Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

collectorsweekly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 184 posts

Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

#41

Post by WA »

meowzero wrote: post #40
WA wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's good about these pictures? If you released them on Instagram on an anonymous account, nobody would give a shit.

It's hard to say. But I've been a fan of Juregen Teller for a while. He wants to break all the "rules" of fashion photography and photography in general. You're right, if you post these anonymously to IG, no one would bat an eye. But it's published in a prominent fashion magazine, it's taken by the famous Juregen Teller, it features celebrities posing in an unflattering way, they're wearing the latest designer clothe…

Thanks for clarifying this. The link is quite interesting.

Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

#42

Post by cratermoon »

WA wrote: post #35
meowzero wrote: post #7

Another recent example of how "bad photography" inspired "good photos" is Juergen Teller's shoot with W magazine. https://www.wmagazine.com/culture/best-performances-portfoli... The photos are typical of Juergen's style. But his style has been evolving more into casual snapshot aesthetic, but in more ironic way.

What's good about these pictures? If you released them on Instagram on an anonymous account, nobody would give a shit.

There's nothing good about them. They have celebrities and are ostensibly about "fashion", but they don't otherwise have anything to recommend them.

Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

#43

Post by staticautomatic »

soneca wrote: post #13
twic wrote: post #11

Talking about what good and bad means in photography always reminds me of Miroslav Tichý, who said "if you want to be famous, you must do something more badly than anybody in the entire world", and took terrible but strangely brilliant photos with homemade cameras: https://flashbak.com/photographs-by-the-perverted-flaneur-mi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_Tich%C3%BD

Funny, without context (that I am unwilling to pursue atm, just skipped the whole article for the photos) they just look terrible pictures. Period.

I think many of them are great and it has little to do with the “quality” being bad.

Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

#44

Post by cratermoon »

cryptoz wrote: post #31

Related: Do iPhone or Android cameras have a smoothing filter that is default-on and that cannot be turned off? Been wondering about this.

All camera phones do heavy processing of the captured pixels. This is known as "computational photography". The camera software is the only thing that keeps the average camera phone picture in the realm of "that's a picture of the thing I meant to take a picture of".

Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

#47

Post by CabSauce »

soneca wrote: post #13
twic wrote: post #11

Talking about what good and bad means in photography always reminds me of Miroslav Tichý, who said "if you want to be famous, you must do something more badly than anybody in the entire world", and took terrible but strangely brilliant photos with homemade cameras: https://flashbak.com/photographs-by-the-perverted-flaneur-mi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_Tich%C3%BD

Funny, without context (that I am unwilling to pursue atm, just skipped the whole article for the photos) they just look terrible pictures. Period.

It looks to me like the pictures may have been for his... uhh... own self-gratification.

Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

#48

Post by nsxwolf »

twic wrote: post #11

Talking about what good and bad means in photography always reminds me of Miroslav Tichý, who said "if you want to be famous, you must do something more badly than anybody in the entire world", and took terrible but strangely brilliant photos with homemade cameras: https://flashbak.com/photographs-by-the-perverted-flaneur-mi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_Tich%C3%BD

Curious, is "more badly" here an intentional joke? Or did he mean "want it badly" in the sense of really wanting something?

Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

#49

Post by matwood »

meowzero wrote: post #40
WA wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's good about these pictures? If you released them on Instagram on an anonymous account, nobody would give a shit.

It's hard to say. But I've been a fan of Juregen Teller for a while. He wants to break all the "rules" of fashion photography and photography in general. You're right, if you post these anonymously to IG, no one would bat an eye. But it's published in a prominent fashion magazine, it's taken by the famous Juregen Teller, it features celebrities posing in an unflattering way, they're wearing the latest designer clothe…

I didn't find the photos necessarily bad or easy to replicate at all. Taking pictures of people is intimate and challenging thing to do, especially if you don't know them well.

I'm also not one to critique photos from a technical perspective, and tend to go by feel in my own and others photos.

Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture

#50

Post by meowzero »

Spivak wrote: post #34
swiley wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I must be out of touch, those aren’t fashionable and I don’t think most people in their 20s would think they are (sure they wear them all the time but that’s because of a rejection of fashion in favor of comfort.)

Rejection of fashion in very specific trendy ways is fashionable right now. It’s more a rejection of “runway inspired” trends than a rejection of fashion itself.

In this current internet age, there's a lot of trends of fashion. There was even a trend called normcore (https://www.highsnobiety.com/p/what-is-normcore/) that rejected typical fashion trends at that time.
Post reply on HN