Social Media04.10.12

Instagram: Two Takes (Part Two)


With Instagram in the news often recently, we’ve been asking around to see who has used the application and had some fun with it. Tom and Patrick gave us some interesting feedback, and we wanted to pass it along. Interested in Tom’s thoughts? Check out Part 1.

Patrick’s Take: The Mass Manufacturing of “Art”

I was once told in university by a great photographer, “A photograph means absolutely nothing without anything in front of it. The camera does not decide what is in front of it. The human does.”

What he was getting at was no matter how innovative, progressive or advanced a camera becomes, it still will never capture “the vision” without the human force behind it. Vision is what is powerful in my opinion – In design, photography and in motion.

I’ve applied this notion to Instagram in my own head which has reassured me that Instagram doesnt necessarily make everyone a professional photographer. It does nothing more than apply repetitive style filters to taken photos. I find it suitable for accentuating already decent or really great photography, but I don’t believe it necessarily adds meaning to photographs because a) its supplemental elements are limited and b) its supplemental elements are reliant on the photographer, just like the camera is – at least for now.

At an elemental level, Instagram isn’t good at creating meaning. What it is good at is the mass manufacturing of “art.” This, however, is just as I see it today.

I love Instagram, but I do not believe it makes me a better photographer, or a professional photographer for that matter.