My Photo Booth Photo Blog

This is not the first time when I say this words. However, I decided to gather my thoughts in one and come up with the problem. And the problem is: the crucial moment in history of photography we are living these days: its end.
The conditions which arts must live in today are not promising, under my conviction. I really do believe the art is losing its battle with reality to face with. Adopting a political ideas, the world seems to support an utilitaristic way of being: what is good for the majority becomes the norm. As a not-supporter, to be euphemistic, of democracy, I can agree with the principle. How does the world of arts looks in my eyes then? Say, there is a large terrarium with hundreds of chameleons inside – how can you tell the one who didn’t change its colour and the rest adopted it? This is the art in our materialistic reality. There is a bunch of ‘artists’ which are supposed to represent something with their work. However, there are not many of them who really have a message to transmit to the world. Unfortunately, the tip of the iceberg they constitute, the real artistic world, is sinking, pulled by the chameleons that are not even intending but pretending to be the good ones. And it’s hard to tell one from another frequently.
I believe the reason why I see the state of reality this way is not that the art has decreased in sense of number of people interested in it. On the contrary, the amount of pseudo-artists increased tremendously last century. Due to progress which we like to see as our victory over the whole universe, God included; an apple of our eyes. You type in “how to be an artist” in search engine and you get the receipt. Thanks to the miracle of global communication everyone can be an artist or a specialist in whatever you like. Right… We are becoming so superficial that we will soon be able to compete with a sheets of paper: let’s see which one is flatter.
Photography, in particular, is endangered by some other factors. There are some chameleons too, of course. But the most worrying fact is the huge group of people who shoot photos like they were preparing breakfast. I mean, they don’t even consider photography as an art because they don’t bother themselves with considerations about art at all. As biologists would like all the world to be interested in their domain, sometimes I’d like all the world to be interested in what’s my domain. I know it is impossible and on the second thought I’m glad of world’s plurality. Nevertheless, I cannot accept the fact that the work photographers did and do is slowly becoming directed toward narrow group of recipients like magazines (I mean serious ones, not the glossies and the crap). Maybe I am too demanding, but isn’t the ignorance consuming us gradually? When I put them on the scales together – the ignorance and ‘chameleonism’ – the scales get crazy. I don’t know which one is worse.
But I do know which one is more dangerous. Art kept on surviving for such a long time with its fake side by side that it is impossible to give up now. Photography, then, will make it. But I am afraid it may be lost among the sea of so-called-photography that consists in ‘shooting pictures’ and not ‘creating an art’. And its the photography itself that helped it happen. The evolution – or revolution (?) – of digital technologies, the one of the aspects of transforming the world into a global village, implanted in imaging lead to what is happening.
Is it possible that the real photography is maybe not dying, but somehow decreasing into ghetto, a niche for outcasts? No. I would rather say ‘the chosen ones’.

Here goes another one: Nikon retires film cameras lineup. The one of the companies that constitute a core of photographic equipment producers decides to give up on standard cameras. As Konica Minolta example shows, this branch of market is unprofitable. However, the production of high-end cameras F6 and FM10 will continue, together with eight of most popular Nikkor lenses. Nikon statement says that company decided “to focus management resources on digital cameras in place of film cameras.”

After shock caused on me when Kodak materials and Konica Minolta photography section became history, I suffer another heart attack. I like being witness of historical events, it’s inevitable, but not these days. Photography as I liked it is becoming a part of the world that has to do more with past tenses than MY reality. I believe we are able to make reality as we like it to be. If so, and I’m quite sure of it, I’m in minority. I’m not the one to judge whether MY minority is better or not or whether the right is ours or not. What I can say is that I don’t like reality like this one.

Sad but true, the shape of today’s civilization is sculpted by majority. And this fact lets me repeat once again: democracy is rubbish.

Feelings fuel my thoughts.
This is the fire that creates me.
I am NOT a flame.
I am oxygene.

From now on I start a new category: Kaleidoscope. The idea is simple: One photo – One thought. Each post will contain a picture and it’s description, rather like a “Stream of consciousness”. The image and thought will fulfill the entirety and by completing each other create a new idea, new vision.

Why Kaleidoscope? Because every thought is unique. You can think all of the time – what we do, in deed – but every time it will be different. Cause: space-time continuum implanted in our consciousness. “This word” and “this word” aren’t the same.

Enjoy my consciousness…

Day by day, more digital cameras have RAW format in their standard and it’s becoming more popular. For professional photographers that use digital cameras RAW is nothing new. I will try to explain what RAW format consists of in my own words so you could understand the general idea.

What is the difference between RAW and JPEG or TIFF format? To simplifie, when you are taking picture in JPEG or TIFF format, the camera automatically makes some adjustments as white-balance. The RAW format is… raw. It captures the the same image you see in your camera viewfinder converted to digital data. The rest is left for you to decide: you can reproduce the scene just as you’ve seen it.

The advantage is obvious: you get control over the image all over the time: from shutter movement till the final print. You make photo just as you like it. Camera’s processor works like a film: you can see no image until you enhance it in graphic program. Which one? The story begins here. There is no such thing as RAW standard; it means that each camera producer has its own RAW format. And that complicates the work a little. The positive thing about it is that they offer software that supports it. You can also use a third-party software.

With all the advantages as flexibility and huge image data, it’s not a perfect cure. Your skills are still valid. Even more. RAW cannot fix a bad exposure, you are still the responsable of making the possible as good as you can. Actually, I do not consider this as a disadvantage; more like a come-back to classical photography where you control the whole process. The only difference is that you have all your darkroom in your computer.