re: Where Does Photography Go From Here? Golden Age of Photography
Reader comments
Maynard M writes:
Lloyd, on today's blog you felt that camera companies have nothing exciting to offer in their upcoming products. From a technical standpoint that may or maynot be true, but the whole point of photography is making good photographs. We live in a great age in the types of cameras we have available to use. In the right hands we can capture amazing pictures that a few years ago were not feasible because of equipment limitations. I worked as an assistant to Richard Avedon. Many of his photographs that were shot decades ago with very simple cameras, are considered works of art today. He worked with a twin lens Rollei and an 8x10 Deardorf. At one time he was given a Hasselblad to try, technology light years more advanced than the Rollei, but he did not like it because he felt the technology interfered with the taking of the picture he was trying to capture.
I agree that many things could improve on the cameras that we are using today. Looking at photos on a computer screen is no way of showing me how good the camera that was used to take that photo is. You have to print that photo at least to a half decent size to see what the camera has captured. Personally I use Nikon Z8 cameras. It is a wonderful camera to use. I have used every type of camera from a Minox to 8x10. I print many of my photographs 60" and I am amazed at what today's top level pro cameras can do. It doesn't matter if it is a Sony, Canon, Fuji or Nikon.
I would like to see the MP race slow down & more improvement applied to the technology that already exists today. Simplify what is already there.
The old saying is that it's the photographer's eye, not the equipment that makes a good photo, but I can honestly say that with the quality of today's cameras, very good photos can be taken by very mediocre photographers.
Still it is very exciting when something new comes out or a segment of the type of cameras that we use makes its debut, whether it is in the 35mm or medium format. It doesn't have to be technologically earth shattering, but maybe it makes us start looking at new ways to photograph some of the subjects we have already visited. From what I have heard on the rumor mill, a new Fuji Medium format Rangefinder camera may be coming out in the springtime that is the size of a Leica Q3 & sports a 100MPX sensor and a fixed 28 mm lens. As a people/ travel photographer, that would be a very exciting piece of gear to work with. It is real because I have talked to a person who has held a working prototype. If this camera does appear, I know a lot of people who have wanted a medium format high MPX digital camera in a small size. I am familiar with Fuji's older, larger RF camera. It would open up a whole new way of seeing for many photographers. Just the portability would be exciting. It would have the same effect that a new jump in technology would have. Something new at the technology end would just give us a more advanced way to get from A to B, but a completely new form factor may cause us to start seeing the photos we capture in a completely new & visibly exciting way.
DIGLLOYD: the megapixel race is all but over due to the laws of optics. If we see a bump in pixel count that reduces digital artifacts such as moiré and color aliasing, then that’s a pure image win with no downside. In no way does that compete with “technology that already exists today”—that concern is a blind alley.
Agreed of course that the photographer’s eye is what matters most, and by far. But there is also great value in bringing satisfaction to someone who just wants to capture their own memories.
Agreed that if technology interferes, then we are going backwards in important ways. This in fact is the driving force between all the reviews I do—usability, haptics, etc. It’s about the camera getting out of the way, and making it easier when possible. There are still far too many failures in that sense.
Why would anyone want a rangefinder? It adds nothing and takes away everything—so many better ways to replace its functionality. No one needs a rangefinder even for the claimed purpose. I think this is conflating an old deeply flawed technology with “compact and fast and quick”—two opposites. Try a Sony A1 II.
For me photography has 3 main elements and the reason why I love it,
A) Photography is my favorite hobby, together with spending time in nature.
B) Being outside in nature, ideally off the beaten track, is spa for the brain.
C) With the photos made/taken, we get to enjoy “all” the tings we have experienced, again and again and again… Can’t get any better!
DIGLLOYD: yep!
I don't see any golden age of photography. Maybe a golden age for cameras and photo technology, but the oversaturation of images on social media and the advent of AI have killed my interest in landscapes.
The idea of "the shot of a lifetime" propelled me before but there's so much crazy shots made by AI I can't be bothered to ask if something is real. Even if I got something real, I feel like nobody would believe it.
DIGLLOYD: it’s not about technology but what it brings to people’s lives. More on that below.
If something kills an interest or passion, it is a destructive and enervating trap to engage with it. If caught in that trap, then a reframe is in order to extract yourself. The “nobody would believe it” is itself a mental trap. I strongly advise reframing because that’s not a good place to be.
As a friend of mine said once (paraphrasing): “Ansel’s picture of Half Dome may be better, but this one is my photo”. There is a lot of wisdom in that statement.
