Jump to content

Tourism Selfies


sarah_fox

Recommended Posts

<p>I was taking a pleasure drive down a scenic parkway today and saw a couple taking a selfie in front of a scenic overlook. I have long puzzled over exactly what the expectations are for such a photograph. The same is true of many photographs of people posing for photos (that others take of them) standing in front of some scene. What I don't understand is whether the scene itself is important to them, or is it simply a record that they were there? Consider the spender of the Grand Canyon, for instance. Doesn't someone featuring prominently, smack in the middle of the frame, make the photo about something other than the Grand Canyon?</p>

<p>Please note here: I am not criticizing this practice! Rather, I am trying to understand it, because I'm wondering how it can be done better.</p>

<p>Anyway, I'm the first to admit I've never been a cool sort of person, and I'm certainly not part of the selfie generation either. So I'm asking a sincere question here, because I want to understand the phenomenon: When taking a selfie, why is it important to stand in front of something scenic? Or perhaps the question should be: When photographing something scenic, why is it desirable to place one's self in the frame? Is this simply a statement that someone was there?</p>

<p>Thanks for indulging my curiosity on this subject.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>Hey, no matter where you stand you're always in front of something! ;)</p>

<p>Sometimes you just need to know that the shutter is actually working on your Bolsey B2 (it wasn't except for 1/100).<br /> Here I am in front of some spectacular cloud formations (take my word for it.)</p>

<p>And, oh yes, it's to prove you were there. People have been doing it since photography was invented. <br>

There are all those Civil War photos with Brady in them, for example.</p><div>00cwR6-552366984.jpg.b6be7e8356f456f3772b8be037c4bfd8.jpg</div>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>So to expand on the question, let's say you're in Paris, and you want to show your friends that. You can photograph the Eiffel Tower and show that to your friends, but they might think, "Oh, you just used a picture you found on the 'net." So to make it more believable, you put yourself in the picture for evidence? Or is there some aesthetic reason to do the selfie with a half-obscured Eiffel Tower in the background?</p>

<p>Put another way, and getting more to the point of what I'm pondering, would it be desirable to get a better, less obscured shot of the scene and to insert a smaller bit of yourself in the picture, so that you're not blocking the scene? Or does it matter?</p>

<p>-------------------------------------------------------</p>

<p>Oh... In the original post, the "spender of the Grand Canyon" would be the "splendor...," were it not for the assistance of automatic spelling correction.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarah, I have done the deed myself that confounds you. The image taken as such is a record of the time when I was (sometimes with others) there, perhaps to look back in nostalgia. As long as something is recognizable in the background, such a photograph is alright.

 

Taking the photo myself while being in the photograph is so darn fun than otherwise. As there is a high possibility of missing focus, exposure, taking self-group photo is a *cough* skill *cough*. Not to mention, I feel more at ease making faces than in the case of somebody else taking a group photograph.

 

Also, I personally don't care for the various *scapes (except on rare occasions) as I would rather be present in person.

 

JDM, your image of the walrus is upside down & is severely out of focus. Does your camera not have focus autotune, rather pervasive these days you know? The exposure is shot; it works neither for the more in focus background of clouds, nor for the walrus. Say, are you passing the walrus to be a likeness of yourself, JDM? Yes?

 

;^}

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>As long as something is recognizable in the background, such a photograph is alright.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Sometimes you also have to prove to Simon Jenkins that you really did go there....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Darn.... Really?! Well, I'm 0 for 2 tonight. I had two ideas to research tonight. The first idea, already patented, was an earthquake-hardened bed. I was going to get filthy rich off of the Californians. The second was a way to possibly solve this selfie problem... except that it isn't really a problem. Ah well...</p>

<p><img src="http://graphic-fusion.com/phphotoop01sm.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="467" /></p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p><em>"Anyway, I'm the first to admit I've never been a cool sort of person"</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think you're pretty cool, Sarah, in your own way. :-) <br>

<br>

To me, the selfie in front of a destination scenery is akin to selfies with VIPs. If you were in the presence of someone whom you thought was important, a photo with that person will, by extension and without explanation, associate some of that person's glory with you. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I think: there is iconic stuff photographed to death by fortunate folks that toured by under better light conditions than I, when I reach it. I also noticed: I (usually) can't photograph other people & stuff with my 15mm for good, its just a tad too wide for such shots. - So what is left? <br>

I'm pretty sure I want to express "look, I have been to *background*" with such shots or would try to give insights into my life that doesn't seem to interest any shutterbuig enough to shoot it on their own.<br>

But most important: the entire selfie staging thing seems a lot of fun. - I adored AL Kaplan's 15mm work (unfortunately mostly deleted here on photo.net). - If you want to do it better look up Suzanne Heintz's "life once removed". She drags a manequin family along to stage her self timered selfies. <br>

Anyhow I'll stick to "CV 15mm & about half a roll / day" if somebody asks me for a single lensed tourist kit suggestion. <br>

