OpEd: We Were Discussing iPhone Photography and In Walks Martin Parr

Written on October 7, 2010 by Bryan Formhals in OpEd

I had an email conversation with Blake about all the crap photography on the internet and how the creme may not rise to the top. My position being that what I think is crap, someone else will find to be wonderful, and what I think is wonderful will be dull, boring crap to the cult of connoisseurship.

Then Blake mentioned gradations, and how the gradations will vary for everyone. The more photography, the more gradations and opinions. And then bam! We’re huddled in our tribes searching out photography that fits into our gradation while sarcastically bemoaning all the crap that doesn’t fit into it.

While thinking about this last night (not very deeply to be honest with you), I found a blog post about iPhone photography from a blog that doesn’t usually discuss photography.

“I hope the ghost of Walker Evans punches me in the face,” wrote producer Eric Spiegelman last night.

It’s the same argument that seems to be going on about photography and the internet all the time. All the crap, superficial disposable digital imagery we’re exposed to on a daily basis, and how it really is just crap, and yeah, you’re not a photographer because you use Hipstamatic or any other silly effect.

Oh, but the democratization of photography. We’re all photographers now! Take that photographers!

I’m getting a headache even writing this because I have a pretty good idea of the arguments on both sides of the debate. ”Photography is more than just pointing a camera. It’s about ideas, and take years and years to learn,” vs “Digital photography and the internet have liberated the medium from the professionals and now anyone with a digital camera or an iPhone can produce quality photographs.”

I can see your blood boiling already. But! No! Photography is! It’s crap! No! iPhone isn’t!

However, I don’t think most people that casually use the iPhone to snap away are really concerned with photography, it’s really more about the social aspects of sharing their visual reality with friends and family.

Too bad they think that reality needs to be dressed up in weird filters. I guess I tend to be with Winogrand: “There is nothing as mysterious as a fact clearly described.”

And in walks Martin Parr.

“I’m interested in anything if its good, and if its fresh and original – and exciting.” – Martin Parr

©Daniel Gebhart de Koekkoek

The quote is from a recent interview in the BJP which if you haven’t read it, is worth a look. Parr always has interesting ideas about photography and where it’s heading.

But that sentence has stuck with me since I first read it. Good, fresh, original and exciting. That must be Martin’s gradation, and everything else must be crap.

Good, I understand. Basically, shit he likes. But fresh? Original? Exciting? That’s where I start to think in circles. Would Vivian Maier be considered fresh, original and exciting? Fresh, would be a stretch since the work is decades old. Unless fresh doesn’t mean produced recently, then I suppose it could be fresh.

Is it all that original? Not really. Black and white street photography has a long tradition, about as long as photography has been around. Exciting? Maybe. The discovery of a long lost unknown talent is always kind of exciting.

But is the work exciting? It doesn’t matter to me because it’s well executed, consistent (from what we’ve seen thus far) and demonstrates the intelligence of the photographer.

Perhaps this is just all about semantics and we’re all really talking about the same ideas, but using different words.

Much of photography for me is about discovery. I enjoy finding photographs and photographers, young or experienced, new or old alike. But the metrics for what resonates with me aren’t necessarily based on fresh, original and exciting. Then what are my metrics? Well executed, consistent and demonstrates the intelligence of the photographer are a little vague and not good enough.

Right now, I’m not sure I can articulate what type of work resonates with me or why. And “I know it when I see it” isn’t a legitimate response in this case. But I do know that the hunt for the best, most original, fresh and exciting photography also doesn’t resonate with me.

This creates sort of a predicament when you’re editing a blog about photography, so I figured it’s time to work on this problem. I’m working on post that will lay out ‘What I Look for in Photography for LPV,’ which will hopefully illuminate some ideas for both of us.

I’m also in the process of starting a Tumblr that will contain one photo and a link to a portfolio from all the email submissions I receive for LPV. I think it’ll be an interesting experiment in transparency. You’ll be able to see what I choose for the blog and what I don’t, and then make up your own mind. Of course, some of the work might not resonate with you.