Anything left to explore?

[thomas_k.]

<p>The Arctic, horrors of wars, nude bodies and clothed bodies of millions of human beings (selfies), planet Pluto – all photographed now – is there anything left to explore for the medium? Any untouched subject/field/angle that you can think of?</p>

[Vlado]

<p>Still a lot of people around.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>No. We should all go home. ;-)</p>

<p>We shouldn't talk to each other because it's all been said. We shouldn't have sex anymore because it's all been done and MORE. Much more! The world's not what it used to be so why have kids anymore? Love is pretty passé, almost a cliché by now, so why bother? Not another stupid walk along the beach. I just did that yesterday! I've been to that mountaintop already to breathe in the air at sunset. No need to go again. Might as well stay home and watch TV. But not another comedy . . . I'm all laughed out.</p>

<p>Seriously, though, yes, there is something left to explore for the medium. My personal relationship to all or any of those subjects, and others, at this moment in time and this point in space. Through my eyes and my mind and my gut.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>Until you've taken a selfie in front of every significant object on the planet, there's always another photograph to be taken.</p>

[GerrySiegel]

Well we still haven't probed the deep mysterious essence of cat faces.

[r_david]

I was just about to start a thread with this exact subject.

 

I got a Holga 135 to spice up my creativity and I shot 3 rolls. I got some surprises that looked really good - I have a

defective Holga; it takes pictures as good as a one time use camera - I don't have any of the light leaks or crazy lens

distortions.

 

But as far as composition, subject and theme; my photos are lame. Technically, the prints I chose were printed quite well -

if I say so myself, but never the less, un-memorable.

 

I put together a shopping cart of consumables (paper, film, chemicals), but I am struggling for subjects and hesitating

buying them - the consumables, that is.

 

Art is about voice. It is about creativity and not about imitation - I can reproduce any photograph of the greats - like I can

play any song by a great guitar player and their solos - but do I have my own "voice" ?

 

I do not.

 

I am a monkey imitating people and it distresses me.

 

Feedback to what I think is original? "That's nice."

 

I do like the process of making my analog photos - although, it is tedious sometimes. But there are times when liking the

process or the journey - as some say - isn't enough.

 

Just my opinion of my journey.

[colin carron]

<blockquote>

<p> There is nothing new to be discovered in physics</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Lord Kelvin - 1900</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<blockquote>

<p>I was just about to start a thread with this exact subject.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Now isn't that ironic!<br>

</p>

<p>Hey, irony. Maybe that's a good subject for a spent photographer.</p>

<p>If I'm thinking of subjects as people, places, and things maybe, instead, I will start to think more intangibly. </p>

<p> </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Wherever you are, turn around 180 degrees and look back where you've been. Look down. Look up. There's always a new way of looking at things.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>Good question !</p>

[john_h.1]

<blockquote>

<p>Now isn't that ironic!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No. It is coincidental. (Notice there is a separate word for that).</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Hey, irony. Maybe that's a good subject for a spent photographer.</p>

<p> </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Both irony and coincidence are.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Ironic because the thread is about overdone subjects and the poster said he was going to bring up <em>the same</em> subject as the OP. In any case, I see irony in it but don't ask that you do.</p>

[GerrySiegel]

The elusive green flash.

[Brad_]

For me it's loads of ideas, little quality time available to pursue.

[sjmurray]

<p>Fred said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Seriously, though, yes, there is something left to explore for the medium. My personal relationship to all or any of those subjects, and others, at this moment in time and this point in space. Through my eyes and my mind and my gut"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I couldn't have said it better myself. Each one of us is unique and experiences the world in a unique way, but, we also have a lot in common too. This means that anyone of us can have a unique vision of something that when shared, will be appreciated by others too. The problem with the question is that it is based on "things," which is not what creativity is all about. The way too obvious metaphor is words in the English language. Have we run out of stories, poems, song lyrics, etc. using the same words, only put together in a unique order? <br>

R David bemoans not having any creativity and is only able to imitate. That maybe so, but many of us, like Brad-, feel creative and take delight in exploring it. A couple days ago I posted a photo for the Digital forum's weekly "post processing challenge." Each week you get to see a number of vastly different interpretations of the same image. I see stuff every day that if I had a camera with me would produce a unique and I think, interesting image. </p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>Consider, Thomas, taking your camera under water. Or sling it from a small flying machine. You'll find some new angles. <br /><br />But if you're thinking there's nothing new to photograph, it's because you're not doing anything new in your life. Start a new sport or hobby. Take up a new language. Build something. Explore a new cuisine. Volunteer at the local fire department. Get a part time job on a loading dock. Shake up your routine, and your urge to bring photography to bear on communicating about it to other people, in your own unique way, will spark. </p>

[dave_s]

<p>It's not about the subject; it's about the photograph.</p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> But if you're thinking there's nothing new to photograph, it's because you're not doing anything new in your life. Start a new sport or hobby. Take up a new language. Build something. Explore a new cuisine. Volunteer at the local fire department. Get a part time job on a loading dock.</p>

<p>Perhaps that might work for and be OK some. But for me, that boils down to "finding things to photograph," a form of throwing stuff on the wall to see what sticks. That wouldn't ring my bells. As SJM alluded above, for me it's about exploration and satisfying my curiosity about places/situations/issues/people/etc. In San Francisco alone I have a handful of ideas on the back burner, some marinating, and could easily come up with another dozen or two. The issue is time. Expanding to outside of the city, jeez, it seems the possibilities would be enormous. For me photography is driven by curiosity about something, not finding things available for making pictures, though I do some of that anyway walking/hanging around - plenty of opportunities there as well, like the photo below.</p>

<center>.

