Desmolicious wrote:
I get the "oh wow, I love film pictures!" reaction all the time and it sells for me.
Maybe art critics don't care, but they are not the ones buying.
Never even once experienced this. People care about the story in the photo but never about the medium which was used.
airfrogusmc wrote:
Silver gelatin and platinum prints still get a lot more money than ink jet prints in gallery sales.
Nope. I wish this was true. Maybe for someone with a big name in photography. I actually sold digital prints for more than silver gelatin photos. Again - nobody cared which medium was used to take the photo or how it was printed. Only the result counted.
It could be the content. When I was doing "Architecture of Arizona" engagement and followers were low. Only after I switched to "Asses of Arizona" did likes, engagement, and followers skyrocket.
airfrogusmc wrote:
Silver gelatin and platinum prints still get a lot more money than ink jet prints in gallery sales.
retrofocus wrote:
Nope. I wish this was true. Maybe for someone with a big name in photography. I actually sold digital prints for more than silver gelatin photos. Again - nobody cared which medium was used to take the photo or how it was printed. Only the result counted.
I reckon it depends what audience the marketing is toward ... those who care, vs. those who don't.
I think the history of photography has always had an "asterisk" associated with it as being "easy" or "easier" ... inferring, less was required of the photographer, than of the artist to produce the work. I'm not saying this is a correct assessment, but it is something of the stigma that has historically attached itself.
From that perspective ... while working with film (chromes for me) back in the pre-digital era, was the "easiest" thing going (vs. painting, etc.). Now that we have digital, film is no longer the "easiest" thing that it once was (by comparison). As the masses (via phones, magic everything cameras, etc.) have become commonplace to the process of capturing images with the ease at which it is, film is "harder" by a country mile.
The world of PS, and coming soon to an image near you ... AI ... makes the process of film even further away from the "easiest", which lends it credibility more toward the craftsmanship of an artisan (in a relative manner).
For those who have an appreciation of the process of the artform (some do, some don't) they are able to denote the difference, and have an appreciation for it. Others ... couldn't care less.
Horses for courses ... seemingly, applies to the consumer, too.
And, in the context of IG ... what level of consumers (mostly) traffic there?
Desmolicious wrote:
When even National Geographic picks a young youtuber because of the 'influence', you know the ship has sailed.
Personally I enjoy watching the kids get excited about photography - especially when it is with film! - but the reality here is when even NG picks people because of their followers, it just comes down to getting views over 'quality'. And then we go down that slippery slope of defining quality - maybe I need to read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance again...
You'd think that national Geographic is some bastion of learning, but apparently they did a lot of popular stuff back in the day, to get popular. not pushing higher standards or anything. Really not much different than posting popular YouTubers.
AmbientMike wrote:
You'd think that national Geographic is some bastion of learning, but apparently they did a lot of popular stuff back in the day, to get popular. not pushing higher standards or anything. Really not much different than posting popular YouTubers.
Back in the day I remember reading their issues, gazing at the mostly excellent photos. It was a bastion of learning before the internet when you could look up anything.
And they would never have used any of the pics that are being shown now. Being a staff photographer for NG was a dream for most.
p.4 #10 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
Desmolicious wrote:
Back in the day I remember reading their issues, gazing at the mostly excellent photos. It was a bastion of learning before the internet when you could look up anything.
And they would never have used any of the pics that are being shown now. Being a staff photographer for NG was a dream for most.
"Bastion of learning" are big words. You can read shards of criticism of the packaged exoticism and standardized attitudes of NG stories. It wasn't an anthropological, or any type of "learned," journal. It was a pop magazine that aimed at a certain kind of market. As many critics have written, the "middle-brow" story came first, to which the photographer had to fit the photos.
