OT: It's not just Al -- The explosion of the self-portrait

[michael s.]

<a

href=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/fashion/sundaystyles/19SELF.html?_r=1&oref=slogin>"Here

I Am Taking My Own Picture"</a> from the Sunday, Feb. 19, 2006 New

York Times.<p>

 

The article says: <p>

 

" ... And one particular kind of image has especially soared in

popularity, particularly among the young: the self-portrait, which has

become a kind of folk art for the digital age. ... "

[michael s.]

Two things I should've mentioned:

 

1. The Times is a subscription site, 95% + of which is free (this article included).

 

2. I post this *not* to begin a discussion about Al's 15mm photos, but to point out that a not insignificant part of what one might call this "new interest" in photography is this very phenomenon. Whether one thinks it's a good thing (as I do) or not, it is happening, and the prevalence of affordable digital imaging and immediate results are two things fueling it.

[vivek iyer]

Can't see the article as I do not subscribe to it and I do not think I am missing anything by NOT reading/viewing anything about self portraits.

 

The 15mm CV lens is really a terrific lens, BTW.

[al_kaplan1]

Jeepers, am I considered "among the young"?

[olliesteiner]

Al wrote: "Jeepers, am I considered "among the young"?"

 

Not if you say: "Jeepers"!

[michael s.]

Well, Al, perhaps the <a href=http://www.lyricstime.com/frank-sinatra-young-at-heart-lyrics.html>"Young at Heart."</a>

[tony_senzaorbi]

I have a classroom full of young men and women who clearly understand the difference between a self-portrait and someone mugging into their p/s digi or cellphone-cam and wouldn't call the latter art, folk or otherwise. I hope the distinction never gets lost or forgotten.

[william_john_smith]

Self portraits have been made since the first cave person grabed a hunk of charcoal and went

to the wall of the cave, so what is the big deal?

[nels]

"...the difference between a self-portrait and someone mugging into their p/s digi or cellphone-cam..."

 

Tony, for those unenlightened among us, could you please explain.

[ray .]

I can't get the article to come up, but I've noticed this a lot lately.

Saw it at the park I went to yesterday. Often it's a self-portrait

including friends or relatives the person is with. My niece

snapped a pic like this with my sister the other day when I was

with them. I think people have done this since the early days of

photography, but it's probably more popular now than ever

because it can be shared instantly with people near and far away

through digital imaging and the internet. It's a form of greeting.

[barefoot]

Good for them - the self-portraiters I mean. Of course it's not something a well bred

Englishman, of a certain age, would ever consider

[tony_senzaorbi]

""...the difference between a self-portrait and someone mugging into their p/s digi or cellphone-cam..."

 

Tony, for those unenlightened among us, could you please explain."

 

I don't believe--at least I hope--there is anyone here, of all places, so unenlightened they don't get what the difference is between a random snapshot and a decisive moment.

[madkins]

hmmmmm. . . . well, as far as the distinction between mugging into a camera, and a legitimate self-portrait goes(associate whatever a "self-portrait" entails as you see fit), i figure that when most of these folks who use digital cameras/cameraphones/webcams for myspace photos want to achieve better results, they start gravitating towards better cameras (or if that's not possible) trying to use more traditional techniques for portraiture/photography in general.

 

 

 

for instance, some of the people that i've known for a bit that also use myspace (yeah, i'm on there. . . how shameful) have become decent photographers after having cut their teeth by taking a few thousand crappy photos of themselves. they gained an interest in trying to figure out why some shots turned out better than others, or maybe how to achieve a certain effect (shallow depth of field, for example. . . something pretty impossible to do with some digital cameras). i think that the idea that it's a new art-form is maybe pushing it a bit, but this image-making, as i've heard it described, does bring people into more traditional photography (at least as far as sparking an interest in a little bit of knowledge regarding technique). . . .

 

 

hehe, one friend of mine recently bought an F3 (he already had a digital rebel), and has even experimented with using my studio lights, my bronica s2a, and my flashmeter. . . . he's messed around with the leica a bit as well. . . . i wouldn't have believed that it was possible to turn one of these "self-portraiture artists" into a legitimate photogeek, but. . . it happens.

[eliot_rosen1]

" ... And one particular kind of image has especially soared in popularity, particularly among the young: the self-portrait, which has become a kind of folk art for the digital age. ... "

 

Perhaps a reflection of the growth of narcissism in modern society, fueled by the popular culture and schools that promote self-esteem over achievement. In any event, it's not a good sign.

[nels]

Pontificating over the 'net, where key-strokes and mouse-clicks are essentially free, rather than putting up pictures to show your enthusiasm for the process and maybe illustrate a point, is so easy.

[kevin m.]

"I have a classroom full of young men and women..."

 

And if a person wished to enroll for one of your classes, what university should they contact?

[michael s.]

Michael Adkins wrote:<p>

 

<< ... i wouldn't have believed that it was possible to turn one of these "self-portraiture artists" into a legitimate photogeek, but. . . it happens. ... >><p>

 

Evidently it does happen. Later in the Times article, it says:<p>

 

"Since endless experimentation with digital photography costs little or nothing (you just delete the duds), many young camera owners ... have practiced their art to the point where they have stumbled across sophisticated portraiture techniques of lighting, composition and camera angle that were once the province of professionals."<p>

 

My initial reaction is that I'm glad <i>when</i> poeple take an interest in photography, and less concerned about <i>how</i> or <i>why</i> or <i>with which tools</i>.

[kevin m.]

Seriously, Tony, if you're in my area, I'd love to take one of your classes. E-mail me the

contact info if you don't want to post it publicly.

[dford]

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/fashion/sundaystyles/19SELF.html?ex=1298005200&en=ca6785435b02d747&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">link</a>

[vivek iyer]

Thanks, Doug.

<p>

<i>"This is the idea that adolescents think people are more interested in them than they actually are, that people are always looking at them and taking note of what they are doing, even if it is just walking across the school cafeteria,"</i>