Regression in art was very fashionable in the 'Sixties.
Nowadays I think the technical advances in photography clamour for finely-honed, hdr images which seem perfect and of another world. They are often far removed from the visual vocabulary of everyday life and seem to take on a life of their own.
I avoid looking at the new screens that are taking over public spaces because they seem to lure the viewer in to the neglect of the "real" world around.
Photographers owe it to themselves to become as conscious as possible of what their images are saying to viewers, especially when they upload to the Internet.
Point and shoot photos are often treated as if they have no context or meaning, when, in fact, they are some of the most interesting work many photographers produce. Looking at these snaps and finding why they might have attracted the photographer is one way of communicating with another person in a non-verbal way.
Having spent time reading Barthes and finding more references to Proust and photography, it seems that photography has found its place as one of the main art forms of the 21st Century. Baudelaire was given to finding faults with such a new-fangled technology.
I expect if he were around today he would be amazed.
Why, for instance, has photography taken such a long time to become established as a valid art form?
Can anybody now become an artist thanks to photographic technology?
What draws many viewers to some photos when others get ignored?
What are the storage systems that will allow future generations to find the work we are doing now?
