The culture of photography

[droj]

I've long thought that this topic is rather lacking here. Is that really from lack of interest, or more that people tend to be inarticulate about it and don't have the language?

Related thread topics often don't get traction - the main thrust is obviously about buying & using gear. Are we culturally active, or just shoppers & technology users?

Stirring the pot. A shot in the dark.

What is the point of photography? Why the flimmock do we bother?

 

[Plain Nev]

Well, it's a broad ranging subject, I guess. Unless you pin it down people aren't sure which way to come at it. And, broadly speaking, most here seem to take an incremental approach and little steps to achieve their wider goal. Although, personally speaking, it's a personal thing, and I don't necessarily seek validation, or encouragement.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Related thread topics often don't get traction - the main thrust is obviously about buying & using gear.

TBH I see the forum as being much less gear-oriented than it was 10 years ago.

Is that really from lack of interest, or more that people tend to be inarticulate about it and don't have the language?

It may be that there's a lot of ordinary peple here, rather than those steeped in the story and mythology of photography, and so there is a small amount of discussion in that way. Many of us have read a few books, but we don't eat, sleep and breathe the culture in a way that's going to create that kind of conversation. I think most people want to make pictures that please them, rather than centering on all that stuff.

Why bother? Because we enjoy doing it (sometimes) and hopefully enjoy the results (more often).

 

[Plain Nev]

TBH I see the forum as being much less gear-oriented than it was 10 years ago.



It may be that there's a lot of ordinary peple here, rather than those steeped in the story and mythology of photography, and so there is a small amount of discussion in that way. Many of us have read a few books, but we don't eat, sleep and breathe the culture in a way that's going to create that kind of conversation. I think most people want to make pictures that please them, rather than centering on all that stuff.

Why bother? Because we enjoy doing it (sometimes) and hopefully enjoy the results (more often).

I think I must fall in that latter category. I'm definitely not living the dream. To be honest, I'm aware of some of the big names in the photography world. But it's not a thing I have ever studied.

 

[f/1.2]

I would say its down to the demographic of the user base here.

Just my own opinion from what I see on here. The majority of people that use this forum or any forum for that matter regularly, are older people and the vast majority are hobbyist photographers that use the forum when they have a question they want to ask. There are a lot more discussions about photography on social media were you tend to have more younger people.

Just as an example I am a member of a car enthusiast forum the forum itself is dead, with only occasionally questions when something goes wrong or people are needing advice on upgrades, years ago it used to be used a lot more. However the social media communities for the same car are very busy and it has more of a sense of community.

 

[Ed Sutton]

What is the point of photography? Why the flimmock do we bother?

I think for a lot of hobbyists the process is the point, with some 'wall worthy' prints as a result if they can be bothered. Others like to show their pics on here.Flickr/social media for feedback/likes/whatever.

Very few want anything more than a relaxing hobby. It's the same in fishing. Most anglers go fishing to chill out and catch a few fish. Others are obsessed with catching the biggest fish they can. Neither group can understand why the other group bothers!

 

[gcgraphs]

The point (purpose) of my photography is to document what is of interest to me.

 

[lindsay]

Does "photography" have a culture? I do think certain genres of photography have a distinct culture: film users, large format film users, collectors of photographic gear, landscapers, wildlife togs, etc. In the same way as society in general, it has cultures and sub-cultures which have an identity, but photographers in general don't really have a generic identity imho. Sure there are people who say "I'm a photographer" without meaning it;'s their job, but I don't think they say that to help define themselves, it's more as a shorthand for telling people what they are interested in.

 

[benc98]

more that people tend to be inarticulate about it and don't have the language?

Vocabulary comes from reading / understanding theory and learning about photography. There’s all sorts of theory, from reading about your camera in a manual / how to guide to critical theory. I think it just so happens most people here get their theory from camera manuals. I think people on here have great language when talking about the technical aspects of photography.
I mean, who’s going to to read Barthes or Sontag unless they have to? Some of the critical theory I’ve come across is pretty inaccessible..

 

[swanseamale47]

Why do we bother? Because photography has long been used to document social conditions and events. It's been used to record important moments of our lives like weddings, deaths and births. It's been used to allow us to express ourselves artistically.
Being able to caprure a very brief fraction of time has allowed us to see things we cant with the naked eye (very high speed photograpphy) and long exposures has made it possible to see movement of things.
Why bother.... because it's there... and it's easier than climbing Everest.... although it'd done that as well....

 

[droj]

Some good replies & food for thought ...

