Is there a loss of meaning in photographs?

Slidinginfinity

I have notice lately that with the loss of the print and the prolific nature of them these days (cheap digital cameras and mobile phones) the majority of people have lost how important snapshots are to the future. I love the snapshots of my Dad far more then the shots when he knew he was being photographed. These evoke memories that I had all but forgotten.

Have people gotten so over saturated with photos and videos they have lost the meaning of what these images represent?

pixbyjohn

A printed photo is so much more than viewing on a screen. I always think a photo becomes prescious 50 years or so after it is taken.

AnCatDubh

perhaps, familiarity breads contempt.

I mean maybe because of the proliferation of things that take images and produce jpgs (often referred to as phones) being so commonplace, that the desirability of actual thought or skilful photography suffers. It may not necessarily be a bad thing but the family albums of the future are being formed today for the majority (of those who would be of a kind of taking photographs) on mobile phones, the instagrams, the EyeEm's, the facebooks, and if we're honest about it, much of which is absolutely dire.

That said the fluke image, the one in a million that someone takes on their phone which is really special can be very worthwhile.

But I agree that the world now views photography differently. Maybe that's a loss of meaning, or maybe its a democratisation of the photograph itself - a disruptive force in traditional views and consideration of what photography is. Photography's own occupy movement perhaps.

Zombrex

Slidinginfinity wrote: »

I have notice lately that with the loss of the print and the prolific nature of them these days (cheap digital cameras and mobile phones) the majority of people have lost how important snapshots are to the future. I love the snapshots of my Dad far more then the shots when he knew he was being photographed. These evoke memories that I had all but forgotten.

Have people gotten so over saturated with photos and videos they have lost the meaning of what these images represent?

This has always been the case with something that becomes mass media.

It always takes a while for society to catch up after new methods of media creation/consumption are opened up to people. The old rules transfer over and take a while to adjust. So we are going through a period now where everyone things merely taking a photo and putting it up on the web some how means they are published photographer.

You notice the same thing blogging or self publishing of novels. Because we have been conditioned to think that having a public voice means something in terms of quality, we get quiet worked up, often outraged when we see someone blogging something we don't agree with. Where as if it was a person on the street standing on a soap box we wouldn't think twice.

Eventually society catches up. These days no one things being able to write with pen and paper means you are saying something interesting or important. Nor do we think that being able to record you voice means that you can sing (which hopefully will be a lesson soon learned in relation to YouTube )

As society moves through this transition phase the novelty factor will wear off. I've actually noticed a drop in the online activity of my friends, many of who when they first got digital cameras would upload EVERYTHING to the internet and share EVERYTHING. These days though they do that a lot less, because when the novelty has worn off they simply can't be bothered uploaded that photo of their fingers to Facebook.