Posted by Peter Cairns on July 17, 2009 at 4:10 AM
This forum undoubtedly features many talented artists all with their established, or developing, photographic style. But it is a fact that standards have improved inexorably across the board in recent years, leaving me for one, wondering whether the possibilities are finite and where nature photography might go in the future. And so a question:
What will nature photography look like in 20 years from now? And what will the leading shooters be doing to get noticed? OK, two questions...
Pete
MacPro, Eizo monitor, Drobo back-up, tea, eyes at f4, migraine.
Specialisation is the key to standing out. Its not enough to be a nature photographer, you'll need to concentrate your efforts on a specific group or species, or perhaps a clearly defined area. You are part way there with your Highland wildlife/landscapes but I suspect that in future we'll all need to be even more targeted to have that USP. 'Peter Cairns, oh yes the Scottish wildcat specialist'... Spending time with the subject and specialist knowledge (always valuable) to back up the images are the only advantages that a pro photographer has now.
The web has made anyone with a specialisation easy to find, but revenue from pic sales is drying up and, like it or not, the world is moving towards free to use (or cheaper than chips) content for large parts of the media.
How do these things add up? No idea...
All the best
Andrew
Posted by Rene de Heer on July 17, 2009 at 5:19 AM
Pete, to be honest: i really dont care where nature photography will be in 20 years. We might all have succomed to swine flu! Who knows!
I do know i will be retired, have hopefully plenty of time, have my health and will finally have my own hide in my garden for my own pleasure.
Thats how i look at it: i am not in it for money (thank God for that), i am in it because i like to be outside and take pictures, express my own creativity whether people like it or not! Because after all: i am doing this for myself mainly....
They'll be doing what they do now Pete - having migraines and wondering where they go next in order to beat the downward rush to free .
It doesn't have to go to free tho' - those that have their own vision and ability to innovate (either through use of equipment, species knowledge or use of retail products) will be out there still getting (and selling) quality stuff that people want to see and own. The rest will be contributing the commoditised, mass produced stuff that the bottom-end mass market wants.
Niches always exist... you've just got to find them.
(ps Don't forget that as it's a nature photography forum, you see an unusually high concentration of shooters here - it gives a slightly skewed view of the world. Most people don't have the time, money or inclination to do what most folks on here do.)
MacPro foot warmer, Daylight Therapy LCD monitor, spare disk backup, fresh double espresso - so no migraine
Specialisation is something I keep hearing as a relative newcomers to nature photography. I think comes naturally to a large chunk of photographers. Either they have some background in nature/ecology/biology, enjoy spending a lot of time outside or have experience with a certain time of animal/plant/area of their country.
This is a very narrow niche and style is perhaps more important factor. I would hate to think one should only concentrate lions or beetles because you worked in a safari park or studied entomology at college. Clearly that's just ridiculous.
If your photograph makes someone stop, look and stirs an emotion or memory then you're successful. Should you be in the business for money, this needs to be translated into a sale. That's where the context comes in. Why the specific photograph makes you think can really add power.
It's very difficult to imagine what the next 20 years will bring. Technology advances so quickly. Will we all be shooting HD film and extracting frames as stills as a side part of our nature films? No idea what people will be doing to stand out, it changes very quickly.
I would concentrate on the here and now that's what matters.
Chris
Posted by David Taylor on July 17, 2009 at 7:03 AM
When I was in the RAF in the late '60s I read Earth Abides by George R. Stewart
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Abides
I can truly say it changed my way of thinking at the time and made me very much aware of the impact Human Technological Society (HTS) has on the planet.
The optimist in me hopes that HTS sees sense and lives in harmony with the planet so that there will always be Nature to record.
The pessimist in me thinks.....
I agree with Chris that we should, whilst we record what is in the past, concentrate
on the here and now and lay the foundation for a harmonious future.
I think then, as now, photographers who can tell a story (and sell a story!) will be in business. Its that simple.
We had daubs in the sand, then the cave walls at Lascaux, the quill pen, and the printing press,the biro and now email and the web, Twitter and YouTube, and as the technology has evolved so too have the myriad ways that stories can be told. See this for an example of innovative and engaging image-led storytelling:
http://vimeo.com/3156959
or this:
http://www.thewhalehunt.com/
'Language' evolves, the aspirations of storytellers evolves, and the appetites and expectations of consumers evolves too. Good storytellers will simply reflect that and feed our needs to know.