I think for a lot of hobbyists the process is the point

Yes, there can be a lot of fun in process anyway ...

Does "photography" have a culture?

Oh yes I'd decidedly say so - for instance in the way a photograph can be described as to nature and purpose, since it is different to any other visual medium (though it relates to some, eg painting & film).

I mean, who’s going to to read Barthes or Sontag unless they have to?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Neither group can understand why the other group bothers!

This is so true of the world in general.

One reason why I record images is that photographing people, objects and places can, in a small way, help me to understand them. Another reason is to show what I saw. Other people have their own, different reasons for using cameras. It's likely that I wouldn't understand exactly what they're getting from it and vice versa.

 

[Blue439]

We have for quite a while now mastered the three dimensions in which we exist. We can move up, down, left and right pretty much as we want. We are no more interdicted by oceans or mountains, and we can even fly if we so choose. The only dimension we have not mastered, over which we have absolutely no control whatsoever, and cannot hope to have any in any foreseeable future, is the fourth one: time. We evolve along the path of Time at the standard rate of 24 hours per diem and have no hope of ever being able to go back or forward in time, nor to make it go faster or slower.

Because of that absolute lack of control and power over the passing of time, the main purpose of photography, in my opinion, is to document and keep memories of what we were, what we saw, how people, animals and things were when we were there with them. Photographs have value because the moment they depict is already gone and will never, ever be back. Looking at photographs allows us to travel through space (although we could do that by technological means at our disposal), and more importantly through time. In a way, when we look at a photo, it’s almost as if we were, or had been, there.

 

[droj]

We have for quite a while now mastered the three dimensions in which we exist. We can move up, down, left and right pretty much as we want. We are no more interdicted by oceans or mountains, and we can even fly if we so choose. The only dimension we have not mastered, over which we have absolutely no control whatsoever, and cannot hope to have any in any foreseeable future, is the fourth one: time. We evolve along the path of Time at the standard rate of 24 hours per diem and have no hope of ever being able to go back or forward in time, nor to make it go faster or slower.

Because of that absolute lack of control and power over the passing of time, the main purpose of photography, in my opinion, is to document and keep memories of what we were, what we saw, how people, animals and things were when we were there with them. Photographs have value because the moment they depict is already gone and will never, ever be back. Looking at photographs allows us to travel through space (although we could do that by technological means at our disposal), and more importantly through time. In a way, when we look at a photo, it’s almost as if we were, or had been, there.

All that is true, and I smiled with recognition when I read it. But I think it omits to mention how a photograph can have certain qualities within itself just from the nature of its making - its visual character - even as from when it's made it is a fixed entity, more or less.

 

[lindsay]

I'm not sure any of the above relates to a Culture of photography - more it's purpose and role really.
I looked up a definition of culture:
"the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group
also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (such as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time" (google - Webster-miriam dictionary)

I think photography can illustrate a culture, but I can't see the generic activity of photography as having a cultural identity, as I said above, although maybe the examples I gave are sub-cultures and this collectively they are a culture of photography. If Photographers are a social group, what are their customary beliefs, social firms and material traits?
I suppose we believe in the power and wonder of light, we stand back and observe rather than engage in what we see, we value the image more than the effort to achieve it? Anyway that's the trajectory of my thinking on this.
Thanks @droj for making the thread and kicking off an interesting discussion.

 

[Plain Nev]

Agree. I'm not sure culture is quite the right word for it. I think culture defines itself by its artistic expression. And, as we know us snappers don't always pull together in a way that could be described as having a common purpose.

 

[droj]

Culture: umbrella term that includes a spread of bases, but which may include the ways that photography is practised, appreciated and interpreted ... as a cultural pursuit in its own right.

 

[woof woof]

What is the point of photography? Why the flimmock do we bother?

I got hooked as a 10 year old who was into drawing and wider art when I realised that the camera didn't always accurately record what I was seeing. Not accurately recording reality and being able to record something else is only a part of it, I also like recording reality, learning about and fiddling with the kit and recording people and places and moments that matter to me. Plus it's something I can do when out walking, on a day out or on holiday without it completely talking over as some other hobbies might.

 

[droj]

It may be that there's a lot of ordinary peple here, rather than those steeped in the story and mythology of photography, and so there is a small amount of discussion in that way. Many of us have read a few books, but we don't eat, sleep and breathe the culture in a way that's going to create that kind of conversation. I think most people want to make pictures that please them, rather than centering on all that stuff.

