Are Selfies Killing Photography?

[Ryewolf]

This is something I've noticed over the last few years, no matter were I go, it seems like all the younger phone camera generation are more interested in getting their fizzog in front of whatever is happening to post on social media than actually taking a photograph.... I don't know if this is a generational thing, I had film cameras and you waited a week or more before you got the results, plus no internet or social networks to post too instantly.....So you actually had to make an effort so that the image you took was usable...No chimping or getting it redone in seconds. and the photographer was rarely in the shot taken.

Most of the photographers I see have all reached a certain age, they're usually middle-aged - myself included - but they very rarely are including themselves in the shot they're taking. I do infrequently see younger people with actual proper cameras, rather than the ubiquitous phone... I often wonder if we're losing out on recording what life and our surroundings is actually like . A picture is still a picture, but digital is lost if you haven't the means to show it to anyone.

A good example was the old photographs of the Loch Katrine aqueduct being built...

[johntwo]

Selfies are photography.  I suspect that the real question is whether smartphones will kill photography as we know it.  Smartphones already have zoom capability, excellent I.Q. and I note that this week one model is now offering variable DOF via it's software.  What next??

[Hatter]

Depends what you look like, I suppose... selfies of me would definitely kill photography!

I think it's an "I was there" statement.  The back-cameras on phones allow you to frame the shot and still be in it - something that can't be done with a "proper" camera.

[Denis]

The amount of photographs taken and hosted on social media sites just goes to show that photography is alive and well....it is just evolving.

[Ryewolf]

1 hour ago, Hatter said:

"I was there" statement

For me this is the main problem, I see it as a form of narcissism and self-objectification purely done for social media gratification, there's no interest in what they're photographing as long as their fizzog is in the centre of it and they probably forget about that image the moment it's uploaded to whatever social media other than checking how many likes or thumbs up they get.

There's no real thought behind the image, it requires no skill or eye for composition, the background - no matter what, becomes secondary to the "I was there" ideology.

[FUJI]

I don’t think that Selfies are killing photography, because those taking the photographs are not...Photographers..... they are the equivalent of the pre-digital...SNAPPERS...just everyday folk using any kind of camera, picture quality, composition or post processing mean nothing to them, so in the main they can be ignored... that isn’t saying that everyone using a phone as a camera can’t be a....Photographer.... who uses it as his/her. camera to hand at the time.

What the age of selfies has done is to desensitise a vast number of the general public from really.....SEEING....a Photograph or any other work of Art....

This is why, we who are....Photographers....using decent cameras, and knowing our stuff should actively attempt to get the younger generations interested.

I was more than pleased the other day when a very young lass serving coffee in COSTA told me she was going to do photography at University and had a Darkroom for developing film at home.

It’s  all very similar, I guess to....me choosing to paint and to draw digitally on my iPad Pro....to .....using my real Watercolour paints and brushes?

FUJI

[Denis]

12 hours ago, Denis said:

The amount of photographs taken and hosted on social media sites just goes to show that photography is alive and well....it is just evolving.

For clarification,when I said this I didn't mean selfies..of which I find are totally ridiculous, but general images of landscapes and architecture that are posted online !

we have two local facebook pages for natural beauty and the town then and now, most are phone photos, some are from normal DSLR type cameras, these I quite like and I think the good photos are inspiration for many younger people to get started in photography. That's got to be a good thing right?

[johntwo]

I'm not sure how selfies are that different to say our parent's generation taking photographs of themselves with a Box Brownie except that technology has made it possible for the photographer ( I use the term loosely) to be included in the final result.  The problem I see is in the intrusive and sometimes obstructive behaviour that the activity seems to engender, for instance in the disregard (on occasion but not always), of the enjoyment of others. Real photographers aren't immune either as can generally be witnessed on the odd station platform when a steam special is due (Rye ?)

[Ryewolf]

3 hours ago, johntwo said:

our parent's generation taking photographs of themselves with a Box Brownie

Except that with a film camera you're limited to maybe 24 or 36 shots at a time, which then links to the ' intrusive and sometimes obstructive behaviour that the activity seems to engender ' that selfies create, because there is no limit, I've found people tend to hog scenes. I have to say this isn't limited to people taking selfies, I've seen this at Castlerigg Stone Circle, where a guy set up a tripod and spent 45 minutes taking 1 shot every second and was actually asking people not to walk through his shot, like he owned the place, a lot walked around except for one person who said in no uncertain terms that this was a public place