????? SNAPSHOT / SELECTION (gsm) VS / COMPOSITION (analoge) ????? – geschiedenis van analoge fotografie met experimenten naar aanleiding van wat we tegen komen van in de geschiedenis – loneliness in a busy world (depression) – FILM NOIR PHOTOGRAPHY

– Voeger ogen kijken in camera (analoog) nu naar fotograaf kijken (digitaal) – Nu nemen we heel veel fotoʼs en denken we niet na, wat slecht is wordt verwijdert (selectie wordt belangrijker dan compositie) – We hebben altijd een camera op zak nu, de gsm. Gsms worden nu het meeste gebruikt om fotoʼs te nemen en hebben sinds kort ook de kwaliteit om als afdruk te gebruiken – Snapshots, vaak met gsm, van evenementen zorgen ervoor dat je minder ervan herinnerd (wetenschappelijk bewezen) – We nemen fotoʼs met de gsm zonder na te denken, we werken vooral met automatische functie inplaats van de camera te kennen – fotografie wordt volledig wegwerpbaar (posten op fb, likes en comments en dan kijkt niemand er meer naar) – **zie snapshot/ gsm fotografie vs goede fotografie verschillen onderaan – Tussen GSM Snapshot (selection) en ANALOGE Fotografie (Composition) zit DIGITALE FOTOGRAFIE (bevind zich tussen snapshot en “good” photography) – bij analoge is beter dan bij digitaal. Je hebt minder blowouts

Bruno V. Roels, gaps in the kruinenearde (belicht op oud fotopapier) Masao Yamamoto Ai WeiWei, “Safe Passage” FILM NOIR GALLERY FIFTY ONE (fiftyone.com - Zirkstraat 20, Antwerpen) Artiesten die me aanspreken: – Kyungwoo Chun (long exposure portraits) – Bruno V. Roels (analogue photography, printing on old paper) – Daido Moriyama (the bizarre underworld of Japanese street life, with a sense of the theatrical and the erotic) – Kerry Skarbakka (falling people) – Kimiko Yoshida (quasi-monochromatic self-portraits) – Ray K. Metzker (intense ribbon of sunlight or a dense wall of shadow) – Hans-Christian Schink (turns his camera to the sun during one hour-long exposures and a 'real solarizationʼ effect sets in) – Deanna Templeton (portraits under water) – Adam Baer (“aperture-specific” constructions that attempt to visually splinter various atmospheres and reconstruct the shards) – Alvin Booth (nude, printed, toned, and "distressed" by hand, image and printing method is modern) – ! Masahisa Fukase (a record of a man who turned inward, leaving behind pure images of personal grief) – ! Yuichi Hibi (series of dramatic, almost cinematic images captured on dark and rainy nights) – Abelardo Morell (photos of projections of surroundings on other surroundings) – Friederike von Rauch (empty spaces have been abandoned, but with an always possibility that someone might show up) – Masao Yamamoto (birds, Refined, subtle and powerful at the same time. The photo prints are small, sometimes even minuscule, and require a –

profound observation.)

The death of photography: are camera phones destroying an artform? (Snapshot vs Photograph) "It's really weird," says Antonio Olmos. "Photography has never been so popular, but it's getting destroyed. There have never been so many photographs taken, but photography is dying." – narcissistic smartphone photography – if we take a photo of something we're less likely to remember it than if we'd looked at it with our eyes. "When people rely on technology to remember for them," argued psychologist Linda Henkel of Fairfield University in Connecticut, "counting on the camera to record the event and thus not needing to attend to it fully themselves – it can have a impact on how well they remember their experiences." – we don't even remember the stuff we take pictures of, making the snap- happy nature of modern photography doubly mindless – For example: ”People taking photographs of their food in a restaurant instead of eating it," says Olmos. "People taking photographs of the Mona Lisa instead of looking at it. I think the iPhone is taking people away from their experiences." – in the 1850s the rise of photography made many painters, who had previously made nice livings from painting family portraits, redundant. Now it's the turn of professional photographers to join the scrap heap. – "The iPhone has a crap lens. You can take a beautiful picture on the iPhone and blow it up for a print and it looks terrible." But who needs prints in a paper-free world? "For me the print is the ultimate expression of photography.“ – "I'm a storyteller in images; my compositions are better than most people's. Just because you've got a microprocessor in your computer doesn't make you a writer. And just because you've got an Instagram app on your phone you aren't a great photographer."

Why is digital lazy? – Guardian photographer Eamonn McCabe: “I think there's a depth to a print you don't get with digital.” “I don't think photography's dead, it's just become lazy. People are taking lots of pictures but nobody's looking at them." – "It's a scattergun approach. You snap away thinking, 'One of these shots will work', rather than concentrate on capturing the image." – "We don't engage with the camera any more. We don't know how it works."

Nick Knight (the British fashion photographer, done two big assignments entirely on iPhone) – “Before there were hardly any images, and all of them are from on stage. Compare that with now – at a Kanye West gig you see a sea of cameras, and there's a database of images. I think that's fantastic – the new medium is much more democratic."