To me if I like something and its in a realm that I'm interested in - like photography - I get curious about how I like it, and may search for ways to analyse & describe that 'liking'. On a parallel theme, I'm not musical but I enjoy hearing (not all, but a lot of) music - and I strive to explain to myself how I enjoy it - not in a technical sense but emotionally at least.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Agree. I'm not sure culture is quite the right word for it.

Yes.

Perhaps we should stop trying to fit activities which involve photography into a labelled box and see it simply as a technique which supports other endeavours.

 

[droj]

Yes.

Perhaps we should stop trying to fit activities which involve photography into a labelled box and see it simply as a technique which supports other endeavours.

Not trying to box it, Andrew - if there's a description for part of it, it can exist both within that description and outside it. Also, it doesn't have to be a support for other endeavours, but can be an endeavour in its own right, done for its own sake, surely?

 

[Blue439]

I'm not sure any of the above relates to a Culture of photography - more it's purpose and role really.
I looked up a definition of culture:
"the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group
also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (such as diversions or a way of life) shared by people in a place or time" (google - Webster-miriam dictionary)

I think photography can illustrate a culture, but I can't see the generic activity of photography as having a cultural identity, as I said above, although maybe the examples I gave are sub-cultures and this collectively they are a culture of photography. If Photographers are a social group, what are their customary beliefs, social firms and material traits?
I suppose we believe in the power and wonder of light, we stand back and observe rather than engage in what we see, we value the image more than the effort to achieve it? Anyway that's the trajectory of my thinking on this.
Thanks @droj for making the thread and kicking off an interesting discussion.

Well, then the title of the topic and the question the OP actually asks are different, because that question was:

What is the point of photography? Why the flimmock do we bother?

... and that's exactly what my answer was about.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

... done for its own sake, surely?

Photography was pushed as an art form from early on but that has always been the activity of a tiny minority.

The vast majority of photographs have been made for a specific purpose, other than art. There have been billions of images recording such activities as science and engineering, Myriad images have been used for commercial purposes, from advertising to newspaper reports. Trillions of images have been made recording personal events and providing a record of those who aren't present.

Photography is rare in art and even when used, the recording of reality is the reason for photography's inclusion.

 

[droj]

Did someone mention art? I see culture as a wider term that may include craft, aesthetics and technicalities along with purpose ...

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Did someone mention art? I see culture as a wider term that may include craft, aesthetics and technicalities along with purpose ...

Originally, the word "art" meant a skill, as in: "the art of the swordsman".

It was them ruddy painters wot stole it!

 

[ancient_mariner]

To me if I like something and its in a realm that I'm interested in - like photography - I get curious about how I like it, and may search for ways to analyse & describe that 'liking'. On a parallel theme, I'm not musical but I enjoy hearing (not all, but a lot of) music - and I strive to explain to myself how I enjoy it - not in a technical sense but emotionally at least.

We all have our own approach especially. I'm a doer primarily, perhaps analysing why later but perhaps not. I've tried books about photography and toggers but there's little interest for me personally. I make music, but don't actually enjoy consuming a wide variety, often preferring what is familiar and having to take on a frame of mind when listening to new material. I'm not closed to ideas, far from it, but these are my natural inclinations just like I'm a starter rather than finisher/completer.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I'm not sure any of the above relates to a Culture of photography

I suspect you find a culture of photography in places like camera clubs where groups of like-minded individuals meet. TP is a very diverse place, though probably a reflection of a substantial part of the photographic world.

 

[Writewheel]

It's creative. It's art. Most people 'do' art to satisfy an inner urge. I write as well; well, probably better, and I have a need for it. I get the same satisfaction from both, a high from seeing what I've produced, and knowing others will examine it. Creative writing has a distinct culture, more than one, and it's a bit of a drag on it. I'm firmly of the belief that lyrics can be poetry, but the influencers and controllers tell us they aren't. There doesn't seem to be the same anchor in photography, apart from AI produced images (and quite rightly), leaving us with freedom that's heady. Mobile phones are accepted, digital is, and film went away a bit but now is back. Keep culture away from photography. It's destructive. It's repressive. It's control.

 

[droj]

Keep culture away from photography. It's destructive. It's repressive. It's control.

That's absolute b*****ks, Dek, & I suspect you know it. The term culture as I'm using it is just a bracket, a descriptor, not a force.

 

[droj]

I suspect you find a culture of photography in places like camera clubs

Yes you would but of a rather narrow sort, given the great gamut of possibilities available.

 

[droj]

Originally, the word "art" meant a skill, as in: "the art of the swordsman".

