Erwin Puts: 'Photography no longer exists'.
An interesting article.
'Photography No Longer Exists', Erwin Puts
Not sure if I agree entirely. Maybe he hasn't seen APUG.
Last edited by Andy K; 07-25-2007 at 06:51 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Read all what Puts has published on his site. Interesting, but I see some contradictions between his articles.
First I'd have to ask, "you are just coming to this conclusion now?" It has been discussed for some time that at the core of the digital revolution is the fact that the connection between the image and the moment of exposure (capture if you must) has been fractured. This sets this change far apart from all of the other technological changes that have come before in photography (albumen to silver, color materials etc). As far as photography being drawn into a larger world of art-making, that would be going on any way as most of the non-photographer artists using photographic tools have never cared about mastering technique. We have long had a "push button" mode digital or no. Although it must be said that digital is inevitably drawing different modes of expression together in the art world, still image, video, audio, because in essence the medium is now the same.
I agree- instead of calling digital "photography", it should be part of "electronica". Since it is now entirely possible to merge still, video, print and virtual image representation, they belong together in a new media and new department. While many would argue that this makes the resulting "photography" obsolete and "old-school", therefore not worth pursuing, the same could be said for silk screen, lithography, etching, and drawing. An argument could even be made for sculpture belonging in that list, since it is now possible with 3-D holography to virtually render sculpture both static and kinetic.
You know what's the big problem with film? It's no longer photography anymore. There's a bunch of clever buggers over yonder who just take hundreds of pictures in a minute and then show it on a screen. And you know what? The pictures, they move!
Film photography should no longer be called "photography" because it merges with cinema and animation. Did you see Chris Marker's "La Jetée" ? Incredible, the man was mixing still and animated pictures together. There is no longer a difference! Photography is dead!
Using film since before it was hip.
"One of the most singular characters of the hyposulphites, is the property their solutions possess of dissolving muriate of silver and retaining it in considerable quantity in permanent solution" — Sir John Frederick William Herschel, "On the Hyposulphurous Acid and its Compounds." The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal
, Vol. 1 (8 Jan. 1819): 8-29. p. 11
My APUG Portfolio
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
in the world of commercial photography, they don't even want a photographer
nowadays ... they have someone shoot video, then
the technician (McTech ?) stares at the monitor and
cherry-pick still images from the - stream - ...
instead of having someone actually shoot with a "camera" ...
not to refer to another thread, but it is all "image" not photography ...
E. Puts is sometimes ready to visit a hospital, so check before accept what he say or write.
He advised Leica to run digital to get into the line... and Leica web site (forum) is dieing after they went digital. Here on APUG we have 70,000 visitors to darkroom one single thread. Hundreds times more there are photographers not going to computer at all, or do not knows for APUG...
And what I did last night: again reproduction of digital image, customer want it as a photograph. So. I have shooting today also, and tomorow also,... So.
I think personaly what Puts means when he say "photography" is behind the answer, and he is right or should visit a doctor, or he too watch TV a lot.
I predicted this :o Figure the next things in this evolution
Originally Posted by jnanian
1) Multiple fixed cameras to cover every single angle.
2) Software to replace the McTech.
No more event photographers. Instead the arena,wedding hall,church etc will have fixed installed systems and add the cost to the rental.
Originally Posted by Nick Zentena
... and those cameras will be linked into the Microsoft mainframe. Your wedding album will be emailed to you before the reception is over and the prints will be whirring out of your printer while you pack for the honeymoon. (all rights to those pics reserved by Microsoft, of course)
Everybody can create technologically perfect images at this moment: the powerful post processing software will take care of all technical hurdles that the film-based photograph had to master...
This is a core around which his brain revolves. So here is my answer to Mr. Puts:
It was baptism of a child of one my frind. Everyone had dig. camera, some two cameras in both hands... I had my Nikon F6 and 500-iso film, so no flash, unnoticable shooting. One dig. guy came to me and ask, how you can take picture without flash, your camera is not working....
To make long short, nearly all of dig. "photogs" came to me to buy some photographs from that baptism, and even I got some new permanent customers. I hope Puts understand philosophy behind this.
And one think more: no consumer care what he is doing. He care that he is in fashion. My brother even know to say: daniel I take some pictures but I am not a photographer. Well who then bother with that mix of terminology? Equipment manufacturers, schools, and anyone that draws living on "photgraphy" martket. They are the sh**.
Is photography in danger? NO WAY. Photography is geting what for it is made. It is a medium like painting, sculpture,... art meduim, and so no mass medium any more, thank you my God. What is hapening is what been with painting and drawing when photograpohy came out on the day.
Last edited by Daniel_OB; 07-25-2007 at 10:58 AM. Click to view previous post history.