"I don't do it for the 'Gram" - ELEMENT. Kendrick Lamar |
Today I saw a post from someone that featured a few people smiling in the outdoors. Like any typical Instagram photographer, most of the colours were soft, muted, pastels - and because it was from the PNW, all of the pictures heavily featured cool tones, degrees of beige and cream, and pops of yellow as a complementary colour. All of the lighting was suitably soft and bright, and the subjects were all arranged in similar positions and compositions (ie center or just off center of the frame, smiling, laughing, or having a contemplative look on their face). All of the objects in frame were either suitably symmetrical or ever so lightly asymmetrical. Everything posted was suitable "Instagram Beautiful", or "Instagram Art" worthy.
Indeed, because I can conjure up such an image in your mind without you seeing the post is indicative of the fact that Instagram has conditioned us to think a certain type of homogenized photographic content is "art". Sure, you're no longer restricted to a 1:1 aspect ratio anymore, but the majority of Instagram posts still value clean ratios like 1:1 or 3:4 - maybe 16:9 on occasion, but never anything else (to imagine a 2.35 in a post is laughable). And all of the "beautiful" photography and photographs need to adhere to the aforementioned standards.
Sure, there is a modicum of variation. Pick a genre like a "fashion" Instagram (all predominately vertical photographs, a similar full-body pose to show the appropriate pieces, the flat, softer lighting remains favoured, a colour palette is chosen) or a "travel" Instagram (all done with similar compositions for the landscape whether it features buildings or trees, everything fairly saturated, occasionally there are people in the frame, usually the larger focus is on a suitably "breath-taking" location), but on the whole within each niche and subgenre there is still a "standard" Instagram aesthetic that we deem appropriate. And the Instagram accounts that can churn out this standardized beauty and do it better than all the others (even trendier outfits, even more impossibly fantastical looking landscapes) then they garner the most followers.
Thus it's interesting to me that despite the fact that "anyone can be a photographer", that the technology to do so has been taken out of the elite few who had to invest serious time, money, and energy to develop their craft, what we as the public have chosen to do is instead homogenize our own art.
Of course, this is assuming that you consider amateur photography posted on Instagram as the only credentials needed to be considered a professional photographer - which, to make myself clear, I do not. I believe that professional photographers can have Instagram accounts, but to have an Instagram account one does not need to be (or indeed usually are) a photographer. Here, I want to consciously make the distinction between a photographer as a professional who has invested time, money, and energy into developing their craft (the art of photography) versus someone who enjoys taking pictures as a hobby and sharing them with others.
Not only that, but I also want to highlight the difference between a photographer and a person who takes photos as a singularly monetary concern. A photographer has developed their skills sufficiently to ask for reasonable compensation for their craft. And how could you refuse if you truly see what the art of a professional photographer looks like? Their images are their intellectual and artistic property, and you cannot repurpose or resell their image for your own gain. Of course, the Instagram version of this would be to garner enough followers to make companies want to pay you to take pictures for them (essentially a freelance advertising gig), or to use your Instagram as a place for you to put your portfolio so that other companies, bloggers, artists, etc. can see your work in order to hire you.
All of this seems obvious, you might say to yourself, nodding along as I essentially describe a profession versus a hobby. However, Instagram has begun to blur these lines. Consequently, I find it frustrating when I see my peers right and left calling themselves a "photographer" and assuming they can start a business just because they are in possession of an Instagram account. No. You are not a photographer, but you are someone who takes photos.
And this does not have to be seen as a negative thing. I myself am someone who casually takes and shares photos with my friends and family because I personally enjoy to do so (it's my "Travel/Life Scrapbook"). However, my sister uses her Instagram as her business (she is in fashion and uses her account for PR and branding purposes). Here, there is a distinctive difference in the purpose we use our accounts for as well as the amount of time and energy we have both taken to "cultivate" our Instagrams.
She has invested considerable time and energy in making her account into a portfolio and a means for her profession. She has also invested money in improving her outfits as well as her knowledge of fashion and other social media outlets. Granted, she may not be a "photographer" insofar as knowing the technical side of camerawork, but she does know what she wants her image to look like and how to brand it. I, however, enjoy sharing my photographs for personal pleasure. I went to film school so I generally know how to compose a shot, but I do not expect to make my money as a cinematographer or a photographer.
These short musings, of course, are only part of a larger question about the role of media in moulding our current expectations and perception of Art, but this short little musing was inspired today by the fact that I do have friends who I think are genuinely talented photographers who want to use their Instagram to take their work to the next professional level. In particular, I want to highlight my high school bestie Annaliese (check out her Instagram @annaliesehenry) because I think she is extremely talented and dedicated to learning more about her craft (not a #sponsor).
No comments:
Post a Comment