ASSIGNMENT FOUR: CRITICAL REVIEW

I have written my critical review and will be emailing it to my tutor today.

I originally didn't include it here until my tutor had seen it and written my feedback but now that th's been done, here is my original Critical Review submission.

Is advancing technology threatening traditional photography and the market of photography?

“The advent of the digital camera had changed the traditional camera, but it's most revolutionary aspect has been the advent of the camera phone.” (Tom de Castella, 2012)

As with many things through time, the technology and processes of photography have evolved. The introduction of the photograph and the process to develop a single image to print in the 1800's was a major breakthrough during it's time and this created a new public demand for photography itself and for the practise of photography.

Jump three hundred odd years to today's market and an even bigger breakthrough has occurred; the digital age. This has brought with it dramatic changes to photographers and the art of photography alike. Technological advances have created vast changes to how we create and market photography but will these developments see the end of traditional photography and the market of photography in general?

Photographs have been known to have been introduced in the 18^th century but it wasn't until the early 19^th century that the breakthrough of the daguerreotype process was introduced by Louis Daguerre (1787-1851). This was then experimented with to create a more mobile process, the daguerreotype view, which opened the market for photographs from around the world, inspiring photographers to travel with their cameras.

“Printsellers had already proven there was a market for a visual travelogue – prints were mementos for people.... and served armchair warriors.” (LJS & Hacking, 2012)

LJS (2012) continues that “the announcement of the daguerreotype in 1839 captivated the publics imagination about the new art and paved the way for a photographic exploration of the world......but for the first 15 years of the art, the daguerreotype view dominated” (LJS & Hacking, 2012, P.29)

As well used as the daguerreotype was, it had long exposure times and therefore was initially used for landscape images. However a development to the process included the invention of a F3.6 aperture portrait lens by Joseph Petzval (1807-1891) in 1840 along with a new idea to add bromine to the iodine to make the plates more sensitive by John Frederick Goddard (1795-1866) later that year. This reduced exposure times significantly allowing a new breakthrough in portrait photography. This meant that photographers opened studios to meet demand for public portraits.

Another boost for the publics growing interest in photography came in 1888 when Kodak invented a box camera under the slogan “You press the button, we do the rest”. This allowed the public to take their own pictures and return the camera for Kodak to do all the developing work and then return their prints to them. A process that is still in use today with the aptly named 'disposable cameras'.

The 20^th century saw a continuing improvement in the development of photography as well as in the market for photography. 1907 saw a revolution in colour photography and the introduction of the “rotogravure” process in the early 20^th century, provoked an increasing demand for advertising and publishing photography.

“The introduction of rotogravure enabled quality halftone reproductions to be printed cheaply and at high speed on a variety of inexpensive paper stock on a large scale. Opportunities for commercial photography rapidly expanded and a mass market advertising was born”. (Pamela Glasson Roberts & Hacking, 2012)

The press also played a huge part in the market for photography. The end of the war saw an increase in candid photography in the press, with the public having an increasing fascination with celebrities and the famous from the likes of Hollywood. And the press also always had a need for documentary photography to illustrate event coverage and stories, much like press coverage today.

The mid to late 20^th century then saw an influx of rival companies creating more competition in the photographical market. Each would develop their own cameras which then saw AGFA create the first fully automatic camera called the 'Optima'. More advancements in the technology saw the additions of the Polaroid camera, the APS (advanced photo system) cameras and eventually the digital camera.

These developments were important to keep up to date with societies needs and wants. The progression in photography as well as other factors in society have brought us into a digital age. For photography, that meant huge changes to not only the technology but also to the processes to produce physical prints. The very first digital camera was invented by Kodak and Steve Sasson in 1975 and the developing technology only made more of a contrast to traditional methods. This saw film almost being made obsolete and allowing the photographer more control over their images. It also allowed more photographs to be taken without the worry of 'running out of film' and even the ability to check and delete photos from the camera itself. Tom de Castella of BBC news magazine (2012) acknowledged that “The impact on professional photographers has been dramatic. Once upon a time a photographer would not dare to waste a shot unless they were virtually certain it would work”. This meant that the volume of photographs being taken could also be increased, with images now being stored onto small memory cards as opposed to the film alternative. The cameras/memory cards could then be connected to computer devices, where the images would be uploaded and stored to the computer without the immediate need to physically develop any prints at all.

