Digital changed the landscape. Before the pixel, craft was still an elemental component of the narrative. A process that involved trusting strips of cellulose in a mysterious dark box was replaced by instant, impeccable rendering, in situ on vast monitors. The photographer’s role as sorcerer and custodian of the vision was diminished: The question ‘have we got it?’ became redundant. Now it was the photographer asking the art director asking the client. Which is a big deal. Because the previous dialectic was that you engaged people who brought something to the party you couldn’t provide yourself. Like Magi, the ‘creatives’ brought creativity; photographers, vision. By abdicating those responsibilities to the guy who’s paying, you’re undergoing a sort of self-inflicted castration. A culture of fear and sycophancy develops. Self-worth diminishes, because nobody really likes being a eunuch, even a well-paid one. There’s less currency in having a viewpoint. The answer to the question ‘What have you got to say?’ drifts towards ‘What do you want me to say?’ There’s reward in being generic, keeping one’s vision in one’s pocket. Trouble is, when your vision has spent too long in your pocket, sometimes you reach for it and it’s not there any more.

Photographers’ Rep Julian Richards on Why He Abruptly Quit the Business  (via photographsonthebrain)

See also:

[W]hen a film-maker says he will produce a pot-boiler in order to give himself the strength and means to make the film of his dreams—that is so much deception, or worse, self-deception. He will never make his film.

                     -Andrei Tarkovsky

Leave a comment