[Leica] Re: 4/3 cameras NOW STUDENTS USE?

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant)]

Philippe Amard offered:
> Ted,
>
> I don't want to be offensive and you know it Mon Ami, cher Ami. :-)
> But kids are used to different perspectives (cartoons have helped) , to a 
> different sense of composition (digital age),  and I'm sure they never 
> heard or refer to our standards - who among the generations have heard 
> abbout Kertesz, Nadar, Smith, Sudek or Evans to name but a few?
>
> Everything in there is cultural.
>
> I really wonder what or who Chinese photographers refer to today ...
> In earnest<<<<

Bon jour Philippe,
No offence taken. :-)

My interest was tweaked by Didier Ludwig when he said:

> The younger generation (which is probably more talented as we are, because 
> photographing is much more common today and kids start much earlier to 
> shoot) does less care about a red dot on a camera, though I have noticed a 
> certain interest for exotic gear amongst my students. <<

Which begs to be asked. Are younger "photographers" as Didier says...>.kids 
start much earlier to shoot) <<  certainly due to digital camera basic 
simplicity of look at screen, it looks OK... click!" ??? Are they 
photographers? Or are they going to become better shooters?

Or are they evolving into "electronic image makers" without thought to 
light, composition, subject, action and many other things we put into 
deciding whether it'll be a good photograph when we .... "click?"  That 
which we learned with film.

I realize the attention of so many young folks is locked into the technology 
of what's on the screens of gadgets..... ipods, computers, idiot tv-video 
games and heaven knows what else. But due to this instant everything, do 
they really see a photographic quality as we do? Not that we're the be all 
to end all at times.

I doubt they care about a red dot or many things from the "ancient past" of 
photography and photographers, sure some will. But on the whole those who've 
become "photographers" because of the digital mania. How many realize 
there's far more to photography than the bright screen held at arms length?

Next month I'm giving a presentation to a very large group of photo folks, 
... "Digital photography, ease up on the numbers! The essence of photography 
has not changed!"

I see so many digital pictures published and the "happy snaps" of many that 
appear to have no given thought to the aesthetics of photography in making a 
good picture. I fear we may see a great loss of quality photography simply 
because the "image making" has become an automatic action of what's on the 
screen at arms length. And without thought for a beautiful photograph. 
"Click! look, delete, click again!"........ all without a thought of what 
makes a good photograph good or not!"

Hopefully I'm wrong. Any thoughts ?

ted