Are we completely missing the boat with digital technology?

[Spanik]

Not an amateur of "multimedia" myself. What is multimedia anyway? If you think about it, then everything is mulitmedia. Even a print hanging on a wall isn't alone. It makes a difference where it hangs and how it hangs.

But I'm surprised there a more people like me that don't like video. For me it is the difference between having a story told or reading a story. Far more exciting to read a story.

[RichC]

Presumably, those who don't like videos don't like movies either....?

[Lauffray]

I don't know, all this technical wizardry doesn't really interest me, I have seen it well done but rarely, most of the time it's a distraction from the actual photography.
Being in the technology domain myself (professionally) I chose simple cameras and a simple process because I don't feel like fiddling with technological gizmos all the time, I do enough of that at work

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by Dave Jenkins

The art of photography is in the seeing at the moment of inception. If it was not well seen to begin with, nothing that can be done to it later will make it art.

Tell that to Andreas Gursky.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by RichC

Yup! Now, my mission should I choose to accept it will be to combine all these feelings and experiences into a photographic project! Oh, and to throw in some social commentary to leaven the nostalgia! LOL

PS: the working title is "Coumarin" - I'll let you Google as to why...!

I remember joss sticks called Cut Grass, and yes I had to consult the oracle. I have a project called A Peculiar Practice about local cricket that I've been doing for years now, nostalgia is a moveable feast I think, tricky to pin down

[Bob Michaels]

Thanks for the link.

Actually the largest or 42" digital frame at $1,899 is still substantially less than what I pay for the the materials (doing all the work myself) to mat and frame a 30 photo exhibit.

Originally Posted by jsrockit

Small digital frames have come down a lot too. However, large ones are still very expensive.

http://www.alldigitalframes.com/large_s/72.htm

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by Bob Michaels

Thanks for the link.

Actually the largest or 42" digital frame at $1,899 is still substantially less than what I pay for the the materials (doing all the work myself) to mat and frame a 30 photo exhibit.

True, but do you really want only one LCD in the gallery (space) room? I was thinking you'd need to go the multiple route.

[Bobfrance]

I 'communicate' visually for a living and am not interested in communicating with my photography. I enjoy the process and exploring aesthetics. I share the images with friends and on some networks, but I don't consider that I have an audience. For most of us to think we do is a conceit in my opinion.




.

[Bob Michaels]

This Magnum in Motion series of Alex Webb's "Crossings" is an example of the new technology I was referring to. I have seen the actual photos in exhibit, own the book, but still think this is the best presentation.

I think the only thing better would be sitting down, one on one, with Alex Webb while he was handing you prints one at a time and telling you about them and why he made them.

[jpa66]

Nice, thought-provoking post Bob.

I understand what you're saying and agree with most of it.

Jan

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Bobfrance

I 'communicate' visually for a living and am not interested in communicating with my photography. I enjoy the process and exploring aesthetics. I share the images with friends and on some networks, but I don't consider that I have an audience. For most of us to think we do is a conceit in my opinion.




.

... that and a misunderstanding of the word amateur brought about about by the world we live in.

[raid]

When I was standing in the midst of protesters in TahrirSquare (Cairo), I felt the energy from the people, and I had to switch to video from still images on my EPL-1. At such moments, a video captures the sound and the motion, which a still imae cannot do. Being able to do both with one camera was an advantage.

[Bob Michaels]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

True, but do you really want only one LCD in the gallery (space) room? I was thinking you'd need to go the multiple route.

I am not suggesting this is the way everyone should do all photo exhibits all the time, just that we need to recognize it has it's place.

I am doing an exhibit with just one LCD. It is in the local history museum where there is not sufficient space to adequately display prints. But they want me to tell the story in the photos and that is the best way. Plus, it does give the opportunity to play supporting music that I recorded on location where I was making the photos. See an early draft here.

I have another upcoming exhibit in a real gallery of a different series. There will be 35 framed prints. I am discussing with the curator about including a digital frame with another 50 or so images accompanied by a 2-3 minute commentary from me about the subject, Cuban people in their native environment. My agenda is not primarily to show the extra photos, but to create the opportunity for me to deliver my message in words in addition to what the prints convey. Viewers will have the choice to stop and listen to me while they see more photos or walk on by.

[Bob Michaels]

Originally Posted by BobYIL

Bob, I hope you know, these are film Leica shots.. Alex just recently switched to digital because of the requirement of prompt transmission. All his book pictures are film Leica shots.

