Photography as a purly utalitarian medium

Do you agree that the only usefulness left to still photography is purely in the utilitarian areas such as passport photos, crime scene photos, product photos etc. and photography as an "art" form is pretty much finished.

What if 'dog' was spelled 'c a t'?

I ask this because I have friends and family and I find myself taking photos at gatherings ( although not at funerals ).  Later people, including me, look at these images and get some small bit of happiness from the emotional context of the images.  The vast majority of all photography is, and always has been, for this purpose.

You should try this, even if it means acquiring friends.

Art ?  Don't really care and never did.

If the only purpose I had for cameras was the ones you describe I'd stop using them completely.

--
StephenG

I dunno, but it sure seems saturated (no pun intended).

No. I do not agree with that. Advertising photography over the years achieves "art" status with regularity and continues to do so. Even the Mona Lisa has been used to sell things. Duel purpose and utility  is not the same as soulless, generic or mundane.

I have friends and family  and I never shoot at gatherings and  all my photography has always been associated with work and occasionally aspiring as  art.

If my only use for a camera was to shoot real people family snaps of babies spitting and aunties eating cake I'd never use another one. The very thought of  it grosses me out.

For someone with over eleven thousand posts I'd have expected other  than a family snap shooter with no interest in art-  but maybe that's why you have the time for eleven thousand posts.

--
denniswilliams

For a moderator to put some one down is "less than optimal" since the purpose of moderating is to dampen flames not encourage them.  Not that big a deal in this post, but be aware of your role here moderator.

To the OP there is a saying that "boredom is an insult to one's self."  I think there are still many avenues to artistic photography, you just haven't found it for yourself.  I am continually blown away by the quality of photography - artistically - that is available today.  I find current work to be incredibly original and socially utilitarian.  On average, photography has improved leaps and bounds so that very good photos can be achieved by many now, which raises the bar for truly artistic photography.

--
Hind sight is always better than foresight, except for lost opportunity costs.

The main problem why photography does not have a future as an art form is quite simple, there are no means and ways to understand what is a good photograph today - thanks to digital technology.

The look department is pretty much taken care of by software and the subjects are pretty much the same as they were in the beginning of photography, nothing else is left in photography that someone could aspire to.

When there is no challenge left and no clear goals then naturally what follows is a simple activity, like writing a journal but instead using photos, a personal journal means something to the person who wrote it but for others its completely boring and useless, this is the reality of photography today, basically everyone's photos are like their personal journal, therefore something very personal and irrelevant to everyone else and hence very far from art.

The best a photographer could aspire to in the past was publishing a book, well, today one can do that very easily by using blurb etc, but then everyone is doing it so whats the point?

"The best a photographer could aspire to in the past was publishing a book"   ..????

so not A Gallery Exhibition ....????  ......or selling His/her work ????

and of course your post does beg the Question ...IF you think photography has no future ... Then why are you     bothering to post in the forum ????

or even using the Forum ????

Moderators are entitled to express their views.  I'd be very surprised if anyone because a volunteer moderator knowing they could not post their opinions.

If you don't like my answer blame the OP - it is inevitable that someone would express my viewpoint, as the OP seems oblivious of the primary use of cameras.

--

StephenG

I've been a moderator, not here but at another forum not photo related.  When you become a mod, you do loose a wee bit of freedom as you have to be a bit more of a diplomat than when not a mod.  You're the guy or gal with your arms out blocking the two fighting parties, though I have to say where I moderated there was little fighting.

Don't be upset at my post, just remember you are part ambassador now, you'll work hard for no pay.

--
Hind sight is always better than foresight, except for lost opportunity costs.

If it is to you, it is to you. To me photography is art and always will be. One person's art is another person's trash. Asking for a consensus on art is a waste of time.

There is nothing utilitarian about an image like this. Art? I have no idea.

--
StephenG

It was a bit of a silly post, and the response was very appropriate. And a lol

Perhaps the OP should look back at the history of photography a bit, see what people has used it for over the decades...

Have you not looked at a photography magazine lately? If DPR is the only site you visit it's easy to think that...check out what people have posted to the following site:

http://1x.com/

I do product photography as my day job, but I need to let loose with something creative and artistic, or at least experimental.

No, I don't agree. Is there some reason why you think this? Care to explain why you think this?

--
Dan
-
I love my girlfriend, my dog and my canon 5DIII - even though none of them ever do what I tell them
I am learning photo graphee - see the results at www.danmarchant.com

Yes, completely done. May as well quit, waste of time.

--
Everything happens for a reason. #1 reason: poor planning
WSSA #44

Depends on the forum.

--
http://fruminousbandersnatch.blogspot.com/

The post is very good.