Dark rooms have been replaced with computer software such as Photoshop, which allow photographers to edit their photographs to create the desired images. These images could them be stored or printed at home or sent via the internet to more professional companies who, like Kodak once did, will print a higher quality print for you. The internet has been a major development for every corner of society. It has played a massive part in the technological and marketing advancements. Early photography saw photographers shooting photos and making prints to meet local demand. The internet has now created endless demand and possibilities worldwide.

All these inventions and progressions through the last two centuries have evolved photography to keep with a more digital society but have they really had an impact on traditional photography and the market for photography?

Back in the 19^th century, the photograph was highly marketed for public demand. There wasn't as much competition as there is today with regards to the amount of professional photographers as well as the procedures for creating the prints. And this procedure was far from simplistic and very time consuming. The public's imagination created the demand for collections of landscape images as well as a desire for a professional portrait. This allowed photographers to set up studios and others to travel the world to capture new images to meet these demands. As time progressed and photography became more widespread, it became more of a personal expression for individual artistic style which also heightened interest for more less-conventional art. These factors are still valid today. Professional photography studios are still well used outlets where the public can visit and get customised requirements taken to a high professional standard. However, the advances in both the equipment and the processes now allow a very different experience to how they were centuries ago. But the fact that professional photographers are still very much in demand and being commissioned to create specific requirements of their customers shows that the technological advances have not threatened this aspect of photography. In fact, they may have complimented it. The fact that photographers have studios that are very modern with an abundance of props and lighting selections can only help create the desired images with less effort. The same with the cameras themselves. Cameras now allow custom settings or a selection of automatic features which create more effects without the photographer having to do all the work themselves. Even the processing stages allow a lot more diversity in creating the final images which can then be saved to USB sticks or CDs or printed on a wide variety of products such as canvases, mugs, t-shirts etc. The possibilities are endless. All these choices allow for a much bigger market for photography.

The media is also an area where photography is still in high demand. The extensive range of magazine and newspapers nowadays allows for competition between stories and photographs especially when it comes to big stories. This means photographers are commissioned to undertake assignments to illustrate big stories with ever decreasing deadlines. The developments in the technology not only allow more compacted equipment for the photographer to possibly travel around easier but you will find that most nowadays will have the ability to edit and transfer their images on location directly via the internet to meet those tight deadlines. The papers also desire candid or paparazzi shots, mostly through the tabloids, to accompany stories on celebrities which are still in high demand today and with such a high volume of readers, fashion photography and advertising photography are more in demand than ever before. So I can't see any negative impact in these areas from the advances in technologies.

One of the casualties of the new digital progression in photography is the actual processing of prints and the companies that once strived on it. The influx of rival companies have pushed the limits of older more prominent photography companies such as Kodak, who had been a leading competitor of the scene for over a century. However, these new advances were too much for Kodak, amongst others, have faded slightly in the photographical market. The Economist (2012) reported that “It (Kodak) built one of the first digital cameras in 1975. That technology, followed by the development of smart phones that double as cameras, has battered Kodak's old film and camera-making business almost to death”. The article explores how “they did eventually make a hefty business out of the digital cameras but it lasted only a few years until the camera phone scuppered it”. The advances in the technology and the cameras themselves were something that Kodak didn't keep up with and where other rival companies adjusted to suit the new technology, Kodak failed. The Economist (2012) stated that “Unlike people, companies can in theory live forever. But most die young, because the corporate world, unlike society at large, is a fight to the death. Fujifilm has mastered new tactics and survived......Kodak, along with many a great company before it, appears simply to have run it's course.” However, you will find many a photographer who hasn't made the switch to digital cameras and will still shoot with film cameras, although their choices of equipment are now limited. Cha (2014) stated “film is great because there are so many different types of cameras and stocks of film to choose from” but then he goes on to say “Most of the gear I use aren't in production anymore”. This shows that even amongst all the new technology and developments in photography , there is still a market for the traditional way.

