A Photographic Revolution In the Air

I’m reading a biography of the legendary photographer, Alfred Stieglitz by Dorothy Norman. I’m finding it a fascinating read, how he challenged rules. When he was young and played sports, he often wanted to change the rules of the game. In his photography and his life, he wanted to not “hit the target, but hit the center of the target.” That kind of passion inspires me. To not do something good enough, but extraordinarily.

Alfred Stieglitz - PICRYL Public Domain Search
Alfred Stieglitz, photographic pioneer

Photography is on the cusp of something big. A monumental change is coming.

To many, it may feel like photography has become so ubiquitous that it has become somewhat meaningless, worthless, yet there will always be a need for art from artists. Just like I promote printing of photographs, there’s a movement, a revolution afoot, to celebrate the photographers who step outside of the mainstream: the typical image-maker using their pocket phone and Instagram to show their friends where they are for a glance and a swipe–and making real work, printing actual photographs.

There was music in the cafés at night
And revolution in the air

~Bob Dylan, Tangled Up In Blue

The revolution doesn’t involve the phone shooters who will continue to happily share their world instantly on small screens, (maybe we should rename them picture sharers), but the photographers who are making long-term tangible work. This isn’t disparaging to the phone shooters as not everyone wants to work as a photographer or cares about making photographs that last.

I define photography as having made a photograph, a physical work of art. Curated from all the frames that could have been printed, one chosen to print and frame. What good is writing a song that you never perform for people? What good is a photograph that doesn’t get printed and exist on a wall, whether at a gallery or simply in a friend’s dining room? (Again, unless you’re a picture sharer with the phone, that’s fine but that’s different. For the majority of people, there is no long-term life expectation of their images. They are made for immediate viewing only. They aren’t pursuing photography as art.)

Perhaps the revolution involves large exhibition prints for gallery or museum shows. Maybe it involves quality prints that just aren’t possible once you expand a phone photo past a 4″ screen.

There have been many posts about how a phone can match the quality of a top of the line DSLR or film camera, but they leave out “only at low resolution viewing, like on small digital devices”. Bring those images up to a significant print size, and does the phone image hold up or fall apart? It’s apparent that the phone image was never made for a large display, the type of art print worthy of a gallery, the quality chosen to document important work, the kind that is bought by art collectors.

Plus there’s the psychological difference. If you go to make portraits for a photo project, a larger camera instills a sense of quality and professionalism which causes the subject to respond differently than if you walk in with a phone. Same is true if you walked in with a Holga or Diana plastic toy camera or even a 4×5 or 8×10 view camera, the camera changes the perception of the project’s importance.

Stieglitz wasn’t willing to accept the status quo. He challenged what was and asked what could be. He moved art photography forward at a time when photography had very little value. Sort of like today.

In 1897, he was instrumental in promoting art photography and helping it become respected through his involvement with The Camera Club of New York, and exhibiting work in his NYC gallery, 291.

I, too, challenge photographers wherever I go to print their photographs. To mount exhibitions. To frame and display their work. To make a difference, make great art–actual photographs and create work that can be exhibited, framed and bought as artwork. Today sure, but also in the future.

There’s a changing tide that’s starting where young people are embracing film photography–albeit in small numbers but still significant and growing numbers–because they want something less fleeting than digital images, pictures that can have lasting value beyond phones, clouds, backup drives and computer screens. There are universities reinstalling darkrooms and adding film photography classes due to student demand.

I call it a revolution. There’s something coming that’s going to change the way photography is perceived. Where we are at now isn’t where we will be in 10 years.

Right now, camera sales are down. Like when photography began, just the pros and a few serious hobbyists had the expensive equipment to make photographs. Only the wealthy could afford to make photographs with large-format equipment in the days before George Eastman started selling the Kodak Brownie, which was essentially the smartphone of the day.

1910 Kodak Camera Ad ~ Let the Children Kodak, Vintage Radio, Camera, TV Ads  | Camera ads, Vintage camera, Kodak camera

The “Kodak” ushered in ubiquity in photography in every person’s hand–man, woman or child. Everyone predicted serious photography’s demise.

But though the Kodak was commonplace, it didn’t diminish photography. Nowadays the pros and serious hobbyists are still upgrading equipment and making the effort to carry a kit to have more choices to make better photographs than what is possible with a phone.

The revolution has begun, but it’s difficult for many to see with such a quantity of phone images being made that are constantly entering our lives. So many digital phone snaps being emailed and texted and sent to us via social media that it feels like that is all there is, no actual photos exist. The perception is photography is now only on our phones, a colossal quantity of pictures. But that’s fueled by our own addiction to the devices. By our willingness to spend our lives online.

Because there is very little printing of those phone photos, I predict like those early Kodak Brownie photographs, they won’t last. But the ones from the Rolleiflex portraitist of today, the 4×5 landscape photographer, the 35mm documentary shooter, or the Sony digital photographer, those photographs will have an impact.

In time.

Time makes photographs more valuable. Would Vivian Maier or Fred Herzog or Saul Leiter have been considered such masters if they had been discovered in their time? We can’t misjudge the element of time to add value to an artist’s work.

