It is sad but true, photography has become somewhat of a trade of the past. The social media has a lot to do with the stripping away of photojournalisms' reputability. Countless magazines fill the stands of photographs of celebrities taken by the paparazzi. Mainstream society has become obsessed with the private lives of Hollywood's biggest star's. The paparazzi hold the key to accessing this otherwise private world. So, are the paparazzi considered photojournalist, and are their photograph's an artistic expression?
Photographs allow us to always remember a certain memory of someone or something. In some cases they maintain a legacy, but today photographs have become somewhat of a disposable thing. Practically anyone has the capability to shoot, edit, and develop pictures from home. So long are the days of Dark Rooms, a time when specialized skills and knowledge still were required.
The paparazzi are driven by money and money alone. This takes their photographs from an artistic viewpoint to more of a marketing viewpoint. Paprazzi are not independently expressing themselves through the photos they choose to take. Furthermore, they do not choose what to photograph, the people do. Paparazzi just deliver the goods.
Celebrities are people, which then make people the primary subjects' of these photos. So, are people then art? People are in a way pieces of art, but they should not be used as the primary sourse for today's art. I think we are astounded by each other and whether or not it is considered art truly lies in the photographer's intentions for taking the picture in the first place.
This is such an interesting topic to think about. Photography is every where in the world and there is so much to be said about it!
ReplyDelete-kolatonick