I like Flickr. I think there are some very good photographs on Flickr. I remember when Flickr launched. It was the start of the Web 2.0 era, and Flickr was all the rage with it’s slick interface and growing community of photographers, all with their own unique photographic vision to share. I had considered becoming part of said community (I do have an account), but in the end I stayed away. In those rare instances that I actually do find myself on Flickr to browse a friends photos (because I love them, not because I’m looking for choice pictures of myself that need to come down now…no one wants to see me with a lamp shade on my head…wink), I sometimes stray from the beaten path of friends to other groups of people on Flickr. I leave shortly after.

The reason I leave is pretty simple; everything looks the same. I’ve never seen so many photos of the same things, in the same style, with so little emotional impact. What I do not understand is that all the comments praise these photos for their “originality.” What makes me sad is that people are asking for feedback, and from a constructive criticism standpoint they aren’t getting it (a basic primer on constructive criticism for those interested). Worse yet, I think people are falling into the positive feedback loop (which can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy), ignoring any constructive criticism and simply looking for approval of their art. That’s no way to grow, be it as an artist or professionally.

Now, I’m not trying to disparage anyone for seeking comment on photographs, nor am I saying that shooting the same things in a particular style as someone else is bad. That would be like saying that John Sexton isn’t very good because he sometimes shoots similar scenes that his mentor Ansel Adams did, in a similar style no less. That isn’t the case at all, as styles and scenes aren’t really what kills me about the massive amount of photographic content on Flickr or the web in general. It’s the loss of feeling.

I just don’t get chills when I look at photos on Flickr, or for that matter many online photography community sites. Sometimes I think I’m missing the point of a particular shot. I look towards the comments and only thing I see is “great shot!” and little prize emblems because a group liked it. There’s not much discussion, and when there is it seems to deteriorate quickly into gibberish (a characteristic of many forums for as long as I can remember). Everyone seems to be patting each other on the back for pretty much any shot and just can’t make sense out of what people are getting from a particular shot. Did the shot evoke emotion in the artist? The commenter? Maybe I should be looking at this thought the glasses of contextualism?

I often jump back to contextualism when I don’t get that emotional response, but I usually aren’t able to ascertain a point of reference or what was going on that would give it something more. This isn’t like Guernica by Picasso, where you have a known historical reference as starting point, and then you can interpret from there (and there are lots of interpretations of Guernica, see wiki entry). For a good book on the topic, you might look at Fenners' Art in Context: Understanding Aesthetic Value.

I suppose my issue is that I view art personally as being about invoking a particular feeling or emotion. Sans that, I look to see if makes a point about culture or social conditions within society. I look at all the high dynamic range photography that is all the rage and it doesn’t evoke anything with me. Similar for the technical prowess of the stitched panorama; I’m more interested in the curiosity it evokes in me about the software behind such a feat.

As for my photography, I just don’t care much what people think about what I’m doing. Most of what I shoot I barely qualify as art and is largely for myself and makes me happy. If it invokes emotion with someone else, well that’s just an added bonus. Note, you won’t find many (if any at the moment) of my film images online for this very reason; if I want a serious critique of my work I know where to find constructive criticism. Otherwise, they stay within my collection (and in one case a museum, but that’s another somewhat silly story for a later time).

This is largely why the majority of the photographs I have online are all family related; they have the most value for the people close to me, and most other people will pass them by without much thought. I don’t host them on Flickr because a) it’s much easier for my family to remember my name and hence this web site, and b) for raw backup of my files I have servers for that sort of thing (which spits out the smaller previews you see on this site for instance). I send links out to those who might like to see them and any one else is happy to view them as well.

Is it’s Flickr (or any forums) fault for offering the ability for such a feedback loop to occur among it’s user base? Of course not. I’m of the opinion that art isn’t happening there, I’m just of the opinion the type of art I like to view isn’t. However, if you’re of the inclination to seek feedback about your work from the online world, beware the constructive criticism which is neither constructive or criticism to begin with.