Whats great though is that at the end of the day the best storytellers are generally the ones who do the footwork, put in the hours and reap the rewards of experience....and wild nature has a way of throwing up astonishing stuff all the time for them - because they are out there to see it and record it.
Andy Rouse didnt get successfull by simply being a gobby larger-than-life character - it may have helped, but he got there by getting out and spending the hours in the field so he knows his subjects, and his markets, and by giving them high quality images on time, all the time.
In twenty years time Andy Rouse Jnr may be doing exactly the same, but using all the new technology available right at the sharp end and all us wannabes will be following on.
The old adage, "its all been done before" is just about right and you are right the ability of the Pros to sell an image is becoming increasingly difficult, but NP Pros are moving into other areas allied with nature photography rather than trying to rely on image sales as their sole source of income.
We seem to have hit the saturation point of excellence - look at the WPOY entries now, there is very little that is "fresh" or new. - its the fault of the credit boom and information/internet explosion - anyone can now buy Pro big glass. 30 years ago you had to save up and buy from your local camera store, unless you were a pro you shot with a Soligor or Tokina 400F5.6 or 500mm F8. You could count the fingers of one hand the number of wildlife photographers around then - I look at my images from that era now and they are laughable compared to what I can generate now.
Pros will continue to earn a living, less so by selling images but more so by selling their expertise through workshops and photo-tourism. The evolution has been happening for some time now. mu tuppence anyway
Posted by Peter Cairns on July 17, 2009 at 8:35 AM
Very interesting comments guys and interesting too, who has taken the trouble to respond to this thread...and who hasn't.
Mike's and John's comments are particularly topical. Mike, although the market for photo-tours has exploded so has the competition. When I started running tours 12 years ago, you could count on one hand my competitors - that's changed and we may well be getting to "it's all been done before" with tours too!
For me, John hits the nail squarely and I must confess, I was perhaps trying to tease such an idea when I posted the thread. Very few photographers think about THE STORY and it's potential implications to an audience. I've been working this way for the last three years - as a result of afore-mentioned competition - and I can honestly say that as well as being more commercially rewarding, it is much more satisfying on a personal level and much more beneficial on a communication level.
In my very humble view, photographers with the talent of the likes of Rene should be looking beyond the garden and the hide, beyond the individual image and using their expertise to communicate far beyond this forum. Just my view you understand!
Well as it pertains to photography in our own country I can't help but wonder what impact the expected population growth will have over the next 20 years. I believe the projections are we are somewhere around 61 million now and expected to be close to 71 million around 2030 which is a lot of people to find space for. I suspect that documenting the environmental impact of this may become ever more important and probably distressing too.
In terms of how this is portrayed I wouldn't be surprised if 3D imaging is the standard by then. Imagine the possibilities for critique then
Its all very optimistic, but we might be swimming in the gray goo of nano bots mention of the Soligor 500mm f8 reminds me I have one somewhere, big heavy brute for its size.
We will have bionic eye replacements, with terabyte flash storage and 100Gb wireless lan connectivity. This allows the news press to upload as it happens, puts a new twist on eye focus
Grey squirrels will have been wiped out by a mutated strain of the pox, that the reds spread after becoming immune to the current strain. The market is now flooded with cute red shots. Due to global warming, many species normally found in the south of England, can now only be found in small patches in Scotland. Thus Scotland has now become the wildlife photographers mecca.
But who really knows, 40 years ago we all thought we would have hotels on the moon by now, the thought that gets me is, even now early lost film stock is being found, then digitized and restored for all to see of the early days in photography.
But now its all going digital, with new file formats, hard drives crashing, operating systems changing, how many images are going to be lost to time, technology changes and failures :
I imagine the technology will have changed a lot, I'd imagine we'll all be pulling stills from vid and handling all that data in real time. Any thing that makes taking pictures easier can only be a good thing. No mater how easy it is to take a picture there will still only be a few great photographers at any one time because it's seeing that is difficult.
I'd also imagine that those who succeed will be famous personalities. I'm guessing that audience will follow said people on line and possibly in real time, sort of like a very lively blog. Money will come from sponsorship rather than sales.