“Any photographer who still shoots film today knows all too well the meaning of the phrase “slim pickings” whether it be in regards to film, developing labs, chemistry, dark room equipment and even cameras” (Istillshootfilm.org n.d)

There are still photographers who choose to shoot in film despite the high tech advances to the equipment and there are numerous websites and facilities online to now give these photographers the opportunity to find and purchase the older technology that they still thrive for. So yes, here we can see that there have been casualties to the new developments in technology but there is still a, albeit small, market for the traditional way.

The main thing to note about the changing market due to these technological changes is the fact that nowadays, everyone can be a photographer. Traditional photography was more time consuming and an expensive profession. Tom de Castella (BBC News magazine, 2012) explained that “today photography is cheap and effortless”. Smart phones with exceptional quality cameras have made a convenient alternative to compact cameras as the vast majority of people will have a mobile phone at all times. The growing technology in regards to these smart phones as well as social media websites, eg Facebook and Twitter and 'apps' , such as Instagram, allow the masses to not only take a large quantity of photos but will also allow them to edit them and then share them from their phones. The internet also offers hosting websites such as Picasa and Flickr for people to not only store their photographs but to be able to showcase and share with other photographers and people from around the world. Although, these sites can also be used by the media and stock photo companies to locate new images as opposed to commissioning professional photographers at a cheaper cost to themselves which will obviously impact someone along the way.

The internet has also seen an introduction to a different kind of photographer. Jon Rafman and Michael Wolf made names for themselves by creating award winning photographs from frames that they have screen – shot from Googles' street view, without leaving their homes, although critics will question whether this is really classed as photography.

The new advancements have allowed easier access to photographs and photographers alike, as well as allowing a lot more creativity to the photographers themselves. The newer technology has managed to create a public fascination with the camera and photography , through 'the selfie' and 'tweet what you eat' to name a couple, but it's the fact that so many people now have access to high quality, affordable cameras means that new aspiring photographers are born every day. This has allowed the market for photography to thrive. So do I think that these new technologies have threatened traditional photography? Yes. Purely due to the fact that the old way of photography is not as commonly practised anymore and some of the older generation of companies have had to bow out or take a back seat. Some professional photographers are adapting to the new procedures whereas some prefer the old conventional way so there is still a small market for this minority. But do I think that the new advances in technology have had an impact on the market of photography? Yes but not in a negative way. There is still a huge mass market for photography and photographers alike. The new technology has opened numerous doors in the photography world, creating new photographers and new means of marketing photography. As with most things, there are some who welcome change and some who find it difficult to adapt and this can create losses but the opportunities for photography and photographers are endless in contrast to even a few decades ago. As time evolves, things have to evolve with it and I think photography has well adapted to the change.

References:

WIKIPEDIA TIMELINE OF PHOTOGRAPHY TECHNOLOGY (2015) Timeline of photography technology [online]. Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_photography_technology [accessed: 20^th July 2015]

WIKIPEDIA LOUIS DAGUERRE (2015) Louis Daguerre [online]. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Daguerre [accessed: 20^th July 2015]

LJS, GLASSON ROBERTS, P. & HACKING, J. (ed.)(2012) Photography, the whole story. London: Thames & Hudson

WIKIPEDIA JOSEPH PETZVAL (2015) Joseph Petzval [online]. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Petzval [accessed 20^th July 2015]

WIKIPEDIA JOHN FREDERISK GODDARD (2015) John Frederick Goddard [online]. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Frederick_Goddard [accessed 20^th July 2015]

ECONOMIST (2012) The last Kodak moment? [online] Jan 14^th 2012. Available from: http://www.economist.com/node/21542796 [Accessed: 20^th July 2015]

CHA (2014) Why film is still better than digital [online] Jan 17^th 2014. Available at: http://www.slrlounge.com/film-still-better-digital/ [accessed: 20^th July 2015]

DE CASTELLA,T (2012) Five ways the digital camera changed us [online] Feb 28^th 2012. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16483509 [accessed: 20^th July 2015]

