Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I took a look, they are just bad photos to me. I could not find any redeeming quality.
I'm curious, show an example of what you consider to be good photos, if you don't mind taking a moment.
[deleted]
Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
61–70 of 184 posts
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I took a look, they are just bad photos to me. I could not find any redeeming quality.
From the wikipedia article: "...using homemade cameras constructed of cardboard tubes, tin cans and other at-hand materials" I mean... I don't know if I'd take perfect pictures with such equipment, especially not if I'm trying to do it secretly.
This is not about technical quality. They just don't look or have anything interesting in them.
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#63The example of a selfie is in fact, not a selfie.
It's right under the paragraph about the "plandid," and it seems to be a perfect example of that, though the caption makes it ambiguous re: intent.
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I took a look, they are just bad photos to me. I could not find any redeeming quality.
I'm curious, show an example of what you consider to be good photos, if you don't mind taking a moment.
I don't think I can explain to you by showing an example. Also, I type this on a phone and don't have access to my collection.
A good photo looks interesting or has something interesting in it or comes with some interesting context.
These are more or less random photos taken with a bad camera. That's it.
Now, I don't say you need good camera for good photos. You can make interesting photos with any camera. And you can also use bad camera for interesting effect.
But, again, these photos don't show any kind of plan, thought, deliberation, interesting subject, context, technique, nothing.
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#65Related: 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:
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Haute couture is almost all nutty stuff that no normal person wears anyway. It's like art for art's sake, not clothes.
Is it not art to demonstrate the capability of the designer? And what’s expected to follow is that they can put a great looking “regular” item together too
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing good about them. They have celebrities and are ostensibly about "fashion", but they don't otherwise have anything to recommend them.
Well they were decently lit and in focus...
That used to take skill, before autofocus and digital cameras able to shoot at ISO 6400+ with post-processing to smooth out the noise. Now we're at a point where if the picture our phone takes is out-of-focus and too dark, we blame the phone.
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Adding context does little to change that, unfortunately. I could understand if they evoked some kind of emotions or served as a deconstruction of photography technique, but most of them just look like deliberately bad photographs to me. Then again, I'm only an amateur at photography.
I'd guess they invoked nostalgia in other photographers at the time about their old bad photos, so they thought it was brilliant. Like an inside thing only they understood.
I like them and it's simply because they evoke an intellectual and emotional reaction. That's art.
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#69Talking 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?
It's itentional. He starts with, "First of all, you have to have a bad camera".
Re: Photography technology has influenced what people consider a good picture
#70Talking 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
Kind of taken aback by all the people saying these are just shitty photos.
I think they are gorgeous...
Do y'all think Lo-fi music is just shitty music too?
I guess its a little unsurprising coming from the usual HN crowd lmao.