May 13, 2013
If social media has been a blessing to anyone, it’s photographers.
Twenty years ago, those interested in viewing photographs had to drive to a gallery, pay an entry fee, and stand in line. Ten years ago, an internet browser could find a photographer online with a search entry, wait for three minutes for each single picture to load, and then slowly browse the photos a photographer cared to scan and upload.
Because the demand was low, professional photographers were few. Most had their own studios, and made a living shooting contract work – school photos, posed Christmas cards, anniversary photography. No one moved around much.
Today, I routinely get ‘Wedding Preview’ shots in my facebook stream. I see incredible hi-res images of subjects that I love – CrossFit, kids, farms, landscapes – without seeking them out. Friends who had never studied before 2005 are praised for their work, and begin shooting photos at weddings, charging between 2,000 and 5,000 for their services. It’s incredible how quickly photography has moved into the hands of the general population, rather than only the specialists. It’s also amazing how the boom in demand has created a demand for artists in the medium.
In the earliest days, photographers were less artists and more technicians. Cameras were expensive and complicated: knowledge of the equipment was the hurdle into entry. Subjects of photographs were seated squarely in the middle of the frame, and very few landscape portraits – or any other ‘artistic’ subjects – were shot, because there existed no market for ‘art.’
As camera operators became more proficient, the time required to set up a shot decreased, and pictures became more common. This drove camera technology to require less preparation and setup time, which meant that a photographer could take many pictures in a day. Although expensive, camera operators could now afford to take a shot or two that weren’t strictly posed.
As the camera became more portable to meet this demand, they also became easier to use, and the general population became interested. Through trial and error, many ‘mistakes,’ and reams of ‘wasted’ film, photography became art. Removing the technical limitations of setting up a camera allowed for more time in practice with the eye.
Today, of course, each picture you take on a digital camera carries virtually zero cost. Take fifty, if you like, and keep only one. Cameras are foolproof: just point and click. Yes, professionals still tinker with things like aperture and zoom, but even those can be automated based on the desired final product. The technology now serves the art, instead of vice versa.
The story of the camera can be applied to the learning process of any new skill. A handstand and a math problem require the same learning curve: introduction to the skill (setting up the camera); practice without expensive consequences (less time and resources required); freedom to experiment (no limitations on film); and the ability to accept mistakes in search of an answer.
At Ignite HQ, we’re currently in the final week of an enrichment program in photography. As my knowledge of the camera increases, I find myself automatically making decisions about zoom and aperture that required a lot of planning and forethought only weeks ago.
“How do I get more light in without overexposing the picture?” became, “How fast must my shutter speed by to compensate for the higher aperture?” which, in turn, became, “What do I want this to look like?” Technical knowledge becomes automatic, and art fills the vacuum.
In CrossFit, we call this virtuosity: performing the common uncommonly well. In Ignite, we call this ‘mass practice.’ But what we’re really talking about is art. How are you moving a technical skill into artistic practice today?
Ignite book