Photography is in its infancy as an art form, relatively speaking. Painting, drawing, writing, dance, music… these are all thousands of years old. As mediums of art and expression, they have developed slowly, organically, gently. The same cannot be said for photography. Actually, no… you can say the same thing about photography I guess, just not the whole thousands of years part. We can be generous and say that we’re looking at around 200 years, give or take. Sure, photography may just be a natural progression of other mediums such as drawing or painting, or even writing in its own way. But the capturing on a scene before us through means of light alone; still new, I think.

 

This is not, absolutely not, a blog post about the history of photography. It is, however, an attempt to shine a bit of light onto something that perplexes me and excites me about my chosen medium. The idea of film vs digital, photoshop vs darkroom, Photographer vs. A.I., that’s all been well documented and argued, and frankly bores me. What does intrigue me is the notion of photography as a medium in its early stages, and being someone who wants to devote his life to that medium.

 

The fact that photography has always relied on the continual advancement of technology has created the incredible expediency that we’ve witnessed, especially over the last 25 years. The most obvious change being from film to digital, though I am sure that the shift from Wet Plate to film felt equally jarring. But now, as we look at the role of artificial intelligence in the editing process, and more recently in the capturing stage (check out Sam Hurd’s work with Insight… absolutely fascinating) there is a lot of conversation surrounding the entire idea of what photography is, what it means and what we should consider acceptable.

I would argue that given photography is so new, so young, and with its relationship totechnology, it really is no wonder that we are wrestling with these issues. It makes sense that we are confused about what it’s all supposed to look like and feel like. The speed at which this art form has matured is unlike any other. I said at the beginning that it is in its infancy… maybe it’s more like a toddler, or an adolescent, or even a teenager. But whatever age it’s at, I don’t think it’s operating at an emotional and intellectual level that is relative with its progression. It’s like in the movie Big, where Tom Hanks is a kid inside an adults body. So too, photography is trying to understand the immense power and freedom it has adopted through technology, but without the time to develop the cognitive skills and emotional experience to do so.

 

The medium has so much to offer us; I truly don’t think we are even aware of what that could be, how it can look. It is, perhaps, why we are so incredibly inspired when we see photographers doing something we never thought of. Whether that is using tools in unique ways, changing the approach to the use of the camera itself, composition, lighting, or anything else that makes use scratch our heads.

I think it can also be a little overwhelming, and is probably why we spend more time talking about the pure optical performance of a new lens or the high iso performance of a sensor, than the more contemplative and esoteric elements that make up the very nature of the medium. This might be what people mean when they say “Gear Doesn’t Matter.”… and it is also probably why we bristle up when we hear that. Because photography necessitates gear. The very nature of photography is the relationship between the camera, the artist and the subject. It’s why getting to know your camera is vital, not so it can get out of the way of your photo taking, but so you can truly embrace the relationship you have with it.

 

Telling someone “You should be able to take a great photo with any camera”, is entirely disrespectful to the importance of the relationship between the artist and his tools. Certainly a great photographer will take pleasing images with any camera, but it does not mean they will make the images they truly want to make, with any camera. Just as a painter relies on a certain set of brushes and colours for a given painting, so too does a photographer choose their gear to match their vision.

 

That felt a little off-topic, but what I am trying to get at is this struggle I am seeing all around me in the photography world right now, whether that is arguments about gear, or AI or the future of photojournalism or artistic merit within photography… it all feels pretty tense. And that is exactly what growth feels like. This medium is young, it is confused, it is uncomfortable with itself and how it looks and feels. Perhaps then, it really is in its teenage years. Photography is becoming more self-aware, self-conscious and to me, having some serious growing pains. Of course, since the dawn of photography there has been critique, dialogue, arguments. But the writings of the last 150 years felt more like a curious exploration on the form itself and the artists within it. To me, I guess it just kind of feels like we are avoiding the more uncomfortable conversations, the deeper conversations, and are throwing up red herrings about bokeh and Autofocus performance.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I love getting in the weeds with that stuff too… but it’s just feeling strange right now.

 

I think this was maybe two very different topics that I turned into one blog post. There’s a lot more to unpack here… more to come I guess.

 

Chiokoe Utte’esia,

C