Yes, usages change over time as well as often being duplicitous to start with, so it always helps to define our terms. But it remains that no-one had mentioned 'art' till you did. Culture as I understand it is a broad church that relates to society & consciousness & is certainly not restricted to 'the arts'. We've had culture since the beginning of humanity - but didn't have photography back then, which is the detail that we're intended to be investigating here.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

We've had culture since the beginning of humanity ...

Indeed, but mostly in the same sense as a bacterial culture.

Then we developed a number of social cultures, which varied in each tribe or proto nation.

Then we developed pseud's culture which, unlike the two previous types, was restricted to the rich and those bright enough to sell them "invisible suits".

 

[droj]

Indeed, but mostly in the same sense as a bacterial culture.

Then we developed a number of social cultures, which varied in each tribe or proto nation.

Then we developed pseud's culture which, unlike the two previous types, was restricted to the rich and those bright enough to sell them "invisible suits".

Oh, do please show us your bacteria snaps ... we're on tenterhooks. Or failing that, a few pseuds ...?

 

[woof woof]

It's creative. It's art. Most people 'do' art to satisfy an inner urge. I write as well; well, probably better, and I have a need for it. I get the same satisfaction from both, a high from seeing what I've produced, and knowing others will examine it. Creative writing has a distinct culture, more than one, and it's a bit of a drag on it. I'm firmly of the belief that lyrics can be poetry, but the influencers and controllers tell us they aren't. There doesn't seem to be the same anchor in photography, apart from AI produced images (and quite rightly), leaving us with freedom that's heady. Mobile phones are accepted, digital is, and film went away a bit but now is back. Keep culture away from photography. It's destructive. It's repressive. It's control.

I can see your point but I do think that culture can be a positive even in the world of photography. I also think that once you've mastered pressing the buttons it's all just opinion anyway.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Yes you would but of a rather narrow sort, given the great gamut of possibilities available.

That's a part of the point really, people often need a set of core understandings to gather round in order to form community.

 

[Ed Sutton]

Did someone mention art? I see culture as a wider term that may include craft, aesthetics and technicalities along with purpose ...

Culture and art are two very loaded words. The 'mainstream media' tend to promote culture and art as the same thing. Look at the Culture (capital C) pages of, let's say the Guardian or BBC, websites and all you see is visual art, theatre, film etc. Not a sign of agricultural shows or sheepdog trials - two things that I would class as rural cultural events. Yet if they covered some ceremony from a Brazilian forest tribe they'd class that as culture.

I'd say there is a culture of photography/photographers, divided into a number of subcultures. But like all such things, very difficult to define.

Keep culture away from photography. It's destructive. It's repressive. It's control.

Culture is none of those things. Culture is how people live their lives.

 

[droj]

That's a part of the point really, people often need a set of core understandings to gather round in order to form community.

Granted, but if we're to talk of of culture at large I think that we need to discuss the whole spread of it as far as we can ... which doesn't preclude characterising each niche.

 

[droj]

Culture and art are two very loaded words. The 'mainstream media' tend to promote culture and art as the same thing.

We're not discussing mainstream media - that's largely a packaging exercise compiled by hacks (some of whom are more incisive than others).

Not a sign of agricultural shows or sheepdog trials - two things that I would class as rural cultural events. Yet if they covered some ceremony from a Brazilian forest tribe they'd class that as culture.

Yes, indeed. Bring on the sheep (that's not a p***-take, I'm entirely serious!).

I'd say there is a culture of photography/photographers, divided into a number of subcultures. But like all such things, very difficult to define.

Which hardly stops us from examining it - to know the nature of what we we do & why we do it. Not least because like that we communicate, instead of huddling into corners as cliques.

Overall, the world has a single human population, and I'm unable to be prescriptive about how it should behave in all its departments. But descriptiveness surely is to do with self-consciousness. Doesn't that sound healthy?

 

[Ed Sutton]

We're not discussing mainstream media - that's largely a packaging exercise compiled by hacks (some of whom are more incisive than others).

Regardless, it's where a lot of people (including those in alternative media) get their definitions from rather than the groves of academe.

 

[droj]

Regardless, it's where a lot of people (including those in alternative media) get their definitions from rather than the groves of academe.

I don't know that any of us here exist in the groves of academe, photographically speaking. If we did, would we bother descending to a place like this? I rather think that we'd stay ensconced in our ivory towers, clinging to our salaries & prescribed senses of self-worth.

Gawd, you're erratically contentious! It's all about truth-telling & the biggest picture - that last not literally, obviously.