For me it's all about the story. I've fallen in love with "The Wire" and have spent a long time wondering how I could translate that in to something to help wildlife. To date I've no idea but I'm sure it will come to me.
I think the answers that are now coming are getting closer to the mark.
Its all going to be about innovation in storytelling. The technology is secondary to the plot imho.
Good stories, imaginatively told, will always hold people's attention. Digital is a fantastically enabling technology, and I'm hugely excited by the potential it offers. If you've not seen it, hunt down Microcosmos, the French film of a few years back - its 'only' a story about insects, but its one of the most visually stunning and exciting (nature) films I've EVER seen. The audience were literally gasping in the theatre around me.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117040/
That was done using 'old' technology - film (!) , so just think about what such imaginations are doing with digital.
We're facing huge changes in the way imaging is being done - and the ways it can be sold. It's always been difficult to earn a crust at it, and despite the 'ease' that you can make images with digital, it is STILL difficult, and at the end of the day success comes down to imagination and hard work.
I think technology will continue to develop - it will be 'nice' to have digi SLR that can produce clean files upto 5x4 and 8x10 standard with as much fine detail...but at extreme speed of several frames a second or even film that matches that quality. As a guide to technology I suppose we will be looking at potential what the BBC has at their disposal currently and possibly better. I think technology will increase the number of mediums available for work to be sold into.
The ways in which we communicate I expect will change quite a lot with terrabit and perabits of data flying around to support the extremely large file sizes we are dealing with - life will be madder than it is now. Photographers will continually need to keep up with technology and communications so that they can continue to tell the story of the world at large and all the faceats that entrigue and draw, you, the viewer in.
I'm interested in understanding how many of us as photographer currently use the best and latest mediums for distributing work currently?
---
I tend to agree with some of Johns comments on stories being well told with good visuals and the best and latest technology - breaking new ground.
Hard graft and working on particular subjects I still feel yeilds the best results as it allows you to build up a good relationship with your subject.
I guess the other major question to ask is what level of wildlife will be around in twenty years time for us to photograph,songbirds over the past twenty years have dropped in numbers,global warming,extinction etc,hopefuly the photographers of today can help awareness through the use of their images so the photographers of tomorrow have something to photograph!!
A bit major perhaps but hey ho!!!
I find it interesting that there seems to be an underlying theme in this discussion about
" being successsful" What does that mean ? Selling pictures.?
To be honest I don't really care if I never sell a picture again. Been there, etc etc, and I get more enjoyment now than I ever did in the days when I needed to get a pic that might be commercial. That theme also leads to the need to get "that shot " which is different and that kind of desire can lead to some less than nice techniques being used to do it.
As for "where will photography bee in 20 years time" - well it won't be bothering me
JohnR
I'm planning on dying in about ten years time, so I'm not really worried about the 'look' of nature photography in twenty years. My misunderstood, photographic master-pieces will receive recognition for being soulful, heartfelt, visionary works of art and (in the tradition of some of greatest painters) will sell for millions. My family's future will be secure and they will be rich enough to escape this dying planet for a new life, on Mars.
Alternatively, in 20 years time, my images will still be attracting poor forum stats and wannabe nature-togs will still be trudging around the (last remaining) 'honey pots', happily handing over copious amounts of cash for the pleasure of producing (non-)carbon(-neutral)-copy images of species in-vogue.
I'm also guessing that the importance of equipment will STILL be over-emphasized, with camera manufactures producing products with even more functionality that no-one really needs, and that togs will still be worrying about which of the two main manufacturers to go with . . . . . . Sony or Panasonic.
Now where did I put that Dignitas application form . . . .
PC laptop - (very un-trendy)
Tired brain (two-day education conference wondering what the hell people were talking about)
Tired eyes (daughter believes she is an alarm clock programmed to go off a 5 . . . every morning!!)
Gut ache (probably something terminal)
I imagine the technology will have changed a lot, I'd imagine we'll all be pulling stills from vid and handling all that data in real time. Any thing that makes taking pictures easier can only be a good thing. No mater how easy it is to take a picture there will still only be a few great photographers at any one time because it's seeing that is difficult.
I'd also imagine that those who succeed will be famous personalities. I'm guessing that audience will follow said people on line and possibly in real time, sort of like a very lively blog. Money will come from sponsorship rather than sales.