Garry Winogrand was said to have pulled another street photographer aside and said, “Whatever photo you make today, make it the best you can, it only gets better as it ages.”

It’s true. The photographs being made by the photographers of today are going to go far. The ones willing to carry a camera. To shoot film or high-resolution digital images, make photographic prints, initiate projects, exhibit their work. They will be seen as the modern pioneers–the new Maiers, Herzogs, Leiters, Winogrands, and Egglestons–and an inspiration to a new generation of photo amateurs in the future who will deride making images just for small screens and also take up the art of creating actual photographs, which is when camera sales will rise once again.

To forego the Brownie for the Speed Graphic. To embrace the higher quality image despite its making being more work.

It may not seem it to the casual shooter, but I see it at gallery shows, and other places where exhibitions are happening. I see the attendance at the “A New York Minute” street photography show at the Cleveland Museum of Art, full of viewers not interested in viewing on a screen but on a gallery wall. People coming to see hand-printed black and white silver-halide prints. To experience photography.

A change is coming. It’s a revolution in the air.

People wanting to consume photography who are not willing to settle for “fast food” but wanting a gourmet meal made from scratch. Mirroring the slow food movement, not desiring the quickest and easiest, but something a bit better quality even if it takes a bit longer to make.

Like the record industry embracing its resurgence.

Like the film photography industry seeing an increase in demand for film stocks, and the re-release of formerly discontinued films.

There’s a revolution happening. And it’s easily missed, obscured by the ubiquitous presence of the Kodak Brownie photos of today, the phone snaps all around us. But happening it is.

Photographs are being made by photographers building strong bodies of work. With purpose. With direction. On a daily basis pounding the pavement or taking to the land. With an eye for quality and deliverability. Working to make photographs for a future audience who will appreciate the work.

It takes a revolutionary to see the future need to photograph the things today that aren’t nostalgic–old cars, rusty buildings, cute diners. It takes a visionary to see how to document today’s world in a way that works for tomorrow’s exhibitions. To create photographs of the strong and weak, the beautiful and the ugly.

The Robert Franks making documentary photos of America today. The Garry Winogrands creating street photographs that will be embraced in just a short time. The Diane Arbuses photographing those on society’s fringes today. The William Egglestons making art portraits.

The revolution has begun. A few are a part of it, more than you would think, and more are joining it, but it is happening. It is strengthening. And it welcomes all newcomers. Their work will be celebrated.

Just not today.

The revolution that’s here is making photographs for tomorrow’s viewers, and setting the stage for the photographers whose names will be ubiquitous with photography then.

Want to support my shows? You can, just visit this link at Paypal, or go to SupportKenneth.com to add your monthly contribution to keep the lights on!

Check out my YouTube Channel of Photography Talks: my 6×6 Portraits Blog (you’re here) and my Daily Photography Podcast. Thanks!

2 thoughts on “A Photographic Revolution In the Air

Add yours

  1. Full disclosure: I am primarily a film photographer, shooting 35mm, 120 & 4×5. I’ve been shooting seriously since about 1973. I agree with most of this, and the sentiment, but have to make an observation regarding the quality of « cell phone » images when viewed on other than a small screen.

    It’s simply not true. I’ve had a photo that I made with an iPhone XS printed to 30 inches on the long side, and it holds up really well. As a matter of fact, I showed it Michael Johnston who was quite impressed with the technical quality. Note – I had it printed (and framed) as I do agree that, for me, photography is MOSTLY meant to be printed. I have also sold a 20-inch print to someone who really liked it.

    The fact, however, is that when Kodak invented consumer photography that was accessible to a wider public, printing was virtually the ONLY way photographs could be enjoyed. Yes, you could have a magic lantern show, but how convenient was that if you wanted to show some pictures to cousin Fred who lived hundreds or thousands of miles away? Same with the stereopticon – not really convenient, which was the point of inventing the Kodak, other than to make George Eastman very wealthy and greatly improve life and the economy of Rochester. I currently live in Rochester and was here during its fall.

    For what it’s worth, you can find my photo that I mentioned here: https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/59388aa0f5e231a82811531f/1562197582309-QP6LBBQ9J9ZKHO2LO4B5/public.jpeg?format=2500w

    And by the way, that brasserie in Paris is frequented often by David and Peter Turnley, which is one reason I made the photo. It was taken on April 8, 2019, four days after I just happened to run into Peter as he returned from lunch there, following receiving his French citizenship. Along with other wonderful happenings, that was a really good trip.


    1. Ok, Earl, so there can be exceptions to any rule, but overall, most phone photos aren’t made and able to print that large unless the operator was being very careful (most aren’t) and the lighting conditions were a perfect fit (most aren’t) for that small sensor. It is a fine photo and thanks for sharing it. But again, that doesn’t mean all phone photos can be printed big. That’s not a direct correlation because of your print. And add to that that most people never print their photos at all, the phone viewing is all there will ever be for them. I accept all printing photographers into the revolution: film, DSLR or phone, but it’s the print that matters most. Thanks for sharing yours. Very nice.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: