Is it just me or is there nothing new in photography?

>>3138763
rip in*

>>3138763
What kind of innovation are you talking about? Give an example of what you would consider an innovation of the past

>>3138763
I think about the philosophy/art of photography all the time and I want to talk about it with a friend but he just says "shoot whatever you want" and "who cares" and I want to talk about it with /p/ but you guys probably get shit like this all the time.

I dunno.

>>3138767
probably don't know enough about photography but to me it seems to advance incrementally based on new subjects and equipment. Currently it seems if I were to say look up underwater wildlife photographers that while their work looks fantastic for the most part its the same subjects, same compositions and same equipment. This is mainly the reason I quit photography a couple of years back as it was just everyone doing the same thing even the abstract shit seemed to mimic each other. Someone I consider relatively innovative is Joel Coleman but that could just be my lack of knowledge talking haha

>>3138771
nah bra go on I'm down to chat (if this isn't an irony post)

>>3138763
photography is not art. it's just documenting.

>>3138777
How would you explain embellishment then? when a good photog is being the lens they can make the subject look better than irl

>>3138775
well in the last decade, panoramas became easy to make, focus stacking, hdr (good hdr, not tone mapping). Then there has been incredible advancement in camera technology with DR, autofocus capabilities, face tracking etc. There might not be a lot of inovation in terms of compositions or subject matter, but tech has changed quite a bit.

>>3138785
have you got any links or examples of this new shit?

Innovation is a meme. 9/10 a great photograph isn't great because it's innovative, it's great because it's the same boring shit everyone has already done before except that particular photographer executed the shot flawlessly through sheer skill, experience or just plain luck. Odds are that you can't take these flawless shots consistently, and that's okay because most people can't either. Falling for the trap that you have to be unique and innovative is like wanting to learn how to run before you've mastered how to walk.

Imagine this, you come across a perfect scene, something very emotional, very powerful. If a famous photographer was standing in the same spot as you and took a photo of that scene, it could end up being one of their most iconic photos ever. You have your camera, your shot at immortality, now what the fuck do you do? Are you experienced enough with you camera that you can dial in the settings you want without wasting too much time? Can you nail the focus? Can you frame the shot in the best way possible? You learn how to do these things by constantly taking photos of boring shit. If you never take photos of boring shit because you think it's beneath you, you will never develop the vital skills you need for when the perfect scene finally comes up.

Look at it this way, you wouldn't want a UFC title match against Conor McGregor before you even learn how to throw a punch. So you better git gud at throwing a punch.

>>3138786
I litterally just named the innovations in tech.

>panoramas became easy to make, focus stacking, hdr (good hdr, not tone mapping)

>>3138840
>Innovation is a meme.
Too true. The same applies for most art forms. If you know anything about writing movie scripts or novels you know that it's just as formulaic as photography. Everything is based of a basic and unchanging set of guidelines that anyone can follow. The difference between you and a professional is his ability to display his art in such an expert way that the casual observer never see the guidelines that underlie the work.

Quentin Tarantino ranked the original matrix movie as one of the greatest movies of all time. It's also possibly the most formulaic movie of all time, the reluctant hero forced to make a choice, the concept of the chosen one. These tropes were literally already around and are used in The Iliad, 1200 years before christ. The beauty is that it tells that story so well and it's executed so flawlessly that no one even noticed.

>>3139074
>>3138840
Ive said it before and Ill say it again, a well executed shot speaks to me more than a badly executed experiment. Id never tell someone they have to do something one way but even if I try I cant just throw away everything I learned or all my own biases or preferences. It just doesnt work that way.

File: DSC08392.jpg (275KB, 475x844px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 475x844px

>>3139079
>Falling for the trap that you have to be unique and innovative is like wanting to learn how to run before you've mastered how to walk.
also too true. it's why posting your stuff on this board is damn near counter productive. every high school dickhead on here is going to try and tear your stuff to shreds. instead of trying to constantly find that unique and groundbreaking shot, just take pictures of whatever is around you and work on trying to find the best way to frame and light that particular image. it will also give you more time to work with post editing programs like lightroom so that when that really good shot does come your way you won't ruin it with shit editing.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3376
Image Height	6000
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:24 20:59:57
Exposure Time	1/640 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	5000
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Brightness	-0.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Shade
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	24.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	475
Image Height	844
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3138840
>>3139074
>>3139079
>>3139096
OP here This isn't for my personal development. Im talking about photography as a whole and was excluding myself from the equation entirely. Seeing perfect shots is not enough, cause literally almost anyone who has put in the time will nail an amazing shot at some point. Competition is so fierce/saturated everything has been done to death. True innovation Imo comes from something new and or experimental nailed with perfect technique. I was pretty much asking whats next for photography?

