Thanks for sharing those thoughts! I'm not too far off in your thinking and your frameshift to making art for yourself. I freely admit I have never had to rely on my art as an income source, but I have definitely been consumed by the social media monster in driving my creative spirit. Until now. I recently read Rick Rubin's new book, The Creative Act. The point is, if you create something and like it, success has been found. That doesn't answer the question of income, but I do recommend that book to you.
Hey Patrick, great to hear you think similarly! Yeah, look, if I had to rely on my photography as a means of making money, it'd be a whole different story. I've actually got that book on my "want to read" list, I'm after a mindset change and The Creative Act sounds like it'll help me achieve that!
what do i think? i think you should do the experiment without even thinking at the results. do it as in "i created something that is important to me even if nobody reads it". rant as much as you want about social media (i love that and that's why i got the like of this post) but don't forget to post an image from time to time.
😂I’m a little late to the party, seeing this for the first time in my notes feed today. You’re so right though, I was nod-reading the whole time. I don’t have the heart to content-create, and so I keep stacking up photography that sees little light-of-day as I keep trying different ways to connect with an audience that shares an interest in how I see the world - capturing moments of connection in nature and everyday life. There’s a kind of stubborn optimism about having that core artistic vision, though - while my logical mind keeps sighing “Pointless” my artist mind keeps responding brightly “But maybe…!”
I have similar feelings about content-ification of photography (art in general). For me it’s an extension of how our society/capitalism treats art/creativity. They are products to be sold (for likes or cash) instead of experiences to have.
This is a wonderful essay. We have feared new technology going way back in time. That is where the term Luddite comes from. I’m not skeptical. If we don’t kill ourselves first we could have a magnificent future. Well that’s my opinion or my hope. Anyway, great essay
I think because technology is evolving so rapidly, it's difficult for us to understand what is and isn't harmful — like how smoking cigarettes was "healthy"! But I think this tech change has a deeper meaning for me in that it is directly affecting my art form, and I don't like that, and therefore I feel myself rejecting the tech itself. Which is neither right nor wrong. But it's cool to see how things can change in real time. Thanks for your comment!
Yep - AI is here and people who use it create images NOT photography! All well and good but as a number of people have said on the thread, creativity is compromised by social media. I’m old and came from a world of film & darkroom chemicals. I also happened to be working for a multinational, Ford motor Co and became an early programmer using Fortran, remember that! In later life I gave all that up and I worked as a pro photographer until that died because everyone has a phone camera, blah blah blah! So now I have a website, easy with AI templates for my personal stuff and for my creative juices......
This is your area of expertise and I bow to you. But how can social media and AI replace real artistry which conveys feelings and emotions? But you know more about this than I do.😀
I don't think AI can replace either, but the untrained eye doesn't always know when an image is AI. I see people posting AI images of birds and other wildlife that I know are straight up AI, but other people say, "Oh isn't that a cute bird," etc.
I personally think AI has a big market in royalty free/stock images. If a marketing agency can use AI tools to create imagery, that's far more cost effective than hiring a photographer. I'm not convinced AI will replace the artistic side of photography. However in saying that, the Head On festival in Sydney has allowed AI photographs in their competition this year. I'm not sure how to feel about it. It doesn't sit right with me.
"Art is still art, even if no-one sees it. Art is the act of going through with an idea, whether it fails or not."
I'm not sure how I feel about this. I've been an actor in another life and I can assure you that doing Hamlet's soliloquy alone in your living room eventually stops feeling like Art.
Personally I think art is the act of making something meaningful AND having at least one single person learn/live/escape/whatever verb/ thanks to it. It's like the act of love, you need two people. It needs to link.
And that's what makes what you are describing in your post so difficult. The way things are set up these days, if you are not someone famous's son/daughter or incredibly lucky, you've got to grind at least a minimum of audience to have your art exist as a link. And that means waving frantically at the edge of whatever saturated industry you're in. And of course people much better than you at yelling will drown you. At first. Hopefully :)
Let me know if Substack is worth it, I'm also new around here.
I have no idea if it is worth it. I think my writing matters to me for me, but (having been an actor much of my life) I relate very strongly to the need to be witnessed in the act. I have little to no idea if people are reading my work and if they are, what they think. The stats can tell you something, but not all the things, and best I can hope is there is a trickling out of help and hope. I know I don’t comment on every blog I read, perhaps I should do more of that. The impact matters, but the instinct to write matters more, I think.