"Tourist in front of" shots have tradition. - They might not be the most iconic, but surely among the most popular photographic subjects. I guess who ever takes these connects a lot of memories to them, which either the camera or the film budged didn't allow to record. <br>

Another issue might be the social convenince? - It seems easier to align the family in front of Eiffel tower than to teach them to ignore your omnipresent camera (by skipping the frozen "cheese" smile) or to drill yourself to become fast enough to not trigger their eyerolling "when will you finally spot your trigger & let me carry on?" face. - Luckily nobody expects natural facial expressions in the aligned group.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The selfie craze seems to me to be all about social media. <em>Look where I am, what I am doing</em>. The subject is <em>me</em> because it is on my Facebook page or whatever. People go to my Facebook page (which I do not have) to keep in touch with me rather than look at the Grand Canyon so the selfie thing kind of makes sense.<br>

Bit depressing though that the Wonders of the World are reduced to a background to my grinning face.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Colin, Facebook allows users to categorize their contacts so they can selectively share personal photos. The less discriminating posts are usually from those proclaiming to be "Public Figures" but anyone seeing them have chosen to "Like" these people. Even among friends, users can block those posts if photos become too self-indulging.</p>

<p>So really, it's not necessarily a poster's intention to appear self-absorbed and it's a matter of choice if we want to see them. </p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>""<em>Please note here: I am not criticizing this practice!</em>"" (Sarah)<br>

Apart from the fact that people can do what ever they chose, if it does not violate the freedom of others, I simple abhor the spreading of the ever repeated selfies: virtual narcism in all its forms (selfies, facebook, twitter...) stroking the ego. So I am criticizing the practice as a pathological dimension of our times, which for moment mostly seem to concern younger people. <br>

<br>

Great numbers of people queue for hours before being able to enter the Louvre museum. Most of them walk rapidly towards Mona Lisa room, turn their back to the painting in order to shoot selfies and thereafter, facing the painting they admire their selfie !! - before forwarding it to their multiple friends. Luckily, Mona Lisa is untouched. The selfie-ists of our time turn their back to more than they can imagine, in my mind<br>

<br>

</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The picture in front of a vacation destination or iconic location has been around a lot longer than social media. It used to be that you would ask a friendly looking stranger to take it for you. Now, with the omnipresent wide angle camera in every cell phone, selfies in front of said backgrounds are simply a natural evolution of that. Sure, you can call it narcissistic. But sometimes you simply want a memento, something to share with your friends and to look back upon when the memory has faded. When I travel, I generally have my wide angle along and have found that of the images that I post of scenic locations, the selfie ones have garnered the best responses by friends and family. For me, it's a nice way to share in an image what your up to.<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17582777-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="451" /></p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well, I must admit the selfies posted here have made me smile.</p>

<p>Sanford and Anders, I've seen the same thing here in Virginia. It's almost as though tourists are on an international scavenger hunt: Here's me grinning in front of a Navy destroyer. Got it! Here's me grinning in front of the Monitor turret. Got it! Here's me grinning in front of a bald eagle. Got it! Here's me grinning on a 3-masted schooner.... I find it somewhat ironic that I'm among the most likely people to put down my camera and take in the experience.</p>

<p>Michael, your take on the destination selfie (you almost coined the phrase) makes sense -- that it amounts to accumulation of status points. Maybe it's almost like a video game in that sense -- collecting loot and moving on, eventually advancing (or driving) to the next level (or destination). I know you didn't exactly say that, but that's what I'm thinking.</p>

<p>Colin, I think your observation that it's all about social media perhaps makes more sense to me than anything else. Perhaps that's why I haven't understood this selfie craze -- because I've resisted participating in social media altogether. I have to wonder whether social media as we currently know it will have a limited life or will morph into something else. I think people are increasingly becoming concerned with privacy. When social media can get you fired or not hired, indicted in a court of law, bullied, and otherwise snooped on by creepy and possibly nefarious people you'll never see, I think it may lose popularity. And if that happens, maybe the selfie as we currently know it might decline (but certainly never disappear -- as JDM has aptly pointed out <a href="http://g.fastcompany.net/multisite_files/fastcompany/imagecache/inline-large/inline/2014/03/3027667-inline-3026832-inline-i-vintage-selfie-1920-1.jpg">its long history</a>).</p>

<p>Jochen, some of the selfie work you're describing is perhaps better described as self portraiture. It's more deliberate -- not a quick snap, but carefully planned and executed. Sometimes the easiest and most convenient model for an idea is one's self, especially considering you don't have to instruct yourself what to do. I admit it's a pretty fuzzy line, though.</p>

<p>Siegfried, I have only a single almost-good photo of my grandmother in her later years, taken by my shutter-bug grandfather. She was posing in front of the Whitehouse with a pleasant, grandmotherly smile on her face, cut off at the kneecaps. I have boxes of slides of unidentified trees and mountains, also from their travels, but only one of my grandmother (and none of my grandfather). I guess I would have welcomed some Leica IIIf selfies from them along the way. I would have appreciated some candid portraiture even more (much more), but I'll take what little my grandfather left me. So your point is well taken.</p>

