Sometimes I wonder

[greywater]

Sometimes I wonder why I bother with all these lenses and top dollar cameras. If you're like me when it comes to photography, you like to share your photos with others. You Flickr them or put them somewhere else on he internet only to find that your viewers are accessing them with their damn cell phone's teeny little screens.

Photographs have become highly disposable and hold today's viewers attention for a few seconds before finger sweeping to the next one.

Don't tell me I should take photographs to please myself. Sure I enjoy the process but that's only part of it. I like to see people enjoy my work in the spirit in which it was done.

 

[WNG]

It's my party....and I'll cry if I want to!

It could be worse. Imagine if you had busted your ass in the kitchen preparing Chateaubriand for your guests, and they slather ketchup all over it.

Try not to concern yourself with those defined by the lowest common denominator.
Or you'll lose your mind!

 

[davect01]

Sometimes I wonder why I bother with all these lenses and top dollar cameras. If you're like me when it comes to photography, you like to share your photos with others. You Flickr them or put them somewhere else on he internet only to find that your viewers are accessing them with their damn cell phone's teeny little screens.

Photographs have become highly disposable and hold today's viewers attention for a few seconds before finger sweeping to the next one.

Don't tell me I should take photographs to please myself. Sure I enjoy the process but that's only part of it. I like to see people enjoy my work in the spirit in which it was done.

I get it, especially with the better and better cell phone cameras out there. To be honest, unless I am shooting sports, longer distances or low light, my cell phone is pretty capable.

One reason I hesitate in getting better and better gear, (I would love an A7r2), is the return on investment for a hobby. In the five years I have had a NEX/Alpha product I have printed 4 pictures in the 8x10" range. My A6000 is more than capable in capturing our life events that get shared online and occasionally printed out.

If I was a professional shooter with clients printing large copies of my work then the investment might make more sense. As for now, I am quite happy with my A6000 and my cell phone.

 

[davect01]

It's my party....and I'll cry if I want to!

It could be worse. Imagine if you had busted your ass in the kitchen preparing Chateaubriand for your guests, and they slather ketchup all over it.

Try not to concern yourself with those defined by the lowest common denominator.
Or you'll lose your mind!

Ya you can not control how your non-paying audience views your images.

 

[roundball]

Sometimes I wonder why I bother with all these lenses and top dollar cameras. If you're like me when it comes to photography, you like to share your photos with others. You Flickr them or put them somewhere else on he internet only to find that your viewers are accessing them with their damn cell phone's teeny little screens.

Photographs have become highly disposable and hold today's viewers attention for a few seconds before finger sweeping to the next one.

Don't tell me I should take photographs to please myself. Sure I enjoy the process but that's only part of it. I like to see people enjoy my work in the spirit in which it was done.

Don't understand the point of the post...do you have a question?

 

[davect01]

Don't understand the point of the post...do you have a question?

Seems more of a vent post

 

[quezra]

My most precious photos are of my young growing family. Absolutely priceless photos among them, and quite a few memories I wish I'd shot.

The photography for the sake of it is just a plus. The family stuff justifies the camera and lenses alone for me. And I occasionally earn some side income which is awesome (so far about 70% of my camera gear has been paid for by shooting gigs, though that ratio is going to fall off a cliff when I buy an A7r II )

 

[greywater]

Don't understand the point of the post...do you have a question?

No. Obviously I don't have a question and it's difficult to believe you missed the point.

 

[roundball]

No. Obviously I don't have a question and it's difficult to believe you missed the point.

LOL...and it obvious you missed mine

 

[WoodWorks]

...only to find that your viewers are accessing them with their damn cell phone's teeny little screens.

True. But at least they're seeing them. Not too many years ago you'd be lucky if twenty people saw your photographs.

 

[WNG]

You're upset now? Wait until the hordes start viewing them on their i-Watches.

 

[bdbits]

It could be worse. Imagine if you had busted your ass in the kitchen preparing Chateaubriand for your guests, and they slather ketchup all over it.

...

 

[Golfhacker27]

It is important to understand why you take photos.
For the technical challenge? To preserve special moments and memories? To have your work admired by others?
If it is the last one, and you are using sharing sites such as Flickr, 500px, etc, then (as someone previously noted) you have no say over how your 'audience' chooses to view your work. What do you consider to be the minimum standard of device size and screen definition to be adequate? Ipad? Retina monitor? And what makes your opinion any more valid than anyone elses?
I read a recent article in which the author pointed out that users of the aforementioned sites typically only look at an image for a couple of seconds at most (even those that they like and 'favourite') and they have entirely forgotten it with a minute.
So why would you spend thousands on gear and hours manipulating in post-processing, just for viewers with the attention spans of goldfish.
Take and use and post your photos with whatever gear you want for whatever reasons you want. But I don't really see why you are complaining that your audience isn't giving your work the respect that you think it deserves because they haven't invested in sufficiently high-spec screens (which is essentially what you are saying).

