their mark. But all of this is somewhat nonsensical when you throw RUclips in the mix. You can build a huge following of people who simply don't know about any of the names you listed. That's how this system works.
@@DANIELMILNOR505 No doubt. I once commented on the post of an instagram curator/moderator for an account/hashtag with more than 100k followers that one of his own photos reminded me of a Munkacsy or a Kertesz (I think it was Kertesz's balcony shot from Mauritius, a late work). He responded that he had never heard of the guy and would check him out. After checking him out he replied that he found the guy amazing and would keep an eye out for him. This was, mind you, one of the guys "curating" the work to be presented for that collective account/hashtag.
I don’t know if I’d say their photos are bad, but most of them are definitely boring. It’s a trend/ phase for most of them I think; expensive medium format cameras (Mamiyas) or Leicas and Kodak Portra film. All their photos look the same. It’s all entertainment, nothing to learn from them.
the hardest step to realize, when you be aware the first time that someone isnt seeing anything at all in a picture you made and you see so many delicate things in it, colors shades gradients lines axis form all in a certain relation to each other, the emotion behind the content. and they dont see anything at all. and then comes the second one. then the third asf. you realize noone gives a fuck.
Beside a exceptional photographer, Daniel Milnor thoughtfulness is impressive👍
Good parents.
Oiiiiii, no dissing The film Hipster kids :). They are just hyped and super loving their art and work they make using this old medium and the cameras and are very enthusiastic about it all,.including the history, the old books and printing, ..... film isn’t what it used to be , its something different now !!!!! ... just like playing records or driving a 70’s car or bike or wearing old clothes .. these kids need old blokes like dan , Bob and you too to help them with their art, they need help, guidance , encouragement and as well as reference material and knowledge ... most will be interested in how it was like to shoot film and the techniques and methods that evolved with it to get the most out of it back in the day .. Steve 0’nions is the only old bloke that helps and distributes this sort of knowledge , the film photography world needs more people like this ... these young people would love to learn and have the knowledge from the 60’70’80s and how to get the best from film when Dan was shooting :D...
It's all good. Enthusiasm in regard to making pictures. It's the window dressing that cracks me up.
Daniel Milnor yer I know what your are alluring too . But come on dan , painting and drawing utilise many different materials and instruments, surely it’s ok for photographers too .... variety is good no ? Whether it be, phone, digi, 35mm, medium. Large , pinhole , polaroid/ toy or wet plate and tintypes ... maybe we need to encourage people to tell stories will slightly different tools to inject a different interest and aesthetics as part of those stories . .. sometimes what tool you use is an important part of the story ... ps there is a lot of guff about digi or digi shooters talk a lot of guff too :) .people will be people... in world were uniformity ,control , predictably are becoming the norm .. surely we need the artists and photographers to keep trying different things both old and new ... I say bring all the old knowledge styles and methods back , embrace them, use them and develop ,enhance them and learn them all, .. mix and match , different styles can compliment one another .. I think it would be cool for those commissioning work and projects to specify it be done on tin types, pin hole or large formats- or Polaroid to inject some randomness and variety in the images we are bombarded with , wouldn’t these be impactful in a different way , maybe having much more randomness in visual aesthetics ( not just the high saturation over Sharpe images we get as the norm) encourage us all to think in slightly more unique ways...maybe we in general should stop thinking of the old methods as old /antiquated methods and just as different or alternative methods and as viable options for something fresh , clothing /homeware fashion often revisits past decades and we don’t all eat fast /convenance food all the time , sometimes you really enjoy having an old fashioned cooked roast /chilli/curry meal ... finally politics is having a kicked in the butt being disrupted by the alternatives like , trump and bern . Maybe photography needs shaking up too ... be more Kline ..:)
@@gui4j I think something got lost in translation. Personally, I don't care what people use. I just made a 16x20 print from four acrylic paintings. MIxed media is great. But it's not the message. The print I made isn't about the technique I used to make it. Nor are my books about what camera I used. As long as people are happy and making what they want, I say go for it.
@@DANIELMILNOR505 thanks exactly the type of work we need to be talking more about , especially on social media .. alternative processing ./ alternative creativity/ alternative projects
👍
I love Dan's insights but i think he is wrong about the film youtubers, at least about the ones I found. Most of them (Villem, McDougall, MattDay, NegativeFeedback and so on) watches classic work, has an idol, and don't think they are putting out excellent images every week. But the youtube videos are mostly about inspiring people to go out and shoot. Or daydreaming about going out and shooting. The videos are "tv series"-like entertainment, and with the analog tech they found this chillout vibe, niche if you will. And most of them prints, puts out zines, does everything Dan says we should do, and some of them are getting better photos also, i mean Villem is like 21 or something, he is at the start of the journey and i think he has some really good photos sometimes. Of course there are channels that are like "shot on film, i'm cool", but there are shit digital photography channels also with horrible advice.
Rules are made to be broken by people who truly have something of value to say. For the rest of the crowd have you ever noticed how those with the least to say that is truly of value spend the most time saying it?
👍
Annie who?
I really hope Dan’s wife misses this video. My wife would bury me in the backyard with her brownies. Another rule of photography, don’t critique your wife’s cooking if you want to live to make digital images another day.
She loves it. wink, wink
Hahahaha
stop using photoshop lets see fotography after
if someone doesn't use photoshop/lightroom it means that he's lazy
Led around like sheep.
The most talked-about American old schools photographers became popular back in the days without social media when photography was not yet such a hugely popular hobby as it is now.
Those people had their own styles, beliefs and much simpler ways to make their work stand out. They just needed to be different and to have a gift of the gab.
In 2020, if a “photographer” tries to emulate the styles of those people, especially in B&W photography, its stupidity. Most enthusiasts are led around like sheep by social media and Google to idolize and emulate such old school professionals from a bygone era.
Consequently, there is hardly any originality. Look at the cleverly created Instagram culture that brainwashed the herds of sheep worldwide to produce Instagram style pics...where every hardcore IG’er is pursuing the same style of editing. Its a Dumbing Down, easy peasy process to make amateurs feel like “professionals”.
Thank goodness for social media, most jobless young ones can call themselves “videographers” and “photographers” and the country is filled with them. Its a convenient outlet for jobless people.
No1 issue with photographers in the USA and causing so much unnecessary topics and noise on social media.
JOBLESSNESS.
Many Americans have no choice but to become “photographers”, and then trying to be “exceptional” by being smartasses on social media😂😂
🥺
Stephen King is a pretty terrible writer, as successful as he is.
painful to watch
why?
@@marcsilber His face too close to camera, make me uncomfortable. Also your audio could use a little TLC. However; content was relevant.
cheers 🙂