<p><img src="http://citysnaps.net/2015%20Photos/Two%20Smokers.jpg" alt="" /><br /> <em> San Francisco • ©Brad Evans 2015 </em><br /> .</p>

</center>

[jordan2240]

<p>Sometimes it is difficult to find something you feel is unique, but then again, it doesn't really matter, as every photographer has a unique perspective and every moment occurs only once in time (as far as we know). Very few photos are identical, as there are usually little variations in light, subject positioning, perspective, etc. And for me, one of the greatest joys of photography is just getting out and searching for a shot, and in the case of nature photography (which often produces some unique scene), 'communing with nature.'</p>

[thomas_k.]

<p>Just to clarify a bit my initial broad question: I'm not saying that I'm out of ideas for my photography, in a contrary I wrote my post in a morning in a state of photographic "hangover" after two days of intensive 10 hour photoshoots. I intended my question to be more about new frontiers for photography (including and maybe foremost for artistic expression), than about lack of inspiration. So what's lurking in the dark waiting for the first click of a shutter? (another black cat does not count :))</p>

[sjmurray]

<p>Well, I did a search on "new frontiers in photography" and here are the first two links:<br>

http://www.jewishnews.net.au/new-frontiers-in-photography/34984<br>

http://laist.com/2013/01/20/photo_la.php#photo-1<br>

I think the field of conceptual art/photography will continually generate new and fresh ideas. Personally I am quite satisfied with just documenting everyday life in my own unique way. </p>

[r_david]

I could photograph my tennis partner with a polarizer and print it with a #4 grade filter.

 

What would appear is the - what I think - tired cliché of a B&W photo of an old black guy.

 

Sure HE is unique but the composition and theme isn't.

 

I have been watching "The Mind of the Chef" on PBS. And listening to the chefs creating their own flavor combinations

and struggling to find their own voice. If they do what others do, then they are just a cook- not a chef.

 

If I am duplicating what has been done time and time again, then I am just a camera operator and not a

photographer/artist.

 

For rock music fans, folks who play like Eddie Van Halen are a dime a dozen, but they are just imitators. They may be

playing a original composition, but their sound is imitated.

 

Picasso was quite capable of painting the classics - he could paint someone's portrait like the masters. But he was

inspired (some say by photos taken with a camera with a broken camera lens) to do something no one has ever seen.

 

That's the difference between art and mimicry.

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>New frontiers .... hard to say. They'll be there, but when? Technically - well, things march on. That pin-sharp 250MP photo of a black cat in a black box is still an option. Some day anyway. Every new camera introduced these days is called a "gamechanger" it seems, so at least marketing departments are convinced there is still a lot of new ground to be covered.</p>

<p>Artistically - there is a point to be made that it does get harder as more and more things get tried, expanded upon, mixed with other tests and whatsmore. But compare it to other arts with longer histories than photography - painting, music. It doesn't seem to stop man from finding new things. And even so, in any art, the avantgarde that break new ground have their followers taking things to the peak, and/or beyond, and blending with other styles start. So, at any point, for any given style, there seem to be enough choices to find an individual mini-niche. Be it by breaking tradition, be it by trying to perfect it, or by mocking it, or by mixing two traditions into something else, or...<br>

An idea doesn't always have to be fresh or novel. It has to be good, and then executed well.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>I think truly new ideas in photography and art in general are terrific, but rare. My sense, from my own knowledge of art history and artists themselves, is that if you have to labor over this idea of groundbreaking creativity, it's often going to result in labored-feeling results. Forced creativity can be mind-numbingly awful. Most of us will not be artists of the Picasso order, not that there's anything wrong with having lofty goals. So making personal art, even if it's not all that groundbreaking, still has something significant to recommend it and will likely still be important and noteworthy. You may not make the history books that way but you may make an impact more locally and within smaller circles and for your own purposes.</p>

<p>Photography has always been a uniquely good medium for documentary and political work. Many previous styles can be repeated to important social effect with current-day issues. There are many cases when the subject matter will far outweigh the style and just being there and noticing and sharing will be the important starting points.</p>

<p>In terms of ideas toward photographic art, it seems to me the immediacy of social networking in the digital age has plenty of room for new creative approaches to photography . . . artistically exploiting the selfie craze, backlit presentation modes, the onslaught of public minutiae, and the like.</p>

<p>Here's where art history can come in handy. Reading about the inspirations and processes of the greats through time can be incredibly inspiring. None of this happens in a vacuum. Picasso was influenced and inspired by others, Cezanne for instance.</p>

<p>I usually come away from visits to museums and galleries inspired, often in non-specific but very palpable ways. I've often thought of art as a dialogue through the ages. If I don't want to copy or mimic previous artists (and I include here not just photographers but painters, sculptors, and musicians in particular), I may consider simply responding to them, as I think Tchaikovsky sometimes did with Mozart and the Pictorialists did with painters like Arnold Böcklin. </p>

[Spearhead]

<p>I never run out of things to explore. Apparently it's my " repetitively shooting-gallery style without any sense of all the engagement." Works for me, must be a good approach.<br>

</p>

<center><img src="http://spirer.com/images/fwc3.jpg" alt="" width="467" height="700" /></center>