Doubtless, there were many great photographers published by NG, of which I'll only mention Sam Abell. As for the "dream of most" being an NG staff photographer was true of many photographers, most of whom could, however, be classed as careerists; it wasn't at all true for most who were interested in becoming art photographers, say, Steve MacCurry vs Ralph Gibson, as an example. You can easily put together a list of photographers who had no interest in working for NG, say, Robert Frank, Willam Eggleston, Saul letter, etc...
p.4 #11 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
Mitch Alland wrote:
"Bastion of learning" are big words. You can read shards of criticism of the packaged exoticism and standardized attitudes of NG stories. It wasn't an anthropological, or any type of "learned," journal. It was a pop magazine that aimed at a certain kind of market. As many critics have written, the "middle-brow" story came first, to which the photographer had to fit the photos.
Doubtless, there were many great photographers published by NG, of which I'll only mention Sam Abell. As for the "dream of most" being an NG staff photographer was true of many photographers, most of whom could, however, be classed as careerists; it wasn't at all true for most who were interested in becoming art photographers, say, Steve MacCurry vs Ralph Gibson, as an example. You can easily put together a list of photographers who had no interest in working for NG, say, Robert Frank, Willam Eggleston, Saul letter, etc......Show more →
They are big words, but when NG was prominently available in school for kids to read about far away places - no matter how shaped those stories were - that's what it was.
As adults we may now differ in our views, but as children our views were mostly shaped for us by figures in authority, whoever that may have been.
While you do have that list of photographers you mention, they were dwarfed by the hundreds of thousands, nay, millions of working career photographers plying their trade at newspapers, magazines, portrait studios etc. Those career photographers most likely would list being employed by NG as a dream career.
p.4 #12 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
Mitch Alland wrote:
As an experiment, I've just posted on my IG an 89-second reel of an exhibition project that contains 28 images and is titled, EXPOSED. My IG name is @mitchalland; this reel is currently the first item after two pinned items. There is music, so the speaker has to be turned on.
I've included an abbreviated concept statement that I doubt people will read, though one of the images has an old election poster in French from Zaire (currently Democratic Republic of the Congo) for the fake 1977 Mobutu election, in effect calling for dictatorship (image no. 7).
Image no. 13 has Thai text that says, MOTORBIKE REPAIR.
Image no. 26 is an appropriation of an image from Peter Beard’s large Taschen book of his diaries, on which I've handwritten, In memoriam Peter Beard.
If you're inclined to look at the reel and comment, please let me know....Show more →
Since posting the above 2˝ days ago, I've had 62 views and 3 likes of my Instagram reel of my exhibition project. As dismal as expected: of the 3 likes, 2 are from buyers of my photobook and the third is from someone I had corresponded with in IG. Nor has anyone above posted in response to my post.
p.4 #13 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
[...]
Since posting the above 2˝ days ago, I've had 62 views and 3 likes of my Instagram reel of my exhibition project. As dismal as expected: of the 3 likes, 2 are from buyers of my photobook and the third is from someone I had corresponded with in IG. Nor has anyone above posted in response to my post.
p.4 #14 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
Mitch Alland wrote:
Since posting the above 2˝ days ago, I've had 62 views and 3 likes of my Instagram reel of my exhibition project. As dismal as expected: of the 3 likes, 2 are from buyers of my photobook and the third is from someone I had corresponded with in IG. Nor has anyone above posted in response to my post.
Honestly Mitch- Was the whole point of this post to try and get people to go to your instagram? If so thats ok but you are coming about it sort of awkwardly and I would guess it turns most people off-
I am not trying to be rude here Mitch- That is how I am reading it- For the record- I don't use Facebook or Instagram. Its a waste of my time.
p.4 #15 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
RustyRus wrote:
Honestly Mitch- Was the whole point of this post to try and get people to go to your instagram? If so thats ok but you are coming about it sort of awkwardly and I would guess it turns most people off- ...
Absolutely not! I originated the thread after I read the RFF post quoted in my OP: "So basically, Meta increased overall engagement times with the app at the expense of individual engagement with the photographers you like. It must be true - the pictures I posted 2-3 years ago have more likes that posting them now with the same hastags. It just feels that from 2022, Instagram became a less friendly platform for photographers."
Then, from the responses in this thread, I found out that IG was moving to reels; and posted an IG reel and found what I expected: that my results would be pretty much what they were with my recent regular IG posts. I didn't think that a 90-second reel would attract much attention. To show that this was the case, I posted the statement: Nor has anyone above posted in response to my post. Simply a statement of fact, and amplification of the thought on 90-second reels. Not an exhortation to go and look at my reel.
Nor did I take you as being rude. My reaction is that, generally, I feel that there is too much in assumptions and statements of people's motives on internet forums, which is the reasons that I left both RFF and LUF.
p.4 #16 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
[...]from the responses in this thread, I found out that IG was moving to reels; and posted an IG reel and found what I expected: that my results would be pretty much what they were with my recent regular IG posts. [...]
I wouldn't expect one reel to work magic. Of course, it needs a little more than that.
But the point expressed in this thread about IG shifting towards video, and also stated by the very head of IG itself as in the video I posted, is that photography is not the main interest for IG anymore.
To me, IG has never been a platform for photographers, nor has any other social media for that matter.
p.4 #17 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
pdesopo wrote:
I wouldn't expect one reel to work magic. Of course, it needs a little more than that.
But the point expressed in this thread about IG shifting towards video, and also stated by the very head of IG itself as in the video I posted, is that photography is not the main interest for IG anymore.
To me, IG has never been a platform for photographers, nor has any other social media for that matter.
IG started out as a type of Twitter-like journal but with low quality cellphone snaps. It was about broadcasting your experience through phone pics. Then people started uploading high quality camera photos to get likes and followers (that's why the desktop version of IG came so much later). IG was never really a photography app to begin with. Video features like IG Live, Stories, and Reels are actually much closer to IG's roots.
p.4 #18 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
Mitch Alland wrote:
Since posting the above 2˝ days ago, I've had 62 views and 3 likes of my Instagram reel of my exhibition project. As dismal as expected: of the 3 likes, 2 are from buyers of my photobook and the third is from someone I had corresponded with in IG. Nor has anyone above posted in response to my post.
There's a YT video I saw the title for but never watched called, "No One Cares About Your Photos". My variation on that would be to add, "Especially Photographers", with the caveat: unless there is some benefit to the photographer viewing such as an extremely high level of artistic or technical proficiency, or they're using an interesting piece of gear.
Your Reels, just like your Photos on IG, have to be engaging. You would want to find out what the general IG audience and your followers find engaging and try to present that kind of work consistently over a long period of time before coming to any conclusions. I think what you'll find is the type of content that engages on IG is not the content you will enjoy creating.
p.4 #19 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
To conținue the above thought, you also need to find a niche on IG. My account is just landscape and sky photos taken in New Mexico at or near where I live. The real followers I have (probably 1/3 of my total, the rest are fake accounts) share a common interest – not necessarily an interest in my photos, but an interest in the subject matter.
Due to the combination of my current skill level, the available audience for what I post, and the IG algorithm, I will likely never break 10K followers without resorting to hashtag spamming, paying for IG promotions, and the worst thing of all, which would be to actually take more interesting photos (). Advertising (using IG "boost post" paid promotions, etc.) often turns away those that might genuinely follow your work if they had found it organically.
p.4 #20 · Getting less and less views on Instagram
If you make boring reels about photo content no one cared about in the first place, pushed to a few hundred users, what do you think is going to happen?
Once you realize that the "big" accounts on IG are spending big bucks on fake engagement, you care less about "real" engagement because "real" engagement died 3 years ago and you're pissing in the wind in 2024. I guarantee you I know more about IG than 99% of people on FM, and when I tell you it's dead for anyone but brands, it's dead. Please, for your own sake, don't spend a penny in boosting your posts, as all that does is garner a few likes from bot accounts that IG runs and operates.
Use IG as a mini gallery to push people into whatever platform you've standardized on, preferably one you OWN.
And the above advice is correct...no one cares less about your photos than other photographers. I've had better luck finding interested people just setting a table up at a local fair with a few prints.
). Advertising (using IG "boost post" paid promotions, etc.) often turns away those that might genuinely follow your work if they had found it organically.