I STILL SHOOT FILM (n.d.) Which film cameras are still being made today [online] Available at: http://istillshootfilm.org/post/68284060176/which-film-cameras-are-still-being-made-today-a [accessed: 20^th July 2015]

ZHANG,M (2010) The worlds first digital camera by Kodak and Steve Sasson [online] Aug 5^th 2010. Available at: http://petapixel.com/2010/08/05/the-worlds-first-digital-camera-by-kodak-and-steve-sasson/ [accessed 21^st July 2015]

Thoughts going into the Critical Review

I know I have mentioned before on many occasions, but I cant help but feel rushed and have a continued sense of being out of my depth. I remember from the previous level 2 course that I felt particularly nervous coming up to the critical review as I am not good at writing or reading academic writing and the fact that we are reviewing these types of essays in the coursework just makes me more nervous to the fact that this is how I should be writing. The last essay reviewing exercise was difficult and, even though I know that the amount of theory is due to the 'degreeness' of the course as my tutor put it, it doesn't make it any easier to understand and really sucks any fun out of these courses.

Back to the critical review...
So I've done lots of notes and read up a fair bit (due to time constraints) on my chosen title so I hope the writing goes well. I've started writing down the odd paragraph as i'm thinking about it so I will most probably have a jumble of paragraphs and quotes to try to write in some sort of order when it comes to writing it up but I can only do my best. Hopefully that will be enough.

Exercise: A essay on reviewing photographs

This exercise asked me to review the essay Words and Pictures: On reviewing photographs by Liz Wells which is available in our course reader.

The basic argument in the essay is the difficulties faced by critics to accurately write about and analyse photographs and how their roles are changing due to the post modernist view of what is considered art.
I don't think that the title is a fair indication of the content of the essay as the title suggests that the essay is about the relationship between words and pictures and reviewing the photographs. The essay is really about the difficulties in reviewing photographs and photography collections with regard to the work itself, the photographer and the gallery, and how to put them into words to do them justice.
Wells discusses how books and gallery exhibitions make it difficult to adequately review the work being reviewed as the chosen pictures can be lacking the intensity of the work in general. Wells continues that the review left by the critic will long outlast the exhibition and leaves a mark on the photographer so the critic is under pressure to create an accurate account.
Wells explains the contrasts in writing about photography in different times and countries. Britain didn't accept photography as art until later in the century, allowing an overdue equal status. The post modernist view allows more freedom of expression, whether that be to the work of the photographer, the choices of the gallery or the opinion of the critic. The critics still have a responsibility but post modernism allows critics to be free from the conventional and be more opinionated, while still giving feedback to the galleries and photographers alike.
Wells identifies the relationship between the photographer, the gallery and the critic and how both the gallery and the photographer require acceptance from the critic but reviewing work is primarily about the particular judgement and passion of the critic.
I regards to qualifications, I don't think they should be a requirement but I do feel that a knowledge of photography and the practise of it are particularly relevant. I think critics should physically see what they are reviewing but I feel that experience is just as justified as an actual qualification. Not all photographers have studied photography, they are just passionate about what they practise and I feel that this should be the same for critics too.

This was a difficult essay for me to read. I had to read it at least 6 times just to make sense of it and I still didn't understand a big chunk of it, some parts may as well have been written in latin. So I have tried as best I can to understand these points and to make sense of them.

Exercise: Review your last Assignment (Assignment 2)

I have already undertaken this exercise alongside my Assignment 2 Tutor Feedback and have made notes in that post that you can find here.
As an extra bit of reworking for that Assignment, which I didn't undertake in the feedback post, my tutor said that he was not too sure about the black and white text. I can see why this could 'get a bit lost' in the photograph being black and white so I thought I would try it with an array of colours to see which works best.

Most of the colours work well for the cover text except maybe the purple. The shade of the purple makes the text look a bit too dark and as with the black text, can look a bit lost and unreadable.  All the other colours are bright and vibrant and therefore catch the readers attention. For me personally, I think the orange or the green work the best. They are not as bright and 'in your face' as the others but maybe the orange is just that bit clearer. I actually liked the idea of having the text in black but am now happy with the colour change to the orange and will amend the colour on my submission before assessment.

Reworked Final Cover for Assignment 2

Assignment 2 - A photographic book cover

Assignment 3 Tutor Feedback

Overall Comments

I should start my feedback by saying that I think, overall, you have done a good job here. I read through your text first and was unsure about the results I would view at the end as you highlighted so many of the problems you faced and mentioned that you were not overly happy with the results. When I came to the layout in the blog post, I was pleasantly surprised. The way you have laid out the photographs has been effective –you’ve managed to generally mask some of the heads of other audience members well (although in a few cases you could have done a bit more on this front), and the format of one double page spread per band works very well. I certainly think the results would be acceptable for a local magazine or gig guide, and as such enough to get published. A couple more similar shoots and you would have enough published work to get a press card and better access. From what I understand (gig photography is not something I have ever been known to do much of), this kind of photography is all about access, and at bigger gigs you have to work very quickly. With this in mind you seem to have got the shots a magazine would want and so in that regard have been successful.

The (major) problem that would, in respect to this assignment at least cause you to fail is that the zipped folder submitted contains the files for assignment 2, not 3. As the goal of the assignment is to submit work as you would for a professional assignment you can see where this would be a problem... However, on the positive side, that is part of the reason you have a tutor and these interim written tutorials – to iron out these bugs. It is much better these mistakes happen with me rather than at assessment or, god forbid, with a real life client! I opted to write feedback from what you presented rather than request a resubmission of the correct files as it highlights the attention to detail required if working professionally. A general rule is you should always double and triple check anything you are sending out and proof read all of your text. I tend to send work to one of my other email addresses first to make sure I haven’t made any silly errors, which we all make from time to time.

There were a few typos towards the end of the supporting text on the blog so you might want to give that a quick read through as well prior to assessment.
I’ll finish the introduction back on a positive note though. I was particularly impressed that you managed to get enough different strong performance photos that each of the dominant images on a double page spread had a different lighting effect. This would make picture editors particularly happy as it livens up their layouts no end and I am sure you agree creates a strong visual separation between each band, whilst the page formatting links them together.

Feedback on assignment
Demonstration of technical and Visual Skills, Quality of Outcome, Demonstration of Creativity

•   As I note in the introduction, I thought you did an excellent job in securing enough variety in the images to have each double page spread stand out from the others.
  
•   One area I thought you could tweak a little, especially if the layout was to go into a portfolio (which it certainly could...), would be to reposition the smaller frames on each layout to make the heads of other audience members less prominent. They do not have to be completely covered but a little creative license in laying out the work could draw the eye away from the heads and leave you looking like you had great access. You could also make some judicious use of cropping to get rid of some of the heads –as you are laying the work out there isn’t a particular need to stick with the same aspect ratio as you shot with (not something I would normally advise but in this model it could be effective).
  
•   Your introductory blurb is somewhat negative and I would think about how a client might find this. A lot of this kind of photography is all about perception –if you say they are great pictures people tend to go for it, especially if they are rushed and on a deadline and need someone fast. I have some friends who work with bands quite a bit and they tend to be more upbeat about their own work than I would possibly say is warranted, but it works and they get a lot of paid jobs. Working commercially is often about the perception of value and is as much about marketing as it is about skill with a camera.
  
•   Instead of focusing on the dreaded red light or the pillars, introduce your work by saying how amazing the bands were, what a great atmosphere was at the venue, how it was a very popular night attracting people from all over and how fantastic the bands looked. By selling the work on a positive vibe you will have viewers much more interested in seeing the work. This may feel awkward at first but over time it will become more natural. Let you obvious enthusiasm for the genre come through not only in your photographs but also in the way you talk and write about the photographs as well.
  
•   Regarding gear, I think you have done a great job selecting the appropriate lens for the job. If you were doing this full time you would want something a bit longer and fast but that starts to get expensive. Perhaps a (relatively) cheap 85mm 1.8 would be useful as this would be a few hundred rather than thousand to get to 1.4. Another idea to make you stand out from the crowd would be to go the other way and shoot with what would normally be considered totally inappropriate equipment and develop a highly unique style. A friend of mine won a top photojournalism award with a dirt cheap plastic Russian camera, so there are no hard and fast rules.