 

[Deleted member 5158]

How about setting up an exhibition? Select your best work have it printed, framed and put up on some walls. Might even be worth doing a projekt to get material.

 

[rayvonn]

have it printed, framed and put up on some walls

I get this. I mean, what's the point of getting a full frame camera? Isn't the major difference shown in the prints? If I had a full frame camera, that's where I'd be headed, otherwise what would be the point in spending a considerable sum of money on a camera and lenses without really showing off the benefits. The audience would be guaranteed, that'd be everyone that comes into your home.

 

[HabsFan]

Sometimes I wonder why I bother with all these lenses and top dollar cameras. If you're like me when it comes to photography, you like to share your photos with others. You Flickr them or put them somewhere else on he internet only to find that your viewers are accessing them with their damn cell phone's teeny little screens.

Photographs have become highly disposable and hold today's viewers attention for a few seconds before finger sweeping to the next one.

Don't tell me I should take photographs to please myself. Sure I enjoy the process but that's only part of it. I like to see people enjoy my work in the spirit in which it was done.

I would also add that photography in generally produces many more photos these days. Can you imagine 11 frames per second 25 years ago on film? You'd go through a roll of film in 2 seconds! We are taking way more pictures as photographers and spend more time editing, organizing, etc. I shot a roll of B & W film last month and the quality of my photos was much better on average vs when I shoot digital because I had to take time to focus, compose, etc.

Photos are generally a bit more disposable these days but you best ones will still stand the test of time. Having flickr/facebook/instagram is great if you ask me. I have family overseas that have been able to watch my kids grow over the last 5 years. They were finally able to meet them in person this summer and felt like they already knew them. For my family whether they look at the images on a tablet, computer, or tiny smart phone, the photos are important to them and brings them some insight about our lives thousands of miles away. I would also say that cell phones these days have some pretty high res screens and will do a good picture justice. Best thing you can do though is to print your pictures and have them up around your house.

 

[Hawkman]

One point: Today's better cellphones - iPhones and the best Android phones - actually have very, very good screens. Most of the top smartphones have higher pixel density (300ppi or more) than most computer monitors. And the color gamut and calibration on iPhones and the best Androids are, I believe, better than all but the best, most expensive or specially calibrated computer monitors. So, looking at photos on cellphones may actually be one of the better ways to view them, all other things being equal.
Then again, I might be wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using TalkEmount mobile app

 

[fractal]

Unless you're a professional, photography is a hobby. It's a great way to tap into your artistic juices as well as a craft to master.

It's not the cheapest hobby, but as I tell my wife, it's cheaper than cars, boats or a girlfriend.

 

[ztryfe]

Sometimes I wonder why I bother with all these lenses and top dollar cameras. If you're like me when it comes to photography, you like to share your photos with others. You Flickr them or put them somewhere else on he internet only to find that your viewers are accessing them with their damn cell phone's teeny little screens.

I print 8x10's every now and then, I pin them to my office wall, they are always a conversation starter and have earned me a compliment here and there. But as others have said, I do it for myself mostly, and the most cherished and complimented photos, are family ones, the kind of photos you wont see at my flickr account. I also have this large wall at the stairs at home, that begs for a bunch of prints.

It's not the cheapest hobby, but as I tell me wife, it's cheaper than cars, boats or a girlfriend.

Oh I am stealing this quote,I'll just be careful and leave out the boats part, no bodies of water nearby

 

[davect01]

One point: Today's better cellphones - iPhones and the best Android phones - actually have very, very good screens. Most of the top smartphones have higher pixel density (300ppi or more) than most computer monitors. And the color gamut and calibration on iPhones and the best Androids are, I believe, better than all but the best, most expensive or specially calibrated computer monitors. So, looking at photos on cellphones may actually be one of the better ways to view them, all other things being equal.
Then again, I might be wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using TalkEmount mobile app

As you said, right my phone has a better screen

I get this. I mean, what's the point of getting a full frame camera? Isn't the major difference shown in the prints? If I had a full frame camera, that's where I'd be headed, otherwise what would be the point in spending a considerable sum of money on a camera and lenses without really showing off the benefits. The audience would be guaranteed, that'd be everyone that comes into your home.

That is why I am very satisfied with my A6000. For hobbyist photographer like me, my $400 body gets amazing results. Sure the FF cameras can get a bit more detail and Dynamic Range, but at the cost of a lot more $$$$$.