Posted

Jan 27th 2007

Mood

Annoyed

I've been looking around at a lot of galleries lately and I'm a bit annoyed about what people consider 'art'. I mean, yeah I have photo manip and some of it probably wouldn't be considered art, but a lot of it is beyond even that. For instance: photographers who take random pictures of just anything. Okay, yeah, photography IS an art form, if done well. I guess the line between art and crap photography is a bit thin, but I suppose it mostly depends on quality of the picture and what the subject is. Taking a picture of your cat taking a dump in a litter box with a kodak disposable camera is NOT art.

An associated thing that irks me is stock. Don't get me wrong, I *LOVE* stock, and especially that of the providers that I've used. However, while going through endless fountains of stock (especially on dA) I've noticed on thing: people apparently don't know what stock quality is. Okay, yeah, here you are likely to find random pictures of, say, snake skin. Well that could be quite useful. Random pictures of random shit fit here just as well.. The internal mechanism of a clock? I can use that! Macros of random things? Heck yeah! However, it is here quality makes all the difference. Is somebody going to use your blurry as hell picture of somebody standing in the field? Probably! Is their art going to look as crap like as the original picture? Probably! I know SOME people are good enough with Photoshop that they could probably make that picture pretty clear if they wanted to spend an extra hour working on it, me? I'll find something else that'll work.

Suggestions to aspiring photographers, even stock:

1. Buy a REAL camera. Please. At leasthalf of you are teens, get a part time job, save up a good $300 and you can afford a halfway decent camera. Of course, you could spend a lot more for better, but what's the point? I think there is a point when it becomes overkill just to spend more.

2. Buy a tripod while you're at it. They're approx. $25 most places I've looked. Spend more, get a few more options, but really, its a tripod, its there to hold your camera steady, especially in the case of multiple or extended exposures.

3. Digital or not? Well Hmmmm.... It really depends. Quality actually doesn't change much, I suppose it all depends with what kind of lenses and filters you use. One thing that sucks for stock photography is when somebody scans in the picture and the quality degrades a bit and dust gets on the picture. Photoshop makes quick work of things like that, however, so it really depends on what the individual person prefers. However, even professional photo studios are working with digitals now (and have been for quite a while) so think about that for a bit.


Its not hard to point a camera at something and push the shutter button. My 4 year old can do it. However, it doesn't make you instantly an artist. If it did, I've gotta start a sheezy art page for him... Hmm... that'd be interesting, a sheezy art page for the random crap a 4 year old takes a picture of.... (this would be an example of a bad idea setting in)