>>3139291
It's like you didn't even read the thread.

File: Basibuyuk.jpg (888KB, 540x1024px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 540x1024px

Well there are some photographers who came up with some creative projects. But I think the problem is that it can get too gimmicky.

>>3138763
Wat? There has been a lot of innovation.

People are now using drones for aerial videos / photos. The innovation being that they can do them at all 'cause renting a helicopter wherever can be very bloody expensive and very unlikely to fly that relatively close to the ground, not every pilot is a madman.

Underwater is also starting to become more feasible.

And then we gained just photo cameras with nice stabilization, fast bursts on silent cameras, much better low light capabilities and so on, all of which resulted in more possible photos. Resolution also went up.

Plus the last decade saw people get smartphones with cameras all over, maybe not what we really love but it does mean a lot of moments have been recorded that otherwise would have gone unrecorded, and the capability of running post software and such on these smartphone cameras is somewhat interesting going forward.

And then lenses also got nicer.

>>3139296
>Ask about innovation
>people say tech and don't back it up
>everyone says it a meme and gives me advice in how to take better photos
>say I'm taking about innovation in photography as a whole
>"It's like you didn't even read the thread"
ok

File: printer.jpg (37KB, 640x627px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x627px

You're not looking hard enough.

People say the same thing about video games- there's nothing new, I'm tired of all the same old shit- I have a library of 2,000+ games and can't decide what to play etc

The reason is that you become focused and saturated by repetition. The unique quirky hidden little games and photos and photographers are still there, being made in the hundreds every day, you're just accustomed to the same old things, you have expectations you expect to be beat instead of being open minded.

In short, take a few months off of photography and looking at photography. Your desire and drive will come back with a vengeance. Separation breeds fondness.

>>3138777
When autism tries to sound deep

>>3139337
Autism would be very bluepilled and abstract. I'm just honest and unpretentious and redpilled. Photography can be art, if you arrange the objects (aka staged art photography).

>>3139340
When autism tries to defend itself with more autism

File: image.png (82KB, 640x258px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 640x258px

>>3139291
These things. Now go out and buy one and start taking some innovative photos and stop asking us asinine questions.

>>3139340
>redpilled
>bluepilled
The autism is real

>>3139340
> [autistic screeching]

Wow.

>>3139337
>>3139345
Kek
>>3139336
true
>>3139389
might do just that

>>3139340
You arrange the composition regardless of whether or not you arrange the objects faggot

>>3138776
Not an irony post. There are a bunch of problems I have with modern photography that would be too much to type out. I feel like everything has been done and technology lets everyone take really good pictures and I'm constantly questioning where the art is and whether it's true art.

Anyway, with that said I was talking to a guy who made really cool stuff with an old projector and some film shots. Seemed innovative to me.

>>3139903
The art of photography was never in operating the camera. After all, if of hitting a few buttons and changing a setting here or there is an art form then so is operating a microwave. The art of photography has always been and will always be in the composition. You can dummy proof cameras so that even a small child gets the proper exposure, ISO, aperture, etc, etc, but the camera can't tell anyone what to shoot and how.

That's the difference between taking pictures and photography.

>>3139903
There was this local exhibit where this guy had photographed people living in war zones and other restless places I think in Syria
He accidentally fucked up few photos cause the locals were so curious to see the pictures and took the polaroids from the camera too early and the pics came out slightly fucked, with thumbprints of the subject on the photo
But he just ran with it and it became big part of his work, lot of his photos had that kinda imperfections that just appeared during developing stage due to the rough (to say the least) conditions
Anyway, that's something I had never seen before and I thought it was interesting, personally I really liked the photos as well but I can see how that might be too 'artsy' approach

>>3138763

Yes there is. Just make a way to take photos of light traveling with a DSLR and you will have something cutting edge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtsXgODHMWk

File: 15373257913_4dd86fcdf5_o.jpg (342KB, 768x768px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 768x768px

Look to the science labs and telescope facilities for where our next consumer camera innovations will come from.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2014:12:10 15:26:46
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	768
Image Height	768

>>3139910

>You can dummy proof cameras so that even a small child gets the proper exposure, ISO, aperture

The aperture and shutterspeed can completely change the look/meaning of the photo though. If operating something by pressing buttons isn't for artists then people couldn't be creating art on computers.

