Who can be called a photographer – this has been discussed many times. Is it a person with a camera? Is it a person who composes a shot? Is it a person that produces a final print?
This question has got a whole new meaning for me recently. My son has grown up a bit – he is three and a half now. When we go to a park and I take photos there he wants to be a part of it. I setup a tripod, compose a shot and then let him release shutter by pressing a button on a camera or on remote release. He is really happy to do that. Later he proudly tells mom that he has taken a photo on dad’s camera.
So, does this mean that he is a photographer now and I infringe his copyright by publishing those photos on my website under my name? (I hope you don’t take this question too serious in this context.)
Composed by me, shot by my son:
I think photography is the most democratic accessible art. If we think of other art eye-motion coordination is very important, being it playing a musical instrument, painting or dancing. Photography is the only art that I can think off where this is not important.
Anyone who observed a photographer may rightfully note that this is not completely true. The way a photographer approaches the subject, walks around it, moves around trying to setup a tripod, find the best angle is like watching a dancer move. If you’ve been in photography for a while you’ve may noticed that your body got trained to move fluidly and efficiently.
Being the most accessible art it is often confused with being the easiest one. I think that’s what all the companies, many photo magazines, etc are trying to convince you in. You just need to spend a bunch of money on gear, classes and workshops and (voilà!) you have a dream career – traveling around the world and photographing the most interesting places.
Everyone around photography tries to sell you more gear. Let’s look at “Outdoor Photographer”, for example. Enjoying outdoor photography myself I thought that this would be an interesting magazine. What I found though is that it was not about photography – it was about equipment. At some point I decided to get rid of extra pages with advertising, equipment reviews and pages on how to use particular brand of equipment or software. What was left in the end were 2-4 pages per magazine. Even those pages were half covered in advertisement. The conclusion that I’ve arrived to that even with its cheap subscription, the magazine was not worth it. It was not worth my time. (If you know of any magazine about color landscape photography, I’m open for suggestions.)
In the end looks like more and more companies jumping on this “more photography [equipment] for everyone” advertising train. In the end everyone makes money off photography excepts photographers themselves.
My suggestion to those who want to try photography is to start with some cheap camera and a cheap lenses (or maybe camera with built-in lenses). It will serve you good to learn if photography is for you, what you like in photography and what you’ll need. I know quite a few photographers that find out that that first camera is all that they need and do great shots with it.
I’m having a show on May 1 – May 29, 2010 at East Shore Gallery, Bellevue, WA (directions). It is in their office/bookstore building. The theme of the show is going to be “Rolling Hills of Palouse” and will include select images from the Rolling Hills folios at my website. All images will be giclee prints. Here is one of the photos that will be featured at the exhibition – “Palouse at Sunset”:
Finally, created my own blog related to fine art photography which I’m very much into.
Let’s try the first post: Hello, World!
Check out my website at http://www.vitphoto.com/