Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: So... You wanna be a photographer?  (Read 8879 times)
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #20 on: May 31, 2013, 11:27:55 AM »
ReplyReply

LOL exactly...oh noes, no more newspaper that most people stopped even THINKING ABOUT let alone reading, YEARS ago!
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: May 31, 2013, 11:38:22 AM »
ReplyReply

How so? How do you figure we are worse off?

I just explained it in the second part of the reply #14.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #22 on: May 31, 2013, 12:02:21 PM »
ReplyReply

I just explained it in the second part of the reply #14.

Right, but perhaps I should rephrase:

How are we as news-consumers worse off?

As for the jobs argument: we have been through that discussion in the 80s when computer automation and robotics emerged, but I can not honestly say that "we" as a whole are any worse off because of the jobs that were destroyed, changed, and created as a result of that automation...
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #23 on: May 31, 2013, 12:17:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Right, but perhaps I should rephrase:

How are we as news-consumers worse off?

As for the jobs argument: we have been through that discussion in the 80s when computer automation and robotics emerged, but I can not honestly say that "we" as a whole are any worse off because of the jobs that were destroyed, changed, and created as a result of that automation...


Again, i was talking big-picture, not just photographers or news-comsumers.

As for emerging technologies, it is worth noting that it is only one factor that shapes the current crisis. It is also worth noting that the current crisis appears to be different in nature than the cyclical ones in the recent past. It is significantly longer, affecting much broader spectrum (vs. single technological disruption), has not reached even a half of most pre-crisis indicators, and appears to be systemic, rather than cyclical. Since it has not recovered even a half of what's been lost, one can argue we are still worse off. Perhaps in the longer run (and it has already been the longest one, or one of), we might be better off, but, as we know, in the long run we are all dead.

EDIT: Come to think of it, aren't we, as news-consumers, indeed going to be worse-off with the amateurish iPhone videos and photographs?
Not if we accept the new-generation definition of photography, which equates it with Instagram.
« Last Edit: May 31, 2013, 12:34:07 PM by Slobodan Blagojevic » Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #24 on: May 31, 2013, 12:30:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Another, satirical take on the news:

Journalism experience will disqualify you
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1570


WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 31, 2013, 12:37:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Fortunately the UK Guardian & Observer put some store behind the quality of of their photography - for now. I'd hate to see something similar happen here.
Logged

Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1695


« Reply #26 on: May 31, 2013, 03:55:36 PM »
ReplyReply

EDIT: Come to think of it, aren't we, as news-consumers, indeed going to be worse-off with the amateurish iPhone videos and photographs?

I don't think so.  The ubiquity of cameras means that we get coverage of things we'd never otherwise see.  The meteor strike in Russia last winter is a prime example.  Even though the image quality wasn't pristine and the composition was random chance rather than carefully considered, we all got to see some pretty astonishing images.  From multiple angles, even.

Before the firebombs start, please understand that I'm not in favour of eliminating professional photographers, nor do I think that phone cameras are as good as a D800 at imaging our world, it's just that being on the spot with any camera counts a lot.
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #27 on: June 01, 2013, 03:33:07 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't think so.  The ubiquity of cameras means that we get coverage of things we'd never otherwise see.  The meteor strike in Russia last winter is a prime example.  Even though the image quality wasn't pristine and the composition was random chance rather than carefully considered, we all got to see some pretty astonishing images.  From multiple angles, even.

Before the firebombs start, please understand that I'm not in favour of eliminating professional photographers, nor do I think that phone cameras are as good as a D800 at imaging our world, it's just that being on the spot with any camera counts a lot.




I remember hearing someone quote another person, whose identity I have fogotten, thus: I would swap all the paintings of Christ for just a single photograph.

Makes sense to me.

Rob C
Logged

Rocco Penny
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 483



« Reply #28 on: June 01, 2013, 10:18:41 AM »
ReplyReply

I, for one, care.

...
,
...
,

So... group after group, profession after profession, factory after factory, town after town... are laid off, downsized, closed... families devastated, schools emptied, towns turned into ghost towns.

The latest reports claim that Americans have not recovered even a half of the wealth lost in the Great Recession. Jobs lost have not returned and perhaps never will. The unemployment stats are dropping, but mainly because millions of long-term unemployed are dropping out of statistics, giving up hope they will ever find work again.

And yet... corporate profits and cash reserves are at a historic high. Wealth of the wealthiest is higher than ever.

The old cynic (realist?) in me says, like you did: "Who cares? Thats how the world works. Deal with it."

The young at heart in me says: "Something ain't right here!?"


My dear man,
you have made my kinda disappointing morning worth a second look.
That's how it will be dismantled.
Piece by piece.
The bad set up will not remain.
I am sure of it...
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6424



WWW
« Reply #29 on: June 01, 2013, 11:35:10 AM »
ReplyReply


The latest reports claim that Americans have not recovered even a half of the wealth lost in the Great Recession. Jobs lost have not returned and perhaps never will. The unemployment stats are dropping, but mainly because millions of long-term unemployed are dropping out of statistics, giving up hope they will ever find work again.