I love this quote: "...creating has become less about personal pleasure and more about recognition and validation. And that’s dangerous for our art form."
I count myself as fortunate to have grown up without social media until well into my adults years. I've found myself going back and forth about using social media and my photography hobby. I'm trying to pare down to the essentials and still struggle.
Your point about creating art for personal pleasure vs recognition and validation is spot on. Prior to photography, WAY, WAY back in the day I used to simply draw and sketch for the the fun of it. I never cared if anyone even saw it.
I've been trying to find a medium to get back that pleasure from art creation. Dabbling in poetry & Nature photography seems to be my own sweet spot.
Amen. I detest the term ‘content’ - it feels like you’re just shoveling crap instead of creating. Also +1 on the Rick Rubin book. It’s worth reading and re-reading.
Here is my take as a writer who hates Instagram: the instant gratification of social media has huge impacts on both writers and photographers.
Let's take a photo essay as an example, pictures produced by famous Chinese photographer like Lu Guang might not have a good exposure on social media. And his photos need so much context to understand what he presents. I saw his photos in a documentary photo book at an exhibition and was so moved how he portrays the lives of workers, in decaying and creating the world at the same time. If I see those pictures on Instagram, I clicked like and move on. The quick response quick validation fails to give the audience a chance and time to rest and think in every detail of the photo, which was created out of harsh labor that both the photographer and his subjects experienced. That is the loss of swiping and snapping.
I realize that I enjoy so much when I read a documentary photo book, while I just feel irritated or excited when using Instagram. Or it is the set of emotions we are supposed to feel with different kind of medium.
I think it is a work process to take a good photo and even more work to take a good photo essay. While it is so cheap and easy to publish on social media, it devalues the extend of work that a photographer has to spend to create the photo.
Moreover, the social media needs it fast, so fast, that you don't have time to care for your photos because they are already flooded by millions of other photos. How sad to see beautiful works fade away and selfies take over every second of swiping.
No problem with making 'art' "for my eyes only" but it seems that could quickly slip into solipsism (say that fast three times). Substack posts demand coherent expression of substantive ideas (unless you're just posting a portfolio of pix) and the connection between creator and audience, even if small, is a crucial part of connecting us to one another. Of course, algorithms just can't seem to resist the temptation of manipulating us, it seems to be baked-in (and I know nothing about algorithms). What I like about Substack is that it's a return to longer-form writing that can include images and links. fB & IG can do this but I don't like the (overt) manipulation. Perhaps Substack is also manipulating but at least one can speak more freely without the awful "badges" places on every other social media post.
That’s a photo of "our" Wanaka tree, after her bottom right branch was broken off in an act of vandalism. She never used to be famous. She was just a beautiful tree. In the same way the outcrop on Roy’s Peak has become world famous for the photo opportunity. No sacred appreciation of the view without having to post on social media. The walk now like a busy mindless highway. “In a world where all it takes is one viral post or video to get famous, we seem to have lost focus of what really matters and why we view creativity as an outlet, not as a money-and-fame-maker.” Beautiful places in the world suffer from this. Our town is looking carefully at how we manage this and protect our beautiful natural environment. Thanks for the post. Jo.
As someone who also writes a Substack on photography, I appreciate your thoughtful post.
The commodification of content in the attention economy can be seen as one result of the commodification of just about everything, including all experiences and all personal relationships.
Only a few years separated the release of the first graphical browser (Mosaic, in 1993 — it’s creator, Marc Andreessen later co-founded Netscape) and the privatisation of the backbone of the Internet under the Clinton administration. For a brief period, the internet was a public space free of commercial entities and commercial content.
Under Neoliberalism (we can think of other labels to describe aspects of our current condition that are as invisible to us as water is to fish), nothing has value unless it has financial value. Even play and personal expression can be commodified (remember paying for furni to impress your friends in Habo Hotel?).
I’m going to stop now before my comment exceeds the length of your essay. This is your space. I have a habit of talking too much when I should be listening more (spot the former academic).
Thanks for sharing those thoughts! I'm not too far off in your thinking and your frameshift to making art for yourself. I freely admit I have never had to rely on my art as an income source, but I have definitely been consumed by the social media monster in driving my creative spirit. Until now. I recently read Rick Rubin's new book, The Creative Act. The point is, if you create something and like it, success has been found. That doesn't answer the question of income, but I do recommend that book to you.
Hey Patrick, great to hear you think similarly! Yeah, look, if I had to rely on my photography as a means of making money, it'd be a whole different story. I've actually got that book on my "want to read" list, I'm after a mindset change and The Creative Act sounds like it'll help me achieve that!
It will!
what do i think? i think you should do the experiment without even thinking at the results. do it as in "i created something that is important to me even if nobody reads it". rant as much as you want about social media (i love that and that's why i got the like of this post) but don't forget to post an image from time to time.
Well I think I’m on the right track then! Several rambles and one photo essay are now posted 🤠 Thanks for the kind comment!
‘Art is still art even if nobody sees it’ ... wise words ... thanks for sharing
😂I’m a little late to the party, seeing this for the first time in my notes feed today. You’re so right though, I was nod-reading the whole time. I don’t have the heart to content-create, and so I keep stacking up photography that sees little light-of-day as I keep trying different ways to connect with an audience that shares an interest in how I see the world - capturing moments of connection in nature and everyday life. There’s a kind of stubborn optimism about having that core artistic vision, though - while my logical mind keeps sighing “Pointless” my artist mind keeps responding brightly “But maybe…!”
I have similar feelings about content-ification of photography (art in general). For me it’s an extension of how our society/capitalism treats art/creativity. They are products to be sold (for likes or cash) instead of experiences to have.
Yes that is sadly true
This is a wonderful essay. We have feared new technology going way back in time. That is where the term Luddite comes from. I’m not skeptical. If we don’t kill ourselves first we could have a magnificent future. Well that’s my opinion or my hope. Anyway, great essay
I think because technology is evolving so rapidly, it's difficult for us to understand what is and isn't harmful — like how smoking cigarettes was "healthy"! But I think this tech change has a deeper meaning for me in that it is directly affecting my art form, and I don't like that, and therefore I feel myself rejecting the tech itself. Which is neither right nor wrong. But it's cool to see how things can change in real time. Thanks for your comment!
That Socrates quote was mind blowing hahahahah
great post! Social media has killed many things, including photography stars. AI is the next thing coming for photographers.
Yep - AI is here and people who use it create images NOT photography! All well and good but as a number of people have said on the thread, creativity is compromised by social media. I’m old and came from a world of film & darkroom chemicals. I also happened to be working for a multinational, Ford motor Co and became an early programmer using Fortran, remember that! In later life I gave all that up and I worked as a pro photographer until that died because everyone has a phone camera, blah blah blah! So now I have a website, easy with AI templates for my personal stuff and for my creative juices......
This is your area of expertise and I bow to you. But how can social media and AI replace real artistry which conveys feelings and emotions? But you know more about this than I do.😀
I don't think AI can replace either, but the untrained eye doesn't always know when an image is AI. I see people posting AI images of birds and other wildlife that I know are straight up AI, but other people say, "Oh isn't that a cute bird," etc.
I personally think AI has a big market in royalty free/stock images. If a marketing agency can use AI tools to create imagery, that's far more cost effective than hiring a photographer. I'm not convinced AI will replace the artistic side of photography. However in saying that, the Head On festival in Sydney has allowed AI photographs in their competition this year. I'm not sure how to feel about it. It doesn't sit right with me.
The market for royalty free/stock images is already saturated.
I agree I see what you mean
"Art is still art, even if no-one sees it. Art is the act of going through with an idea, whether it fails or not."
I'm not sure how I feel about this. I've been an actor in another life and I can assure you that doing Hamlet's soliloquy alone in your living room eventually stops feeling like Art.
Personally I think art is the act of making something meaningful AND having at least one single person learn/live/escape/whatever verb/ thanks to it. It's like the act of love, you need two people. It needs to link.
And that's what makes what you are describing in your post so difficult. The way things are set up these days, if you are not someone famous's son/daughter or incredibly lucky, you've got to grind at least a minimum of audience to have your art exist as a link. And that means waving frantically at the edge of whatever saturated industry you're in. And of course people much better than you at yelling will drown you. At first. Hopefully :)
Let me know if Substack is worth it, I'm also new around here.
I have no idea if it is worth it. I think my writing matters to me for me, but (having been an actor much of my life) I relate very strongly to the need to be witnessed in the act. I have little to no idea if people are reading my work and if they are, what they think. The stats can tell you something, but not all the things, and best I can hope is there is a trickling out of help and hope. I know I don’t comment on every blog I read, perhaps I should do more of that. The impact matters, but the instinct to write matters more, I think.
I love this quote: "...creating has become less about personal pleasure and more about recognition and validation. And that’s dangerous for our art form."
I count myself as fortunate to have grown up without social media until well into my adults years. I've found myself going back and forth about using social media and my photography hobby. I'm trying to pare down to the essentials and still struggle.
Your point about creating art for personal pleasure vs recognition and validation is spot on. Prior to photography, WAY, WAY back in the day I used to simply draw and sketch for the the fun of it. I never cared if anyone even saw it.
I've been trying to find a medium to get back that pleasure from art creation. Dabbling in poetry & Nature photography seems to be my own sweet spot.
I love this so much! I guess this is exactly why so many of us came to Substack!
Amen. I detest the term ‘content’ - it feels like you’re just shoveling crap instead of creating. Also +1 on the Rick Rubin book. It’s worth reading and re-reading.
Here is my take as a writer who hates Instagram: the instant gratification of social media has huge impacts on both writers and photographers.
Let's take a photo essay as an example, pictures produced by famous Chinese photographer like Lu Guang might not have a good exposure on social media. And his photos need so much context to understand what he presents. I saw his photos in a documentary photo book at an exhibition and was so moved how he portrays the lives of workers, in decaying and creating the world at the same time. If I see those pictures on Instagram, I clicked like and move on. The quick response quick validation fails to give the audience a chance and time to rest and think in every detail of the photo, which was created out of harsh labor that both the photographer and his subjects experienced. That is the loss of swiping and snapping.
I realize that I enjoy so much when I read a documentary photo book, while I just feel irritated or excited when using Instagram. Or it is the set of emotions we are supposed to feel with different kind of medium.
I think it is a work process to take a good photo and even more work to take a good photo essay. While it is so cheap and easy to publish on social media, it devalues the extend of work that a photographer has to spend to create the photo.
Moreover, the social media needs it fast, so fast, that you don't have time to care for your photos because they are already flooded by millions of other photos. How sad to see beautiful works fade away and selfies take over every second of swiping.
No problem with making 'art' "for my eyes only" but it seems that could quickly slip into solipsism (say that fast three times). Substack posts demand coherent expression of substantive ideas (unless you're just posting a portfolio of pix) and the connection between creator and audience, even if small, is a crucial part of connecting us to one another. Of course, algorithms just can't seem to resist the temptation of manipulating us, it seems to be baked-in (and I know nothing about algorithms). What I like about Substack is that it's a return to longer-form writing that can include images and links. fB & IG can do this but I don't like the (overt) manipulation. Perhaps Substack is also manipulating but at least one can speak more freely without the awful "badges" places on every other social media post.
That’s a photo of "our" Wanaka tree, after her bottom right branch was broken off in an act of vandalism. She never used to be famous. She was just a beautiful tree. In the same way the outcrop on Roy’s Peak has become world famous for the photo opportunity. No sacred appreciation of the view without having to post on social media. The walk now like a busy mindless highway. “In a world where all it takes is one viral post or video to get famous, we seem to have lost focus of what really matters and why we view creativity as an outlet, not as a money-and-fame-maker.” Beautiful places in the world suffer from this. Our town is looking carefully at how we manage this and protect our beautiful natural environment. Thanks for the post. Jo.
As someone who also writes a Substack on photography, I appreciate your thoughtful post.
The commodification of content in the attention economy can be seen as one result of the commodification of just about everything, including all experiences and all personal relationships.
Only a few years separated the release of the first graphical browser (Mosaic, in 1993 — it’s creator, Marc Andreessen later co-founded Netscape) and the privatisation of the backbone of the Internet under the Clinton administration. For a brief period, the internet was a public space free of commercial entities and commercial content.
Under Neoliberalism (we can think of other labels to describe aspects of our current condition that are as invisible to us as water is to fish), nothing has value unless it has financial value. Even play and personal expression can be commodified (remember paying for furni to impress your friends in Habo Hotel?).
I’m going to stop now before my comment exceeds the length of your essay. This is your space. I have a habit of talking too much when I should be listening more (spot the former academic).