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

91–100 of 184 posts

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

#91

Post by ngokevin »

yawaworht1978 wrote: post #30

Yes the craft of photography has gone mainstream with digital. Easier to use for the average person, with filters and effects, but doesn't make the average users professionals. Mobile phone images are the new throwaway polaroid. However, the professionals with digital equipment do some incredible things.

The business of photography is more marketing than craft these days. Even professional photography is a commodity.

There are some people that stretch the art of photography, but they are more digital artists than photographers. They take a lot of the creativity into the post-processing and Photoshop stage. Most professional photography these days is just right-place-right-time and tweaking in Lightroom.

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

#93

Post by cm2012 »

amelius wrote: post #92

Worse, advertising photography has influenced what people consider good looking people.

Movies and TV have a much bigger impact on this than ads. Ads in general are worse at changing opinions than most people think. They are better at getting people to act on what they already agree with.

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

#94

Post by hellbannedguy »

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 truly believe their are two kind of appreciators of art in the world.

1. People who like realism, photoshopped pictures, GGI in media, etc.

vs.

2. Modern art, film noir, Black & white classical movies, etc.

If you give the second a chance, you might be suprised what your imagination does. I used to be kinda a #1 guy with the exception of bad action filmed CGI movies, but completely changed as the years went by. I've even gotten to the point where I think color in film has ruined a lot of movies, along with digital.

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

#95

Post by dylan604 »

falcrist wrote: post #79
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.

The only really interesting thing here that cameraphones have sort of pushed photography to use shorter focal lengths more often. Some photographers feel the shorter focal lengths feel "more authentic" somehow. Other than that, this looks like someone with a smartphone trying a little too hard to "do photography" yet not bothering to travel to a nicer venue.

I love using wide angle lenses, but yes, some of them have distortion that will make people look weird. You also need to know that you have to get super close to your subject to fill the frame for a traditional portrait framing.

To check out a good example for a movie, watch The Frighteners of doing traditional close ups with wide angles. This allows for normal framing of your talent while giving lots of room in the frame for the background gags.

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

#96

Post by falcrist »

dylan604 wrote: post #95
falcrist wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only really interesting thing here that cameraphones have sort of pushed photography to use shorter focal lengths more often. Some photographers feel the shorter focal lengths feel "more authentic" somehow. Other than that, this looks like someone with a smartphone trying a little too hard to "do photography" yet not bothering to travel to a nicer venue.

I love using wide angle lenses, but yes, some of them have distortion that will make people look weird. You also need to know that you have to get super close to your subject to fill the frame for a traditional portrait framing. To check out a good example for a movie, watch The Frighteners of doing traditional close ups with wide angles. This allows for normal framing of your talent while giving lots of room in the…

I'm not saying short lenses are necessarily bad, btw. I just think it's interesting that smartphones have had this effect.

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

#97

Post by short_sells_poo »

stavros wrote: post #86
kebman wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The imperfections serve as a kind of verfremdungseffekt, making the viewer aware that he's looking at a photograph, rather than at a person. As such René Magritte comes to mind. It is fascinating that he made his own camera, though. That certainly adds to the quality of the images, though it's of course a kind of non-diegetic contents. He said, with a wry smile.

Is it just me or has the quality of GPT-3 comments declined recently?

I'm almost certain the parent is not an AI. Perhaps it's just that I have no idea what they are talking about.

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

#98

Post by stavros »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #97
stavros wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it just me or has the quality of GPT-3 comments declined recently?

I'm almost certain the parent is not an AI. Perhaps it's just that I have no idea what they are talking about.

I don't think even Alan Turing himself ever envisioned this.

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

#99

Post by Jensson »

wavefunction wrote: post #90
falcrist wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get nothing from them. Does that make them not art?

For you, perhaps. I don't think there is an objective truth of "this is art, this is not art." I shared my experience of the pictures with you. Art is the experience of Art imo.

A large part of how you experience something is the context though. If people tell you something is great before showing then you are more likely to find something great about it, etc. So with that reasoning a large part of art is just telling people that it is art, it isn't the work itself but the belief that it is art that creates the art.

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

#100

Post by sudosysgen »

knolan wrote: post #65
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.

Yes, but some phones give you raw files and some apps can bypass the additional processing. iOS https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211965 Android https://www.androidbeat.com/2018/10/pixel-3-how-shoot-raw-dn... Alternative iOS camera app: https://halide.cam/

Apple ProRAW is not a real raw file and will include a lot of processing.
Post reply on HN