There has been a sad shift from art being created to it being questioned. The photographs were meant to be created as visual delights. A new process, technique, or aesthetic appeal. Words were for writers as they didn’t paint. They explained in thousand words what a photographer could in one frame.
Then came the period of mass-manufacturing of cameras and photographers – the wave of ‘every person is a photographer’.
So if everyone is photographing the Stonehenge, then someone who is making a big deal out of photography will now need to concoct some cock-and-bull to somehow convince the world that only their photograph of the monument is worth hanging on the museum and living room walls over the millions of other photographers’ images of the same scene.
That’s all it takes.
People are attracted to the poorly lit/composed image because they are made to believe it’s created that way on purpose, for a reason. It’s deliberately pixelated, and not because the amateur forgot to adjust the camera settings…. The Mosaicy Feel – first ever. Even a bad day of photography got sold.
This not only compromises the effort of a real genius, but also encourages mediocrity as those who shout the loudest get heard, get sold. Mediocrity rules.
Though, a few geniuses have learnt to shout too. The professionals are having to adapt.
If my photographs are good enough, then why am I not considered close enough? How did Capa get away with it then?
I’m far from being a genius, but also far from being a mediocre. So, if an image I create evokes awe, then why do I need to explain it?
Should my answer to why something was photographed be not as straightforward as Mallory’s reason for wanting to summit Mount Everest?
“Because it’s there”?!