Technological Distraction on Photography

"Show me a photographer and I’ll show you a fetishist,” said, grEGORy Simpson, or Egor, a professional photographer and a man behind ULTRAsomething. "Sharpness is nothing more than a fetish. So, too, is tonality. Noise, contrast, micro-contrast and megapixels? All fetishes."

In today's world we are surrounded by technologies but what has it to do with fetishes? Many say that these technologies are distracting us away from the world of photography to the world of technology instead. With fancy features such as autofocus and 'auto-o-everything' they enable us to easily take photographs.

"Photography started out dull during the 19th century with large, slow and very limited equipments" said, Padung Pongpanich, 82, Thailand's pioneer in TV and radio development.

According to Robert Hirsch in “Seizing the Light”, photography started in 1826 with the invention of permanent image recording by a French inverter Joseph Néipce.

During early times, photographers were more of engineers and chemists than what we would call artists or 'photographers'.

Later with more advanced equipment, people started to grasp photography and took it more seriously. Artists also took advantage of the technology.

However, photography did not gain popularity with the public until the introduction of the Kodak Brownie camera in 1900. Pongpanich said that it "turned the camera, which once was a specialised equipment, into a consumer product." The Brownie gave the general public an opportunity to experience photography for the first time.

In 1925, the first high quality 35mm rangefinder camera was introduced by Leica and many agree that it was the starting point of modern photography, as we know it today. Rangefinders also changed the face of photojournalism.

Rangefinder cameras were then replaced by more modern SLRs or single lens reflex cameras. SLR cameras allow a photographer to change, adjust or replace any parts of the equipment. So, what’s more is that photographers started to "care" and become "attached" to the equipment or a ‘camera fetish’, said Pongpanich.

After that, came a big advancement in photography, which was the invention of automation in photography such as autofocus and auto-metering.

However, the invention of automation was made insignificant by the invention of digital photography. Many agree that digital photography has changed almost everything in photography and, most importantly, open new door for people to experiment with photography.

Technology is a super-enabler. It has brought with it new possibilities, it enables photographers to develop their skills and archive their photographic goals.

“Technology always has and always will influence EVERYTHING -- not just photography” said Egor.

Technology allows us to access things we once thought impossible said Nick McGrath, an Australian professional photographer and photo editor and reporter at Asia Life magazine in Bangkok, Thailand.

“The invention of film (as opposed to the days of painting emulsion on glass or metal plates) certainly allowed more people to become photographers. And without optical advances, shutter technology and faster emulsions, there would be no "candid" photography,” said Egor.  “I, personally, would not have become a photographer without the invention of scanners and Photoshop.”

From technology developments, new styles also emerge as Egor puts it that “Rock music evolved around the invention of the electric guitar. Hip Hop evolved around the introduction of the drum machine. It's no different with photography.”

Additionally, new technologies, especially automation, allow photographer to do things faster and do not have to think about fussy technical adjustments. In fact, photographers are allowed to be more focused on composition and aesthetic before releasing the shutter.

The development of technologies not only push the boundary of what is possible with photography, but more or less, it brings advantages to journalistic work. “New technology helps the journalist to work easier,” said Birte Chuychunu, a former journalist and a professor at Ramkhamhaeng University in Bangkok, Thailand.

However, in photography, automation such as built-in metering and autofocus, and digital has changed the way we interact with photography, said photography experts.

Studies show that technologies are distracting people from their everyday tasks. Furthermore, studies found that people are satisfied from the use of technology itself rather than having the tasks done.

There are so many new technologies. As a result, it is difficult to keep up with all the changes, said McGrath. “I think that it is distracting.”

With the invention of digital cameras, photographers also started to become ‘pixel-peepers’, or someone who zooms in the image to its biggest size on screen and look for every detail.

Pixel-peeping started right after the introduction of digital photography, along with the ‘mega-pixel race’, when manufacturers try to compete with other with number of pixels.

