BBC:
Renowned German film director and photographer Wim Wenders has hit out at phone’ photography’.
Speaking at an exhibition of his Polaroid works, he said photography was dead and thinks mobile phones are to blame.
“The trouble with iPhone pictures is nobody sees them,” Wenders says. “Even the people who take them don’t look at them anymore, and they certainly don’t make prints.”
Wenders isn’t just some “cranky old man” we can easily ignore. I don’t necessarily agree with his overall premise but he does make some interesting points. Personally, I rarely take any photo that I don’t want to share with others in any number of ways.
Prints are neither how I look at nor share photos.
OMG. I remember years ago when I was in the FSU, a shopkeeper was talking to me. She told me her favorite movies were Vim Vanders films. She even wrote it down, spelling it thus. (Remember that she and I were used to different alphabets). I had to admit I didn’t know the name. Back then, when I later did a search on his name, nothing came up. Now Google correctly corrects the spelling. This is him.
I love a couple of Wim Wenders films, but most people take photos not to show in museums, but to remember a moment later.
Computing is dead. And I blame these godawful things called PCs.These days, some of them are small enough to even fit in your pocket. Even the people who use these newfangled mobile devices don’t have a rotary dialer anymore.
As someone in the photography industry, you should be well aware that phone photography head and digital photography have been the deathknell of quality photography. It also contributes to our high distraction index period
Go to work concert running other public events you will find people busily capturing the events for posterity on their smart phone knowing full well that they will never ever revisit that footage. In the interim, they’ve deprive themselves of the opportunity to experience what is right in front of their faces.
Can easily be said that while digital photography has improved the technical capability of image gathering, it is made everyone a mediocre photographer.
That I think you’re missing the point of his argument. Hey print gives permanence to the image you capture. Imagine what they will be hanging in museums 50 years from now. And if you have never experienced equality print, try one.
Sure, photo albums that would fill up the entire attic. The rest usually went in shoe boxes. Anyone who values important images should still make prints. Permanence is great, and having old pictures passed down is valuable. It’s not like the option isn’t there. Seems more nostalgia than anything else.
You’re describing people who always were mediocre photographers. Now they just have different gear to be mediocre with.
I am “well aware” of no such thing and don’t even agree with your premise.