Sorry if I led you to believe this discussion had anything to do with cameras.

[Bobfrance]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

... that and a misunderstanding of the word amateur brought about about by the world we live in.

Exactly Stewart!

[Peter^]

Bob poses an interesting and important question. Are we the true guardians of artistic tradition, or just a bunch of old farts who do not recognize that the world is moving on without us? History shows us that the "guardians of artistic tradition" are the ones who have the least impact in their fields.

However, as an enthusiastic amateur, I am quite happy if once in a while I can create a wonderfully derivative good picture which I can hang on wall in my house and say: I made that.

- peter

[bigeye]

The icons in still photography of the past have been the single shot that captures and conveys the entire message.

You suggest extending past that tradition and convention to produce a mixed-media or multi-image "presentation" (for lack of a better word), that is as "great", which I'll define here as captivating and unique.

Makes sense to me.

- Charlie

[back alley]

Originally Posted by Bobfrance

I 'communicate' visually for a living and am not interested in communicating with my photography. I enjoy the process and exploring aesthetics. I share the images with friends and on some networks, but I don't consider that I have an audience. For most of us to think we do is a conceit in my opinion.




.

i have an audience...it is very small but it's there...most of the comments on flickr are from mostly the same people...and a handful check out my image blog and make comments to me in person or by email...these are mostly friends.
i don't have a 'buying' audience though...

[back alley]

this attitude that says film is real and digital is not...is funny to me...because it's only on the net that i experience it.
most of the local shooters think i am a dinosaur because i prefer rangefinders and that i'm satisfied with a crop sensor camera.
when i was still shooting film i think they actually felt sorry for me.
i can see how small fueds turn ugly and into large battles...it's sad.

[Bob Michaels]

Originally Posted by back alley

this attitude that says film is real and digital is not...is funny to me...because it's only on the net that i experience it. .................................

Joe, Joe, Joe: I tried so hard from the beginning to say this had nothing to do with capturing by digital vs. film. It is not about gear at all. It is about utilizing new opportunities for the presentation of the photographic images. I have tried along the way to insure this thread did not make a hard turn and become yet another film vs. digital discussion. It appears I have failed.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Bob Michaels

Joe, Joe, Joe: I tried so hard from the beginning to say this had nothing to do with capturing by digital vs. film. It is not about gear at all. It is about utilizing new opportunities for the presentation of the photographic images. I have tried along the way to insure this thread did not make a hard turn and become yet another film vs. digital discussion. It appears I have failed.

It's no failure on your part Bob because you are one of the most balanced fair minded members we have here IMO and if people can't follow your lead it's not your isuue!

You can't control the weather either don't forget!

[back alley]

Originally Posted by Bob Michaels

Joe, Joe, Joe: I tried so hard from the beginning to say this had nothing to do with capturing by digital vs. film. It is not about gear at all. It is about utilizing new opportunities for the presentation of the photographic images. I have tried along the way to insure this thread did not make a hard turn and become yet another film vs. digital discussion. It appears I have failed.

i was reacting to other's attitudes bob...not yours.

digital is very new and i don't even know where the boat is!

[Joe AC]

Originally Posted by Bob Michaels

Joe, Joe, Joe: I tried so hard from the beginning to say this had nothing to do with capturing by digital vs. film. It is not about gear at all. It is about utilizing new opportunities for the presentation of the photographic images. I have tried along the way to insure this thread did not make a hard turn and become yet another film vs. digital discussion. It appears I have failed.

So....it's about slide projectors ; )

[shadowfox]

Bob,

Multimedia presentations are fine and dandy.
I even enjoy some of them.
But I have no desire, let alone compulsion to produce one.

A single image.
A single image + a profound title.
A single image + a poem.
A set of images displayed side by side in a gallery.

That's about as "multimedia" as I care to do for my own photos.
And I can use digital or film to do it.

Come to think about it, I don't really care where "the boat" is, really.

[jwc57]

I was brought up believing one image, if done correctly, could tell the whole story.

I've done slideshows, videos, etc. for clients since 2001 or 2002. I think for me it started with a product called "FlipAlbum". Canon had video/slide software I used for a short time. I was always looking for the next "gadget" that would allow me to present photos in a unique and "inspiring" way.

I've come back around to the "less is more" belief.

Personally, I can see a gallery using electronic displays to show a photographer's work. But, a really fine image can stand on its own, or should. A photograph hanging on a wall gives the viewer time to take in the photograph and see what the photographer saw, what drew him to click the shutter.