The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Is it just me?

jerome_m

Member
Concerning your analysis of the different professionals relationship to the Internet, you may be right, but why is it important ?
I believe the various business plans explain why forums have lost traction. Forums are essentially a flat hierarchy and that is important to their correct functioning. Forums are also dependent of a steady influx of new members and they don't have that any more because other venues are more attractive opportunities to the "new pros". Forums are dependent on people "giving back", as Guy noted. The business plans of the new types of photographers prevent them from "giving back". These new business practices are dependent on a strict separation between "pros" and "followers". One does not "give back" to one "followers", one manages them as a resource.

Ask yourself why everyone on "photo feeds" appears to be a "professional". Maybe you don't know about it, but there is a whole industry of fake magazines, vanity galleries, fake diplomas, fake internet storefronts and fake followers sold by the thousands. Now, these cost money. Ask yourself how that investment is supposed to repay itself.

I talk about photography and/or show my pictures with those who care/want, whether they are amateurs, enthusiast or professional doesn't really matter for me, as long as they share interesting information or content. Professionals owe nothing to us amateurs; they owe something to their clients. A good info is a good info, a good discussion a good discussion, whoever the participant is.
Certainly, but that is not what is discussed here.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I believe the various business plans explain why forums have lost traction. Forums are essentially a flat hierarchy and that is important to their correct functioning. Forums are also dependent of a steady influx of new members and they don't have that any more because other venues are more attractive opportunities to the "new pros". Forums are dependent on people "giving back", as Guy noted. The business plans of the new types of photographers prevent them from "giving back". These new business practices are dependent on a strict separation between "pros" and "followers". One does not "give back" to one "followers", one manages them as a resource.

Ask yourself why everyone on "photo feeds" appears to be a "professional". Maybe you don't know about it, but there is a whole industry of fake magazines, vanity galleries, fake diplomas, fake internet storefronts and fake followers sold by the thousands. Now, these cost money. Ask yourself how that investment is supposed to repay itself.
While some of the descriptions you have given of various types of "Pros" may be true in a populist manner, I feel the conclusions you draw are at best cynical, even somewhat naive.

Rather than parse each one, I would just comment on one I know something about, and say that a "Photographic Fine Artist" faces the same path any Fine Artist working in medium may face: to consistently explore a visual philosophy. How successful one may be at that impacts whether they become recognized.

Cindy Sherman is a successful Fine Artist whose medium is photography. She followed the path of any fine artists with an artist's intent, execution, and showing work to get exposure with the right curators and critics. The "Gallery Curator" you mention is right about mixing with non-artist. Cindy Sherman did not "arrive" in the Art world via photo forum postings, or "exhibiting" work at art fairs.

Uninformed populist opinion, and the masses do not determine Art, and Art cannot be confused with artful decoration. It is Elitist with a defined purpose, which has always irritated the populist observer.

RE Forum participation:

I don't find the notion that it must be so called "Pros" giving back to be an underlying reason that forum participation thrives or declines.

Rather than tag folks as Amateurs verses Pros, I think "Enthusiasts" the better term.

IMO, GetDpi is primarily an "Enthusiasts" forum made up of varying degrees of experience and talent … from beginners to pros and everything in-between.

Placing "work first" is simple on GetDpi … subscribe to the fun with threads and get e-mail notifications … or go straight to "What's New" and scroll for the image posts. I do not care what was used to do it, I'm interested in content and artistic execution.

GetDpi may fluctuate, but it keeps on truckin' … for example, just when you think it is getting stale, along comes an exuberant personality like Lucille, who lives her be-bop passion and makes it the subject of her photographic affection.

Like Guy, I subscribe to the "Pay It Forward" notion and try to help when I can based on experience. However, there are other ways to do this, like seminars, taking on apprentices, sponsoring an emerging talent, and so on. There need not be a reward for these efforts other than … paying it forward out of respect to those who helped me along the way.

Also, like Guy, I cannot show a vast majority of current pro work due to non-disclosure agreements. I'm shooting 2018 accessories for GM, and nothing I ever shot for Unilever could be made public by me because they control exposure, not vendors. I had 4 spreads in Fortune Magazine for a national client I've never been allowed to make public because it was a buy-out and the client doesn't want it plastered all over the web out of their control.

BTW, previous work I did was lifted by a foreign photographer and used on their web-site … so Guy's caution regarding theft is a real one.

- Marc
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I love the Hasselblad X1D announcement. Great tool for those who would appreciate it. :thumbs:
 

jerome_m

Member
While some of the descriptions you have given of various types of "Pros" may be true in a populist manner, I feel the conclusions you draw are at best cynical, even somewhat naive.
Probably yes. It is a complex subject, too complex to be explored in a few forum posts probably.

Rather than parse each one, I would just comment on one I know something about, and say that a "Photographic Fine Artist" faces the same path any Fine Artist working in medium may face: to consistently explore a visual philosophy. How successful one may be at that impacts whether they become recognized.