File: DSC06107.jpg (585KB, 1366x1500px) Image search: [Google]

585KB, 1366x1500px

>>3138771
/p/ hates the conceptual theory and philosophy behind photography but Photo is blowing up in the art world right now. I just read a great essay in A Matter of Memory - Photography as Object in the Digital Age, that kinda expands on Barthes and maybe suggests that he may not have seen the whole picture (pun intended). The essay explores the photo in the light of Marcel Proust's Swann's Way as a powerful trigger to a memory that can bring back smells, tastes and the feeling of the moment it was taken. It looks at the photo as a much more living object that Camera Lucida.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-6000
Camera Software	ILCE-6000 v1.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Left-Hand, Bottom
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2017:08:04 21:16:27
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Brightness	-0.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Daylight
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	16.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3139340
>bluepilled
>redpilled
>unpretentious
>>honest

haha wew

>>3140282

How do yuo geet books on the cheap , im too poor for books

not even joking

>>3140372
The library is free anon

>>3138763
It's just you

>>3140372
library is free and if you want to keep an essay, just photocopy it. I have done entire chapters. University book stores are another place, students have a bad habit of not reading books you you can get almost new used books on the cheap.

>>3139910
Sure that's fair
>>3139923
I really like incidents of accidental art. I don't think it's too much of an artsy approach, but just an example of the environment they were shooting photos in. The story brings more to the photos. War photography has been done to death, it's sad, but repetitive at this point. There was this teenage girl who made the news for shooting homeless people, but she did it in the exact same way as someone else (I forget his name, but famous photographer). Close up portraits, black and white, very dark rendering. I'm not sure if I appreciate her direct copy, especially because she's using an expensive digital camera and selling books now.
>>3140282
Do you have any good resources online anon for free reading? I'd really like to read some of that stuff and I'll do some searching later on so I'm asking before I look here. I do have a friend in visual art with access to a library so I'll give her a shout.

I do really like the last bit and I can relate to it

>>3140647
cont.

My dad was always behind the camera shooting us as kids and I think that's what probably triggered my interest in shooting photos. Lately I've had the thought that it's mind boggling to me that capturing a photograph is a moment in time that will never happen again (or maybe it will/did if you believe in crazy theories but that's beside the point). I guess in that way we re-experience things/moments when we look back at the photos. I guess in that way photos should be taken for myself, my close friends, people that are important to me. They should be a personal item. When I first started getting into photography as a teenager I wanted to take "flickr-esque" photos, i.e. beautiful landscapes and flowers and cool macro shots with expensive high-end gear. That was the dream, but as I've grown I've rejected that.

>>3140656
cont again (I need to stop being verbose and typing so much).

I've also had some struggles with whether I should shoot more finite things or infinite things and what constitutes each, but that is a whole other thing to type up. I.e. the philosophy of what exactly it is I want to shoot and why.

>>3140647
J-Stor a lot of libraries will have access to JSTOR.org, you can get a lot there, it is a great research tool
and sometimes schools will post their course readings online free to access.

some are available in PDF with a quick google search.
https://monoskop.org/images/c/c5/Barthes_Roland_Camera_Lucida_Reflections_on_Photography.pdf

>>3138763

Not sure what you mean by "innovation". Do you mean innovative technology? The newest sensors and equipment make digital thoroughly as good as 35mm film was at its apex; only medium-format and sheet film can resolve greater data than the best digital sensors.

Maybe you mean glass? There's new lenses coming out all the time, though the classics get the job done admirably well, Nikon or Canon.

Do you mean approach? There's only so much new in the world. It doesn't necessarily have to be innovative: take a picture of something interesting. So long as you're not boring, and your intention is clearly communicated, then you've done at least a decent photo.

Take pretty pictures and don't worry about whether it's novel.

>>3139995
wtf im blind now

do threads like this come up in every creative board?

>>3138763
stop looking and be the innovation. Try to create some new ideas yourself.

If you're trying to be innovative in any artistic field, odds are you're not the one who has the skill and the environment around them to actually innovate, this is just statistical.

I don't think people should get hung up on this quandary tho. You should be taking photos because you like it, the whole process, from shooting to development and post. If you're doing it for solely any other reason I think you're lost and will ultimately find yourself disappointed in the long run. Innovation is cool but why worry about what you're doing is played out, or if you should stop doing it, just because theres 1000+ people out there doing the same thing as you? If being special and unique is important to you and that truth bothers you, I think you're in it for the wrong reason.

Technological advances in photography are cool, and so are artistic advances, and they're still being made, just probably (most likely) not by you.

Something more important though, even though i think this is an edgy response to your question ( >>3138777 ) is how important photography is to history and documentation. When you see an old photo, even early daguerreotypes, are you trying to imagine how close that photo was to some sort of innovation or if it was at the margin or edge of some artistic phenomenon? Most likely not, and if you do look at photos that way you're most likely on the spectrum. You look at photos and imagine the time, the space, and the environment first and foremost. Photos aren't important artistically and compositionally except for a small niche population that consumes those photos. I'm more intrigued by the lasting legacy photography will have on how the world was, and how we chose to look at it.

Tl;dr -- if lack of artistic innovation in photography is a nuisance for you KYS