At the same time, they also bring fetishes to photographers. They allow critical scrutiny of an image; therefore people started pursuing their fetishes.

Recently, in an art exhibition ‘Reach Ruin’ by Daniel Arsham, the artist said, “much of the time when we think about what a camera does, we think of it as a producer of images but as well as being a photographic tool, many of us that use photography have a relationship with the object. If you want, call it a fetish.”

“Ultimately, I can see that digital photography is the biggest thing for ‘fetish’ photographers – even though I’m too old for digital,” said Pongpanich. “I usually see the ‘digital-age’ photographers open their images on big screens and zoom in to look for ultimate ‘technical’ imperfections – which I think is ridiculous.”

“New lenses are sharper than the old ones, so people want them. New films have finer grains than the old ones, so people want them. They are endless!” said Pongpanich. “It is these things that create what you call ‘fetishes’ – it might be a fetish for sharpness or anything. They are created simply because people look for those things. When a new lens comes out people just sort of wonder how sharp it is.”

Technology has distracted our attention away from photography.

But for photography and visual technologies as a whole, technology distracts us but “this is only true at the very beginning of the introduction of a new technology” said Wolfgang Schiffler, an engineer and professor for media technology at RheinMain University in Wiesbaden, Germany. “But later on when the technology became more or less a commodity we started with the creative story.”

However, some, including P. Ingkharat, a semi-professional photographer and a camera enthusiast, argue that, “higher technical quality usually leads to higher aesthetic quality.”

Ingkharat also added that, “it is new technology that let us archive higher quality.”

Higher technical quality means that the picture can more accurately communicate to the audience, said Chuychunu.

But Schiffler pointed out that; “with still photography we are already beyond the point where people look for more sharpness and other technical specifications.”

“For visual technologies I see the limitation by the quality of our eyes,” said Schiffler. He also added that there is no point if we increase resolution and our eyes are not able to perceive it.

As a result, higher technical specification does not really lead to a more effective and accurate communication between the photographer and the audience.

A study published in the Motion Imaging Journal supports that at the moment technology has developed beyond the human perceptual ability. It is the reason why digital image compression is possible as it eliminates unperceivable data.

Evidence from experts and studies suggests that there is only a little or no connection between technical quality and aesthetic of a photograph.

Aesthetic comes from one’s mind and imagination, regardless of equipment or technical settings.

In finding a good photograph, it requires something different than just looking for technical quality, but instead, it requires a careful analysis of the subject in front. A good photographer can also have a very different and unique vision.

“The best photographs are those that mirror the photographer’s own soul,” said Egor. “Today's photos are judged solely on the lowest-common denominator — what the photograph ‘looks’ like, rather than what the photograph ‘says’.”

Despite all these arguments, Egor raises a very interesting point. He says that technology is acting as a “great neutralizer,” it enables people to have access to photography, but this can be problematic “when you allow yourself to become a slave to the technology, when you use technology as a substitute for education and when mass market appeal eliminates niche technologies.”

“Some technologies exist solely to shield photographers from having to learn basic skills,” Egor further explained.

In journalism, however, high technical quality is still essential as it is associated with professionalism and trustworthiness of a news organization, explained Chuychunu.

People tend to think that clean and clear photos are more trustworthy and professional.

In addition, new technology lowers the ‘entry cost’ of photography and lets anyone be a photographer. This creates one problem; it lowers the standard of photography as anyone can be a photographer. Those without a clear vision will not be able to really appreciate photography and, therefore, create meaningless photographs. Which can hurt photography.

“Technology is rarely the culprit — we humans are,” said Egor. Technology does not distract “anyone who has a clear creative vision and a well-defined set of goals. Rather, it distracts those without a clear vision”

It is the photographer that creates fetishes and love for equipment, not the distraction by technology. However, it is fair for the photographer to love the equipment. But the photographer should not forget that technology needs to serve the photographer and not the other way around.