And yet... corporate profits and cash reserves are at a historic high. Wealth of the wealthiest is higher than ever.

The old cynic (realist?) in me says, like you did: "Who cares? Thats how the world works. Deal with it."

The young at heart in me says: "Something ain't right here!?"

From where I stand it looks as if the "young at heart" (not the one in you, Slobodan) seem to feel everything is just hunky dory. Those unemployed folks are being taken care of by endless unemployment compensation from the inexhaustible government stash (also known as taxpayers' money, but it would be unsatisfactorily PC to mention that). Kids out of college don't know that the economy hasn't recovered even half its previous wealth because they get their "news" from TV and McParagraph (otherwise known as USA Today). They don't worry too much about not being out of a job. After all, they can stay under their parents' medical coverage until they're middle-aged, and as far as income is concerned, see above. Seems to me that it's the old cynics who see that "Something ain't right here!"

At the moment I'm going through the Great Courses lectures on the World of Byzantium. When I hear or read again (last time was Gibbon, long ago) about the end of the Roman Empire it almost seems as if I'm reading the editorial page in the WSJ.

Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #30 on: June 01, 2013, 12:07:20 PM »
ReplyReply

... Those unemployed folks are being taken care of by endless unemployment compensation...

Russ, let me correct this common misconception of "endless": benefits last max two years and we in the fourth year since the crises has begun. I, for one, have been out of benefits (for which I previously paid through unemployment insurance) for almost two years. I am, as well as millions of others, not only out of benefits, but we are also out of unemployment statistics, which is why the unemployment rate seems to be falling.
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6424



WWW
« Reply #31 on: June 01, 2013, 12:14:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Okay, maybe "endless" was a bit of an exaggeration. And yes, I'm well aware of how the administration and its captive news media have been cooking the unemployment books.

Hope you find employment soon, Slobodan.
Logged

Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1570


WWW
« Reply #32 on: June 01, 2013, 12:44:30 PM »
ReplyReply

You could always get a job as a staff photographer ... oh, wait ...
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6055


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #33 on: June 01, 2013, 12:44:52 PM »
ReplyReply

... I'm well aware of how the administration and its captive news media have been cooking the unemployment books.

Statistical methodology that excludes long-term unemployment long predates the current administration. I guess it was just another variant of the Y2K problem: at the time when it was devised, nobody expected that millions would remain (unwillingly) unemployed for more than two years.

Quote
Hope you find employment soon, Slobodan.

I am thinking of switching professions. Finance is so last century. I was thinking pizza delivery, but there are now more pizza delivery boys (which would suit the young at heart in me) than pizzas.

So... I am thinking photography, I heard it is quiet lucrative, no? Grin
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6424



WWW
« Reply #34 on: June 01, 2013, 01:19:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Statistical methodology that excludes long-term unemployment long predates the current administration. I guess it was just another variant of the Y2K problem: at the time when it was devised, nobody expected that millions would remain (unwillingly) unemployed for more than two years.

Right. But recently we've seen a rush to pretend that the cooked results are real.

Quote
So... I am thinking photography, I heard it is quite lucrative, no? Grin

No Embarrassed Not unless you can get Christie's or Sotheby's involved. Unfortunately, Rhine II already has been done and you just don't look like Cindy Sherman -- unless that's not really you in the avatar.
Logged

dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1260


« Reply #35 on: June 01, 2013, 06:35:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Learn to use the iPhone as a professional camera:

Chicago Sun-Times Fires Photography Staff, Offers Reporters iPhone Camera Classes

btw, this thread could have been named much better...
Logged
opgr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1125


WWW
« Reply #36 on: June 02, 2013, 05:07:20 AM »
ReplyReply

http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/01/after-your-job-is-gone/
Logged

Regards,
Oscar Rysdyk
theimagingfactory
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1570


WWW
« Reply #37 on: June 02, 2013, 05:13:02 AM »
ReplyReply

This is how the world ends - robots take all the jobs, people have no money to buy the goods & services the robots provide, the robots get laid off, then Skynet becomes self-aware. Let's just hope Sarah Connor has her act together.
Logged

Robert Roaldi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 497


WWW
« Reply #38 on: June 02, 2013, 08:04:49 AM »
ReplyReply


Remember those TV shows back in the 1970s that talked about how in the future robots would be doing all our dirty work and humans could, for the first time in history, not worry ourselves with daily chores but instead pursue higher goals. I wonder if they were thinking about photography or youtube videos. Somehow, they never talked about who was going to pay us to do that all that artistic pursuing, so that we could pay the rent and buy groceries in between those high-paying gallery exhibitions.

Is this creative destruction? Some of the think tanks say that this is good and healthy. I hope it all works out.

Logged

--
Robert
robertroaldi.zenfolio.com
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1260


« Reply #39 on: June 02, 2013, 08:29:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Is this creative destruction? Some of the think tanks say that this is good and healthy. I hope it all works out.

I wonder if the think tanks would say the same if it were there jobs being threatened by robots or AI...
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad