Why do you think this is limited to color?
I have been spending evenings in the last week editing "New Black and White" on flickr http://www.flickr.com/groups/newblackandwhite/pool/ down from 56,000 photos to maybe 2 or 3 thousand by the time I'm done. I am so sick of silhouetted bare trees, wide angle barren moors usually with road leading away), lonely figures walking away from the camera in the big city, farm life shot with holgas, hard-lit nudes on black, and sooooooo many other dumbass B&W cliche images.* It is so EASY to just delete 90-95% of what gets posted as dull derivative derivative crap.
When activities are difficult, only people who have a strong personal stake will participate. When it's easy to throw huge numbers of lame pictures at people, the median and mean both drop. This is true both for the ephemeral self-congratulatory flickr and even for the rapid expansion of ever-larger prints in art galleries. They are easier to make, and oddly easier to sell.
The good thing is, however -- the more samples you might have, the better the chance that the outliers will be ever more extreme. If there are a hundred photographers in the world, there might be five best ones. If there are 100,000,000 photographers, there might still be five best ones -- and they are really, REALLY good.
* those on APUG who think such things are "fine art" really need a reality check
@tim: Those three all look the same to me, and their work seems straight outta 1973
http://www.flickr.com/photos/3843178...ags/chongqing/ rethinks LF landscape and see the land as a lightbursting hatching egg. And made by an old guy :P
Last edited by bjorke; 04-24-2008 at 07:54 PM. Click to view previous post history.