They take a photo, post it to facebook, get a bunch of 'likes' and comments on how amazing photographed event is, then no one ever looks at it ever again. Throwaway society. photography on the smartphone has become like music on the ipod, totally disposable

Composition: The skill now lies in the selection of the many photos you take and what you do with them https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/dec/13/death-of- photography-camera-phones

Students in an art gallery were more likely to forget the art they took pictures of, than those they were merely asked to observe – Cultural commentators and itinerant moaners have often complained that our obsession with taking pictures stops us from experiencing the moment, and now scientists are saying that our snap-happy habits may also be ruining our memory. – A new psychological study by Linda Henkel of Fairfield University has provided some proof that the “photo-taking impairment effect” exists: when we take a photo of something weʼre less likely to remember it. – “People so often whip out their cameras almost mindlessly to capture a moment, to the point that they are missing what is happening right in front of them.” http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/is-facebook- making-us-forget-study-shows-taking-pictures-ruin-memories-8994917.html http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797613504438

Can Analog Photography help you take better photos? – Digital cameras have become ever-present in the form of smartphones – I do not really concentrate on the photo itself. It is more like a fast snapshot. (A great sunset? Snap. Some new sneakers I like? Snap. Sushi at –

my favorite restaurant? Snap.) – I take many pictures without really thinking about them beforehand. – This can be a good thing. I create memories the fastest way possible – I do not have to worry about how many photos I take because memory space practically never runs out. – But all these photos are “only” snapshots.

How is it possible that my analog photos are better than my digital ones even though I only use a point-and-shoot camera where I have no control over settings like aperture and shutter time? . The Viewfinder . No big screen, no other distractions. This makes it possible to completely concentrate on the subject you want to capture . The Composition . With analog photography you do not want to waste your roll of film. Therefore, you better think about your photo before you click that shutter button. . The Limited Number of Shots . if I always took three photos in a row with my analog camera, I would be “wasting” a lot of film. Therefore, I take one picture, maximum two, then I focus on another scene. This is where the magic starts to happen: I discover so many great new scenes that I probably wouldnʼt even have noticed if I was shooting digital. . The Surprise . The Look . use expired film, you will get even more unpredictable results . You can try to “fake” the film look for your digital photos but very often make the picture lose its real character and looks over-processed

All in all, analog photography has helped me to get back in touch with “real photography” once more. I stopped taking snapshots most of the time. Instead, I focus on taking photographs. https://medium.com/@annalinke/can-analog-photography-help-you-take- better-photos-bd05ec7039ec

Snapchot vs Good Photograph – The difference for me between a snapshot and an intentional photograph is that one I am shooting ‘atʼ while the other I am shooting ‘throughʼ. By through, I mean using compositional elements, anticipation and timing to evoke a sense of what it felt like to be in that very moment. When Iʼm shooting at something, it typically means that I see my subject doing something and immediately take a picture of the action – snapshot is a shot without an artistic point, itʼs a memory – "Snapshots are personal. They record a personal history and are very important for that reason, but only to people who know the people and places in the photos. Technical quality is less important than capturing the people and place in time. Digital point and shoots are ideal for this purpose. – Good photos grab anyoneʼs attention without any personal or other history. They speak for themselves. Ideally they take an interesting subject and highlight what makes the subject interesting through selective focus, contrast, etc. I use this test: if you saw a particular photo in a gallery, without knowing anything else, would you want to buy it and put it in your house?"

**difference: – The snapshot is made by pointing the camera at what one hopes to ‘captureʼ + clicking – The photograph is composed in the viewfinder, even if quickly and intuitively

– In the snapshot what you see is (hopefully) what you get – The photograph is pre-visualized as to how the scene will translate into a photo

– The snapshot is a record of what the camera is pointed at – The photograph is an interpretation of what is seen, thought or felt

– The snapshot doesnʼt acknowledge the relationship between foreground + background – The photograph deals with the relationship between foreground and background

– The snapshot is primarily about the subject + is minimally aware of the rest of the frame – The photograph is responsible for the entire frame and all itʼs contents

– The snapshot does not pay attention to the corners and edges of the frame – The photograph pays extra importance to the corners and edges of the frame

– The snapshot is only about what is visible – The photograph is often as much about what isnʼt seen as much as what is

– The snapshot is taken at the aperture chosen by the camera – The photograph is made at the aperture chosen by the photographer

– The snapshot has itsʼ depth-of-field dictated by the camerasʼ choice of aperture – The photograph has itsʼ depth-of-field dictated by the photographers choice of aperture – The snapshot has itsʼ perspective dictated by zooming in or out – The photographs perspective is dictated by choice of focal length + distance to subject

– The snapshot can be fixed later by cropping, so careful composition is not valued – The photograph is cropped in camera and can be fine-tuned later, only if necessary

– The snapshot only needs enough light to take the picture, or flash can be added – The photograph is aware of the quality of light falling on the subject and background

– The snapshot does not go beyond technique – The photograph transcends technique to reveal vision

– The snapshot is usually a reaction to external stimuli – The photograph is often guided by internal stimuli

– The snapshot is often taken as a one-of-a-kind reaction to a subject – The photograph is often made in the context of ongoing concerns in larger body of work

– The snapshots beauty is on the surface – The photographs beauty often lies below the surface

– The snapshot has no metaphorical meaning, unless unintentional – The photograph often contains intentional metaphorical meaning

– The snapshots intent is pure in that it is only interested in ‘capturingʼ the moment – The photographʼs intent is often murky in that it understands that nothing can actually be captured… https://www.clickinmoms.com/blog/snapshot-vs-good-photograph-7- photographers-weigh-in/ http://douglasbeasley.com/2015/04/02/the-difference-between-taking-a- snapshot-making-a-photograph/

SNAPSHOT (als onderzoek naar de juist belichting, positie)