<p>And YOU, Anders! Yes, people can do whatever they choose (BAAAAD PhotoNetter! Bad boy!) ... not that I disagree with you even a bit. What I find sad is that most selfies look pretty much the same, except for a minor change of background. But to miss the experience because of a preoccupation with documenting the moment is sad. Of course that's not just a selfie problem. When I travel, I try to carve out camera days and no-camera days. The no-camera days are almost always more fun and rewarding.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Sarah, having spent a lot of time at National and State Parks (I don't work for NPS, but I have conducted a lot of research for them) I too have a certain "disdain" for locational selfies. One generalization I have arrived at at, is that selfies at icon locations are typically made by those too busy/lazy/disinterested/etc. to take in all of the attraction, say hiking a trail at Glacier or going to the bottom of the Grand Canyon. Selfies say, "been there, done that, meh!"<br /> A second generalization is that selfies are often too generic - instead of capturing the iconic location as part of the shot, they capture a generic background that could be anywhere - the "brick wall in Paris, France," could just as well have come from Paris, Tx, or Paris, ID.<br /> Third, selfies are NOT for me.<br /> Now back to the earthquake bed--- how about a cool selfie of you on or under the bed? :)</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I will venture a guess that selfies bloomed from a confluence of technology and social media. Tiny sensor digicams with great auto-everything modes and wide angle lenses made it much easier to take selfies that were actually in frame and in focus.</p>

<p>This was much more difficult to do with the larger format film media and "normal" lenses of previous generations. The selfie of previous generations was more commonly done with Polaroids, although as Jochen noted Al Kaplan shot his with an ultra-wide on his Leica.</p>

<p>But the selfie machine of choice for previous generations was the four-shot photo booth. We seem to forget that because there was no social media for instant sharing. And the booths weren't particularly portable so no matter where you were in world - NYC, Paris, Rome - the background was always the same curtain.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I think the main reason for selfies is to try to make other people envious, not in a devious sort of way, but in a 'look how lucky I am to have been there' kind of way. I think most like some affirmation that they've done some things that have made their lives somewhat interesting, and the selfie provides such. I also think, as Colin notes, social media is largely responsible for the 'outbreak' of the selfie. Yes, people took them before, but then they were mostly shared just with immediate family and close friends, but now you can show the world what great places you've been and what wonderful meals you've eaten. It proves you've lived, if nothing else.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I think it would be in line with selfie-ness not to dwell on these questions but to let your instincts guide you as well as play off of what you see on social media.</p>

<p>______________________</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Doesn't someone featuring prominently, smack in the middle of the frame, make the photo about something other than the Grand Canyon?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, potentially about someone and that grand canyon. Or maybe just about coolness. Or maybe a punctuation mark to a text. I just got my first smart phone. Last Sunday, I went to the box office of the Fillmore here in San Francisco to buy tickets to see Patti Smith. When I went to text the friend I'm going with to tell her I got the tickets, it dawned on me I could quickly take a picture of the box office to attach to the text. So that's what I did. Kind of did it just because I could. Didn't include myself, though. Haven't done my first selfie yet.</p>

We didn't need dialogue. We had faces!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>My theory is that the concept of the selfie seems foreign to folks who self-identify as photographers because photography tends to be a solitary pursuit, done by people who look outward rather than inward.</p>

<p>The exceptions are those who at least occasionally do self-portraits as part of an evolving personal and artistic exploration process, including to test and improve upon their technique. Same reason painters used themselves as models. Some - notably Flora Borsi most recently, mining the Cindy Sherman vein - blur the lines between the selfie, artistic exploration and self-portraiture by creating characters and concepts.</p>

<p>But among folks who don't self-identify as photographers, I don't see an indication that narcissism or envy are primary motivators. These are essentially social creatures - the antithesis of the typical landscape photographer. Communicating is part of their daily routine. The selfie is a form of shorthand, an avatar, a meatpuppet emoticon, used as punctuation or emphasis. Even those Facebook contacts who tend to post in the "Look how fabulous my life is!" vein aren't doing so out of narcissism or arrogance. Most of them are breathlessly enthusiastic about how fortunate they are to have this moment of joy, to be in a good place at a good time, shared with family or friends. It's an open form of giving thanks, acknowledgment that life isn't always grand but this particular moment was. And some of them are visiting pretty damned fabulous places. Their radiant smiles help lend some scale to the stuff in the background.</p>

<p>Also, I like to see what my family, friends and online acquaintances are up to, whether that includes baby's first haircut, or another guy's first legal purchase of marijuana in Seattle.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Sarah, just to make things clear. Actually, I don't think, that "people can do what ever they chose" - not that I will or can forbid them to do one or another thing in life, but I will personally judge them accordingly. Wouldn't we all, PhotoNetters or not?</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarah part of taking a "selfie" is part of the Facebook generation. You are not just taking a picture of yourself because you have narcissistic tendencies, you are taking a picture with a background because you are letting your Followers know where you are/were and what you are/was doing ...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...