When Pro Photographers Shoot On Disposable Cameras ...

Interesting. I used those cameras a lot in the past. Need to revisit the photos.

Yes, Alessandra, interesting is a good word. I've seen disposable cameras around, but never considered them as an art form. Talking to some artist consultants here in Chicago, the 'trend' for an artist to create a series of their work is changing to creating different types of artwork or with different mediums. So this is on my list ...

That was very interesting Frank, thank you for posting.

Disposable or not, some of the pix remind me that there's no accounting for what people define as art. I guess that's good and bad, but it's not unlike painting where it's easy for the unconvinced to think that some paintings that sell for lots of money are mainly con jobs.

You have a point, Doug, it's all subjective. ...


RD .. my pleasure ... just sharing ideas to help each other make it in life and with art.


Enjoy your day.

A couple of nice pieces. Thanks Frank. Interesting

Apologies if this seems narrow-minded and dismissive: what I see are lousy, off-hand snapshots taken by people whose lives seem much more interesting or exciting than mine. Nothing in terms of "doing something" with a camera, the person taking these couldn't be bothered, they're too busy enjoying life. So, interesting in one way, I just think the critics could be more honest about what the appeal actually is.

There are some so-so photos in that collection for sure, but there are also some real winners. As a painter I look at this experiment as sort of like when a painter limits his palette of colors and as a result has to work within a limited color range. These photographers are limiting their "palette" so to speak by restricting the technology they are using to produce their images, ya, it is a little gimmicky but still interesting.

In one of my former lives, I did survey research and one of the truisms of that pursuit is that a lot of things in life look different depending on where you see them. Looking at these photos in the context of a web site that says that they're art, you tend to see art more than if you found a print of some of them sitting on a park bench. At least part of the art is the suggestion that they ARE art. I'd love to take the same bunch of pix, mix them with a bunch of random shots, print them on a big sheet so they all have the same presentation features and then get a couple hundred people on the street to look at them and put their marks on a check sheet where they select Art...Not Art or Not Sure. It would be interesting to see which of the Art pix would get their appropriate checks.

Interesting post Frank.

Sounds like we might have to discuss "what is art"? I don't think we'll resolve that, as it's a personal assessment. If something isn't art to you, why worry about it? If someone else sees art isn't that ok? It all turns into religion...

HW - Thanks. Yes, one example would be Andy Warhol. He went in many different directions with his art, to the point that some things he said was art became accepted as such.

Thanks for sharing the project idea, Frank. Knowing there is a limit to the number of photographs you can take without having any control over specific camera settings should either make you carefully consider the composition of the image you are capturing, or let you just cut loose to take random shots.
Either option has to be a fun thing to try!
Cheers.

There's a dude on instagram whose pictures are all scanned polaroids. I don't know why he doesn't just take digital photos like everyone else and make them look like polaroids, but he doesn't..It reminded me of an exhibition I saw where across a whole wall was a clustered mess of polaroids that were assembled into a 360 degree panorama from the top of Ayers Rock (a mountain sized rock in the middle of nowhere), giving a strange crystal facet effect where the pictures overlapped. It was also the only 'art' that didn't have a sold sticker on it, I'm guessing because up close it actually looked like a mess, A certain amount of work and expense for something so ephemeral, and then you move on to the next thing...

Mark,

The reason to use film instead of film effects on digital is simple. It doesn't look the same. I like the look of film, so I shoot film.