Tag Archives: Future of Photography

Future of Photography Q&A No.6 – Carlein van der Beek

by John Carvill

Oomska’s ‘Future of Photography’ Series continues…

We presented our interviewees with a set list of questions, and left the matter of in what format and at what length they should answer entirely up to them. Here are Carlein van der Beek’s responses.

1. How and when did you first become interested in photography? What was the trigger which led you to take a serious interest? How different would that trigger be now, with all the changes – technological and otherwise – in photography during the intervening years?

My background is in painting, abstracts, and mixed media. At the art academy where I studied, I was also able to take photography classes. I loved it. It was analogue, of course: black and white, developing your own film, working in the dark room. I have always been purely visual and photography gave me the chance to make images when it was not possible to paint.

The trigger wouldn’t be any different now. As I don’t have space to paint right now, photography is the only way of expressing myself at the moment.

2. Photography is often described as a mixture of art and science. It’s also a medium. How has digital technology altered the way these elements combine to produce what we think of as ‘photography’? Has technology altered that balance?

I switched to digital only 10 years ago. Though I loved working in analogue, I wouldn’t want to go back anymore, or only for a special project. To me, Photoshopping or apping, is – in a way – a kind of chemistry, science as well.

But instead of working with your hands, you have to “see” the process in your head. It did change my way of taking pictures. As my background is mixed media pieces, I am used to “building” images. I did so with painting and now I am able to do so with photography as well. In a way I am painting with photos. So to me digital together with the Photoshopping and apping is a gift that enables me to work the way I want.

Continue reading →

Future of Photography Q&A No.5 – Philip Greenspun

by John Carvill

Oomska’s ‘Future of Photography’ Series continues…

We presented our interviewees with a set list of questions, and left the matter of in what format and at what length they should answer entirely up to them. Here are Philip Greenspun’s responses.

1. How and when did you first become interested in photography? What was the trigger which led you to take a serious interest? How different would that trigger be now, with all the changes – technological and otherwise – in photography during the intervening years?

My mother let me use a Kodak Brownie camera starting around 1970. I started out documenting boring family scenes. Probably with digital I would have started much earlier and experimented a lot more since the cost of film and processing was not affordable to me as a child.

2. Photography is often described as a mixture of art and science. It’s also a medium. How has digital technology altered the way these elements combine to produce what we think of as ‘photography’? Has technology altered that balance?

There should be a lot more great young photographers than ever before, since photography is now almost a free activity whereas before just a handful of photos would have used up a child’s allowance.

Continue reading →

Future of Photography Q&A No.4 – Derek Ridgers

by John Carvill

Oomska’s ‘Future of Photography’ Series continues…

We presented our interviewees with a set list of questions, and left the matter of in what format and at what length they should answer entirely up to them. Here are Derek Ridgers’s responses.

The question I most get asked, more than any other, and which fits this Q&A well enough is: “How can I get started as a photographer?”

In the digital age this question is probably more pertinent than it’s ever been because there is so much less printed media around and so many more photographers.

My answer would be: know and research well your market and then look for gaps which aren’t currently being addressed.  Obviously there may be good reasons why those gaps aren’t being covered but there will always be opportunities for people who can see things that other people don’t see.  If you want to shoot ‘me too’ type fashion or glamour or kids or nature, fine.  But just don’t expect to get a career out of it.

In other words, don’t follow the crowd, look for something new which you can make 100% your own.  And if it’s new enough and interesting enough, people will beat a path to your door.

Continue reading →

Future of Photography Q&A No.3 – Steve Gullick

by John Carvill

Oomska’s ‘Future of Photography’ Series continues…

We presented our interviewees with a set list of questions, and left the matter of in what format and at what length they should answer entirely up to them. Here are Steve Gullick’s responses.

OH SHIT!… This is heavy (I don’t generally use such terminology) . I also don’t like to intellectualize photography… That said, it’s conceivable that my only future within the industry could be to intellectualize the art form in the form of teaching the subject to young people – many of whom are never likely to earn a penny as photographers…. Every photo enthusiast that takes a picture for commercial use without being paid devalues it as a means of making a living… It’s nice that digital has democratized photography & has allowed anybody to vent their creative spleen with no need to know anything about the process but for those of us that have the skills & experience, the influx of keen amateurs is damaging… Everything moves on I suppose, how many blacksmiths do you know?

Continue reading →

Future of Photography Q&A No.2 – George Plemper

by John Carvill

Oomska’s ‘Future of Photography’ Series continues…

We presented our interviewees with a set list of questions, and left the matter of in what format and at what length they should answer entirely up to them. Here are George Plemper’s responses.

1. How and when did you first become interested in photography? What was the trigger which led you to take a serious interest? How different would that trigger be now, with all the changes – technological and otherwise – in photography during the intervening years?

Well there is interest and then there is interest . . . isn’t there. I remember getting my first camera as a Christmas present back in the late 50’s, I remember it was plastic and light blue in colour. I would take a picture and a week or so later we would look to see what, if anything came out. I was fascinated by the flashbulbs for colour photography they were coated in translucent blue plastic which bubbled up when fired. This was really interesting as, at that time, I only ever wanted to be a scientist. The magnesium burning smells and the appearance of the spent flashbulbs was amazing, images they were of secondary interest. Photography was really expensive back then so it was not something to be taken lightly, I was never really interested in the pictures which were mainly blurred and difficult to decipher – it was a case of there was my brother, there was my mother, they were a small proof that we existed on the planet.

Continue reading →