Filmwasters

Which Board? => Main Forum => : outofcontxt December 17, 2007, 06:27:44 PM

: Is Photography Dead?
: outofcontxt December 17, 2007, 06:27:44 PM
Is photography dead? Newsweek's resident art critic Peter Plagens seems to think so in the December 10 issue. Read. Discuss. Debate. There will be a quiz after the holidays... uh, just kidding... ;)

http://www.newsweek.com/id/73349 (http://www.newsweek.com/id/73349)
: Re: Is Photography Dead?
: moominsean December 17, 2007, 08:23:33 PM
i read that last week. dumb article. saying that 'fiction in photography' didn't exist until the 1970s is just plain ignorant.
: Re: Is Photography Dead?
: rdbkorn December 17, 2007, 08:26:15 PM
It's annoying when uninformed opinion pieces (such as this one) are presented as "finger on the pulse" pieces written by an expert.
: Re: Is Photography Dead?
: Francois December 18, 2007, 03:32:04 PM
What I found quite disturbing is that the article is sponsored by Kodak  ??? ??? ???
: Re: Is Photography Dead?
: gothamtomato December 18, 2007, 11:50:56 PM
Photography's not dead, but Newsweek is pretty close to taking it's last breath.
: Re: Is Photography Dead?
: cpierce December 19, 2007, 03:48:13 AM
Send them to the filmwasters website, that may prove to the contrary.  Or even better yet a Filmwasters t-shirt to the author!
: Re: Is Photography Dead?
: SJ December 21, 2007, 07:09:21 PM
It's ridiculous, but also kind of exciting.  Painting has been declared "dead" and then been "revived" several times since photography was invented.  It's about time photography is taken seriously enough as an art that it is capable of dying.  It's also a bit impressive, because unlike painting, photography is badass enough to kill itself, instead of waiting passively for a new medium to murder it so it can be reborn.