The reading After Photography discussed the transitions seen over time that led to digital photography. The author exemplified the evolution of painting into photography, compared the Internet to society’s fascination with fast moving cars, and also demonstrated the influences that a new medium obtains from its predecessor (TV from the radio, early photography from painting etc.). The reading seeks to demonstrate the increasing rapidity in which mediums are changing “for the better”. It seems to come across that the digitalization of photography (along with the internet) means a different experience aesthetic and artistic experience.
The tone seems to be split between critical and embracive regarding digital photography and what it means for the art world. On the one hand the possibilities are endless and on the other, it’s too easy. Photography, which threatened the success painting, has now split into 2 categories: Analog and digital. The latter seemingly farther removed from painting than the former. As a student of photography developing my skills in the digital age, I have a world of options and tools available for any type of approach I want to take with my photography. It’s not like the original masters who were experts at the fundamentals of photography. They had fewer chances to get it right and therefore had to be as precise as possible. Today, the discipline is much more lenient and could arguably be considered less specialized. The easy access to cameras, editing programs, publishing sources and the ability to self teach photographic skills, makes it much more difficult for photographers today to set themselves apart and create the unique, specialized images of the past.
Great summary!
ReplyDelete