Cindy Sherman is a successful Fine Artist whose medium is photography. She followed the path of any fine artists with an artist's intent, execution, and showing work to get exposure with the right curators and critics. The "Gallery Curator" you mention is right about mixing with non-artist. Cindy Sherman did not "arrive" in the Art world via photo forum postings, or "exhibiting" work at art fairs.

Uninformed populist opinion, and the masses do not determine Art, and Art cannot be confused with artful decoration. It is Elitist with a defined purpose, which has always irritated the populist observer.
Cindy Sherman rose to fame around 1975-1980. I don't think her career is relevant to what present aspiring "artists" are doing in social networks today.

As to "art" versus "artful decoration", visual philosophy, etc... I generally agree on the principles. I would even agree that "artists", of the sort defined by having their works hanging in museums and presented in course books, are generally close to your description.

But I think we don't quite understand each other because we are not quite talking about the same thing. I am talking about a fairly recent phenomenon linked to the internet, definitely "populist" in your own words and which calls itself "art" and its producers "artists". Probably the word "artist" is abused, but I am at loss for another term.

RE Forum participation:

I don't find the notion that it must be so called "Pros" giving back to be an underlying reason that forum participation thrives or declines.

Rather than tag folks as Amateurs verses Pros, I think "Enthusiasts" the better term.

IMO, GetDpi is primarily an "Enthusiasts" forum made up of varying degrees of experience and talent … from beginners to pros and everything in-between.
I agree on the word "enthusiast", it is a better description. But what is your explanation about declining forum participation on all internet forums?
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Barry, Your idea about mirroring- only in the recent times I discovered that most who post (PICTURES) here also post on fredmiranda. Out of that a significant number has stopped posting here but continue to do so on FM.

Mirroring occurs no need to double it, IMO. :LOL:
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I also rely on "New Posts" of this Forum to see a large number of images from cameras I don't ever intend to acquire.

BTW, many folks seem to completely miss out on images that were taken with MFT gear. Their loss I suppose. :facesmack:
 

pegelli

Well-known member
BTW, many folks seem to completely miss out on images that were taken with MFT gear. Their loss I suppose. :facesmack:
Agree K-H, some of the work posted there is first rate as well.

Certainly my loss for earlier, but the good fortune of the Sony forum getting a lot more quiet is that I discovered the "what's new" feature which actually gives me more diversity in pictures to look at here then I had before :thumbup:
 
V

Vivek

Guest
But what is your explanation about declining forum participation on all internet forums?
I have a theory. Many that just typed in a photographic forum (because they were the first ones to offer any outlet for expression on the net) found other avenues. Every newspaper offers the possibility to comment on every article (pretty much). Even online dictionaries allow for this possibility.

I was looking up an archaic English word used by Huylyss in a post (X1D) and was amazed at the number of comments.

Take look (at the comments):

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sapient
 

Barry Haines

Active member
Barry, Your idea about mirroring- only in the recent times I discovered that most who post (PICTURES) here also post on fredmiranda. Out of that a significant number has stopped posting here but continue to do so on FM.

Mirroring occurs no need to double it, IMO. :LOL:
Hi Vivek, I'm well aware of what you are saying and don't disagree, as I'm a member over on FM......But I do seem to spend most of my free time over here nowadays.
Due to my time constraints, I really can't afford to be checking out FM as well for any non mirrored images that are not showing up here ;)
Personally speaking I'm not really fussed one way or the other if changes are made or if things just stay the way they are...It's Admins call at the end of the day!
I was just trying to come up with what I thought would be a solution that would keep everybody happy :)
My thinking was naturally flawed because I forgot that you can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time :(
 
V

Vivek

Guest
My goodness, Barry! There is no right or wrong. I was just pointing out (what I thought was) obvious.
 

jerome_m

Member
I have a theory. Many that just typed in a photographic forum (because they were the first ones to offer any outlet for expression on the net) found other avenues. Every newspaper offers the possibility to comment on every article (pretty much). Even online dictionaries allow for this possibility.
There is some truth in that. dpreview (the photo site) wrote at some point that the comments on their articles compensate partially for the lost forum activity.
 

Barry Haines

Active member
My goodness, Barry! There is no right or wrong. I was just pointing out (what I thought was) obvious.
Of course their is right and wrong :confused: All I was doing was agreeing with you!
I should have obviously added...you can't please some people "ANY" of the time.
Thx for pointing out your recent "obvious" discovery :ROTFL:
 

Michiel Schierbeek

Well-known member
I have a theory. Many that just typed in a photographic forum (because they were the first ones to offer any outlet for expression on the net) found other avenues. Every newspaper offers the possibility to comment on every article (pretty much). Even online dictionaries allow for this possibility.

I was looking up an archaic English word used by Huylyss in a post (X1D) and was amazed at the number of comments.

Take look (at the comments):

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sapient
At least we are all homo sapiens. I f we are all sapient is another question :lecture:
 
Top