Has the advent of Digital devalued Photography

A common question that pops up routinely is "has the ease and accessibility of digital photography ultimately devalued photography more generally?". A typical example (actually not typical, its a very good discussion) of the debate is this one in the Self Taught Photographers group on FLICKR.

I wont try and make a definitive answer today because I havent got the time or the tools but I would like to add to the debate with a little clarification and a slightly different perspective (though one in keeping with my general feelings on photography).

To begin, I think too many people confuse, are at least arent careful enough to distinguish between "craft" and "art".

Craft, the ability to master all elements of the process of photography to produce an image is definitely degraded and even devalued by digital. While it is true that digital hasnt completely destroyed the craft of photography (meters arent perfect and photoshopping itself requires a degree of perseverance and experimentation) I doubt many would argue that today the level of dedication to master the operation of a modern camera or editing software matched that required by manual film cameras and wet darkrooms.

Art, the ability to know what image is worth making, is however largely unaffected by the appearance of digital. Digital technology has made it easier to make a great image, but it has done little (if anything) to help the person putting it together to know what a great image is.

Personally I dont regret that situation. Personally, the craft of photography has always left me cold. I hated film and still resent having to stop and use a tripod. The mucky muck of getting the image in my head into the camera and onto the computer is something I just want to get over. So I love digital with a passion and revel in how it lets me get to the art quickly.

However, just as there are people that value the hand crafted boat, vase, chair or tapestry and I understand that for others, the loss (at least partially) of the craft of photography is a painful thing.

Dont always delete your just 'ok' photos.

DSC01076, originally uploaded by PMac Imagery.

Not the best photo I've ever taken and absolutely not the best shot ever taken of this scene but it was certainly the best shot I got of this classic skyline. Now a couple of years later I'm so glad I've got this image and a little sad how close I came to deleting it.

The lesson here is we semi serious amateurs with pretensions of being artists have to be careful sometimes not to set our sights too high and lose simple but great memories because a shot doesn't meet our standards.

Not every shot has to be a work of art, always remember sometimes a decent shot is enough for a great memory.

The importance of craft

The digital revolution has brought tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of newcomers to the field - like me. And this explosion of photographers has occurred at a time when the idea of self expression and individualism is also peaking. Therefore, many of the new breed - like me - are perhaps a little too devoted to the idea of being an artist and a little too dismissive of the craft of being a good photographer.

I'm writing this in the aftermath of having 8 quality control rejects in a row from my stock agency. I'd never had more than 2 in the past, now 8. Now to be honest I think the QC standards have changed a little of late but one thing it highlighted to me was that its vital not to get carried away with the so-called 'pictorial' elements of a shot and forget the technical.

Oh - by the way, I had a success and got a batch through this morning. So I feel good now.

a little corner of the net that isnt about gear

Ok, actually there's quite a few sites that talk about the art of photography, but they tend to get drowned out by the vast array of gear sites. Even sites such as Luminous Landscape, once very technique driven, are becoming more and more about the stuff we use to take pictures and less about the pictures.

But the take over is not complete. One of the semi-regular contributors on that site, Alain Birot, has his own little corner of the site, call Birots View, that has quite a bit on actually getting and image worth of all that gear we want to buy. Head over there and enjoy.

(and I promise to write something more interesting soon)

Is the old way the best way?

There is a trend emerging on the net, generally amongst older photographers, to point to simpler times and advise the new generation to follow a similar path. Usually this will involve some sort of return to film, a fully manual camera, and a simple fixed focal length lens. The idea seems to be that by forcing people into a more rigidly controlled,less forgiving environment they will acquire a deeper understanding of the craft of photography and gain discipline from the experience.

I am not so sure.

In reading blogs from many of these people, another theme that comes through is their dissatisfaction with digital and its inability to replicate what they got with film. As if the replication of what they have done in the past is the ultimate aim of the new medium.

I wonder if, the discipline these people have learnt is actually a strait jacket, constricting their creativity and their ability to adapt. Worse, I wonder if by encouraging newcomers to photography to follow their path, while certainly giving the new guys and girls a greater grasp of the craft, if they aren't also crippling their art in the long term.