For me, the “shot of a lifetime” or “trip of a lifetime” or similar phrases are depressing pastloitering concepts. About “getting there” when in fact what ends up mattering over a lifetime is the process up to that point. Signposts along the road of life in the rearview mirror. All that exists is now and what will come to be. These are goalposts (one shot?!) in which failure is the most likely feature, and because... what then after? An analogy might be raising a child—college graduation is to be celebrated of course, but the lifelong journey started even before birth and is the only real value. Those roadside markers don’t mean shit over a lifetime.
The value of a photo is about the personal experiences that layer-up inside—which is the only reason that shot has meaning at all. Which is why shitty quality personal photos have more personal value than the best photographic masterwork. Sure, iconic shots can represent meaning to large numbers of people iff they dovetail with personal values somehow. But they hit near the mark at best, and not in the gold, and frequently not at all for most and many. They have a place, but are a secondhand way of living life when/if held up too much.
When I hike and photograph, it’s about the full experience, that complex layering of memories that are forming from all my senses. I often pause and feel it all at once as a sort of mental snapshot—try it with all your attention sometime. In fact, the images are only a byproduct, a secondary or tertiary goal. Recorded images crystallize the timeline experience in a one-dimensional way, yet these personally-taken images are the closest any of us can get to the original. If the images please others then so much the better, but no one photograph taken by someone else, no matter how good, comes packaged with personal memories. It can only prompt some imitation of something similar.
And so I reject what some would call the golden age of photography as a form of elitism: the idea that the flowering of talent of a few elites garnered defines a golden age. It’s like celebrating the wealth and prestige of a ruling royal class. A tiny minority. Their work no matter how good adds little to my personal life because I live my life firsthand not secondhand. I prize my own photos and especially family photos over the most vaunted "work of art". Because greatness is wholly subjective and subject to collective approval—it by definition rejects personal judgment and places collective values in supremacy over personal ones—not a productive way to live. abamdoning one’s mind to public opinion.
They are totally different things, related only as distant cousins.
The golden age of photography
Jason says, “golden age for cameras and photo technology”. But this is backwards: it’s about the human experience that the gear makes possible.
High image quality anytime anywhere for anyone is a damn fine golden age.
Keep it personal and enjoy those benefits.
A golden age is something that brings compelling benefits to a wide swath of the population. This is indeed what cameras do today in their own corner of life. Fuck the 'art', and give me my own images of the things that matter to me, be it my picture of a place I enjoy, a family photo, my cat, whatever. It has never before been better than today.
Bristlecone Sentinel at Sunset with View of White Mountain Peak
Sony RX1R @ f/ 5.6
On the off chance that someone nearby (SF bay area) understands inverter auditory (noise level) behavior for charging batteries from solar (off-grid style and not the usual micro inverters), I am posting this. Lame useless responses from three different companies make it a work in progress: Anker, Ecoflow, EG4.
My electric bill this month along is $420 @ $0.50 / kWh. This sucks, so I am seeking to solar panel away about 1/3 to 1/2 of my electric bill with a semi off-grid system using LiFeP04 battery 14 kWh and maybe 28 kWh. This requires an inverter that can charge 48V batteries and convert 48V into AC power, eg the EG4 12kPV.
No, not out in the backyard like this, that’s a test setup to gather data on performance, which is great in the sun and unusable on rainy days.
In civilized areas of the world (eg not California), electricity should cost $0.12 kWh or so and make this whole idea an idiotic waste of time. Accordingly, most of my neighbors have installed solar—virtue signaling, not economics. For me this is all about the RoI, so having an expert handle it kills the whole thing. My next-door neighbor has his Tesla PowerWall inoperable most of the summer haha, it took months to get it fixed. No thankee.
Specifically, I’d like to know how loud things are. This auditory information turns out to almost impossible to find. No luck so far. And yet even a little noise would degrade quality of life, so I am not going down this path unless I can have a high degree of certainty that the noise won’t intrude.
To be precise: noise levels under photovoltaic (PV) input charging including overpaneling and modest AC-output on the order of 300-600W average load. I don’t want a “simple” grid tie because our power is flaky here no matter the conditions-so many whomp/whomp outages so much of the yar.
I understand overpaneling and VoC considerations in cold, LiFeP04 batteries, etc. I have eight (8) of these 540W panels. I have the installation location figured, the wiring figured out, etc.
3 panel X 540 test setup