Learning Logs or Blogs/Critical essays
Context
I feel you need to start adding a bit more about the work you are looking at, and, especially as you are soon to start at level 3, attempt to interrogate some of the success or failure of that work in light of the critical theory you are reading. Starting to add this now will put you in a strong position as you start thinking about your critical review –your initial notes into different possible subjects for the paper could form useful posts on your blog.

Suggested reading/viewing
Context
Critical Writing about photography
ADAMS, R. 1994. Why People Photograph, New York, Aperture Foundation.
ADAMS, R. 1996. Beauty in Photography, New York, Aperture Foundation.
BADGER, G. 2007. The Genius of Photography: How photography has changed our lives,
London, Quadrille. (also see accompanying DVD of BBC series)
BADGER, G. 2010. The Pleasure of Good Photographs, New York, Aperture Foundation. BARTHES, R. 1993. Camera Lucida, London, Random House.
BATE, D. 2009. Photography: The Key Concepts. Oxford: Berg
BERGER, J. 1972. Ways of Seeing, London, BBC & Penguin Books Ltd.
Youtube link to series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pDE4VX_9Kk
COTTON, C. 2009. The Photograph as Contemporary Art, London, Thames & Hudson.
HILL, P. & COOPER, T. J. 2005. Dialogue with Photography, Stockport, Dewi Lewis Publishing. JEFFREY, I. 1981. Photography: A concise history, London, Thames & Hudson.
MITCHELL, W. J. 1994. The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era,
Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press.
SHORE, S. 2010. The Nature of Photographs.London: Phaidon
SONTAG, S. 1979. On Photography, London, Penguin.
SZARKOWSKI, J. 2007. The Photographer's Eye, New York, The Museum of Modern Art. WELLS, L. 2009. Photography: A Critical Introduction, London, Routledge.

Pointers for the next assignment
The next assignment calls for you to write a critical review. I have included some critical writing on photography in the suggested reading –picking up a copy of David Bate’s Photography: The Key Concepts and Liz Well’s Photography, A Critical Introduction should give you some good material to reference. The course book is quite thorough in giving you advice on topics and layout but if you get stuck feel free to get in touch. The most important aspects are showing that you are using and evaluating a range of sources to construct your argument and then forming a conclusion on how you position yourself in these debates. It is also important that you reference these sources correctly –there is a guide to Harvard referencing on the college website. 


The above is the feedback report that I had from my tutor in regards to Assignment 3. When submitting my assignment to my tutor, I also sent the final layouts as A4 prints and asked for advice on the prints themselves. As well as some advice on how best to present these prints before assessment, my tutor also gave the following feedback on the prints themselves; 

"Regarding assessment submission, I did feel the A4 versions showed off a little of the softness of a couple of the larger images –especially and somewhat troublesome was the cover image being quite clearly out of focus. (which was hard to see in the web preview I had to use to write the feedback). If you have an alternative frame that is sharp, use that, otherwise I would consider resizing the project so that it could be presented as an A5 sized ‘zine, as the less you increase the size, the less the softness will show…"

In regards to all the feedback received I am very happy but I feel terrible at the same time. I thought I was being super organised by creating folders and subfolders of all my work from this module on my computer and then I go and send the wrong zip folder to my tutor with the assignment email! For this I am very angry with myself. I totally support my tutors decision to not ask me to resubmit the correct folder because, as he said in my report, the point of the exercise was attention to detail.
But apart from that I am very happy.
Things to note from this feedback are to be more enthusiastic and not so negative with my write up and possibly crop out the detail of the crowds heads more where possible.
The glossy prints I sent were of suitable quality although I have been advised to get matt finish prints as opposed to glossy ones for ease of holding and to reduce reflection. Also, I need to amend the cover page as, when blown up to a bigger scale, the shot appears too soft. So a few things to work on and alter but very good feedback for Assignment 3.