Re: [Leica] What, me worry?

["Dan Post" <dpost@triad.rr.com>]

Donal-
Imeant no personal jab there, but I can attest to the change of technology
causing changes in careers, being retired early from my own!
I am afraid that a lot of photographers are going to go the way of buggy
whip makers, and Dauguerrotypists- it is regretable, but unforunately, a
fact of life. I am certain, however, that Harrison, and Ted can tell you
that there may still be 'niche' markets for some types of photography, but
with the ubiquity of  video and digital cameras in the world today-
everybody is becoming a 'photographer'
I personally have not had to depend on photography for any income for years,
and I am out of touch with the 'plight' of photographers, particularly
photojournalists, but I am sure that as a medium of expression, that
photography will have a place for many years to come-
Why do I say this? well, when Niepce and Dauguerre came along back a while
ago, everyone thought painting was dead- a new means of imaging had arrived-
but even here in North Carolina, there are several artists, including the
more or less famous Bob Timberlake, who still paint with some success-
Artists are still chipping and scratching rocks to create artisitc
expressions, even 30K years after the works found in the caves of
Lasceaux(??).
Sure, it ain't gonna be easy, but then, what is Jim Brick gonna do when the
technology if CCD imaging becomes obsolete?
I still relish the feel of developer, and the slick feel of a wet print- I
still get a thrill seeing that image come up, and even though I use the
scanners, and inkjet printer, there is still the joy of creating somethiung
unique. I am sure that there will be those who will patronize the
photographic arts, just as the others have been supported after all these
years of advancement. I know in our lifetimes, the 'short run' seems like an
age, but I think that the well made artisitc efforts of phjotographers will
be more greatly appreciated- especially as more and more people find out- it
ain't as easy as it looks!!! I hope and pray that the editors and bean
counters will eventually come to realize this- the demise of Life magazine
is indicative of this- and a well read (wo)man can not live by paparazzi
fodder alone!
Cheers, and good luck- best of light to you!
Dan
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Donal Philby" <donalphilby@earthlink.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 10:59 AM
Subject: [Leica] What, me worry?


> Dan Post opinned, relative to Gates and god:
>
> >I may be missing something, but why all the razzing on ole Bill? I have
better things to worry about! We all do!
> SNIP
> > Most of what we take for granted now is the result of man's efforts in
the last few centuries, and I don't think in the long run that a man like
Bill Gates, or Bill Clinton will make all that much difference in what we
can and will become!
>
> Dan,
> Those of us who work to make a living at commercial and editorial
> photography DO have to worry.  Those of you who appreciate what
> photography does in recording history should be worrying too.
>
> But bottom line of the "New" economic model is to discourage
> photographers from making a living.  I can no longer recommend, unless a
> person is independently wealthy, a carrer in photography.
>
> It comes down to this:  Publications, including newspapers and magazines
> (and book publishers, too) used to be run by people with a passion for
> what they did.  Their decisions were balanced between making money and
> doing service.  My father was a case in point.  He mostly worked on
> small newspapers.  He said he believed that small towns deserved the
> same quality of journalism as large ones, and he lived his beliefs.
> Today, most publications are owned by corporations whose moral direction
> is governed by attorneys and accountants and boards of directors
> responsible not to readers, but to stockholders and other corporations
> in the conglomerate.
>
> The same conditions have taken over the stock photo business.  I've seen
> the attitudes of editors at stock agencies change dramatically over the
> last few years.  Most agencies (according to what I read and numerous
> conversations with photographers) now consider photographers a bit of a
> bother, and make editorial decisions that can make or break careers on
> what seems like whimsy, and care little for the photographers except as
> they are sheep for the slaughter, only caring for the agency and the
> stockholders.
>
> The commercial agency behavior won't affect the lives of most people,
> but the effect on editorial photography affects us all.  The agencies,
> with brutally lopsided contracts they are trying to strong arm
> photographers into signing, will leave few photographers with the
> wherewithall or incentive to do what they do best:  record history,
> confronting all of us with the consequences of our actions (good and
> bad) and creating work that is more than just the commercial-like
> assignments promoting pop culture or other business interests.
>
> ol' Bill doesn't have a social conscience.  Do you want him in charge of
> the information flow?  The irony for me is that what the corporate
> agencies are doing may not be in their own best long term interests.  Do
> you save money by not putting enough oil in the car??  How smart is
> that?
>
> The deeper fear, of course, is that we are developing eccentially a
> corporate-run media.  In some ways this is even more dangerous than
> something like TASS or other state-run media, in that the appearance is
> of a free press with a free flow of information.
>
> Corbis and Getty that now have merged commercial and editorial identies,
> mimicing the merger of entertainment, news and corporate corporate
> interests in the media and blurring the line between news gathering and
> advertising.
>
> Am I crying wolf?  I think we should be crying Tyrantasaurus-Rex.
> Either way, we are being eaten like sheep.
>
> On the other hand, you can just go along, entertained by all those
> generic eye-candy pictures, and say, "what, me worry?"
>
> donal
>
> __________
> Donal Philby
> San Diego
> www.donalphilby.com
>
>