For me it's all about the story. I've fallen in love with "The Wire" and have spent a long time wondering how I could translate that in to something to help wildlife. To date I've no idea but I'm sure it will come to me.
Posted by Peter Cairns on July 18, 2009 at 4:26 AM
Guys
Nick's point about this forum being skewed towards photographers (obviously) extends to being skewed towards cynical old gits - the club which I undoubtedly preside over. John (uncharacteristically for a highlander) is the beacon of hope!!
Joking aside, we should all perhaps look in the mirror from time to time and think about what we do and why. It's easy to sound worthy but more difficult to deliver.
Over and out and thanks for the insights. I'm off to lie down...on the A9!
In 20 years time there's going to be a lot less choice of what to photograph. Things like Red Squirrels and Water Voles will be extinct. Half of our bird species will be either extinct or critically endangered. Wildlife photographers will be immune to all of this and will continue to endlessly churn out banal bird-on-a-stick photographs which no-one wants.
Discussion
21 repliesWhat will nature photography look like in 20 years from now? And what will the leading shooters be doing to get noticed? OK, two questions...
Pete
MacPro, Eizo monitor, Drobo back-up, tea, eyes at f4, migraine.
www.northshots.com
Specialisation is the key to standing out. Its not enough to be a nature photographer, you'll need to concentrate your efforts on a specific group or species, or perhaps a clearly defined area. You are part way there with your Highland wildlife/landscapes but I suspect that in future we'll all need to be even more targeted to have that USP. 'Peter Cairns, oh yes the Scottish wildcat specialist'... Spending time with the subject and specialist knowledge (always valuable) to back up the images are the only advantages that a pro photographer has now.
The web has made anyone with a specialisation easy to find, but revenue from pic sales is drying up and, like it or not, the world is moving towards free to use (or cheaper than chips) content for large parts of the media.
How do these things add up? No idea...
All the best
Andrew
I do know i will be retired, have hopefully plenty of time, have my health and will finally have my own hide in my garden for my own pleasure.
Thats how i look at it: i am not in it for money (thank God for that), i am in it because i like to be outside and take pictures, express my own creativity whether people like it or not! Because after all: i am doing this for myself mainly....
Rene de Heer
It doesn't have to go to free tho' - those that have their own vision and ability to innovate (either through use of equipment, species knowledge or use of retail products) will be out there still getting (and selling) quality stuff that people want to see and own. The rest will be contributing the commoditised, mass produced stuff that the bottom-end mass market wants.
Niches always exist... you've just got to find them.
(ps Don't forget that as it's a nature photography forum, you see an unusually high concentration of shooters here - it gives a slightly skewed view of the world. Most people don't have the time, money or inclination to do what most folks on here do.)
MacPro foot warmer, Daylight Therapy LCD monitor, spare disk backup, fresh double espresso - so no migraine
This is a very narrow niche and style is perhaps more important factor. I would hate to think one should only concentrate lions or beetles because you worked in a safari park or studied entomology at college. Clearly that's just ridiculous.
If your photograph makes someone stop, look and stirs an emotion or memory then you're successful. Should you be in the business for money, this needs to be translated into a sale. That's where the context comes in. Why the specific photograph makes you think can really add power.
It's very difficult to imagine what the next 20 years will bring. Technology advances so quickly. Will we all be shooting HD film and extracting frames as stills as a side part of our nature films? No idea what people will be doing to stand out, it changes very quickly.
I would concentrate on the here and now that's what matters.
Chris
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Abides
I can truly say it changed my way of thinking at the time and made me very much aware of the impact Human Technological Society (HTS) has on the planet.
The optimist in me hopes that HTS sees sense and lives in harmony with the planet so that there will always be Nature to record.
The pessimist in me thinks.....
I agree with Chris that we should, whilst we record what is in the past, concentrate
on the here and now and lay the foundation for a harmonious future.
We had daubs in the sand, then the cave walls at Lascaux, the quill pen, and the printing press,the biro and now email and the web, Twitter and YouTube, and as the technology has evolved so too have the myriad ways that stories can be told. See this for an example of innovative and engaging image-led storytelling:
http://vimeo.com/3156959
or this:
http://www.thewhalehunt.com/
'Language' evolves, the aspirations of storytellers evolves, and the appetites and expectations of consumers evolves too. Good storytellers will simply reflect that and feed our needs to know.
Whats great though is that at the end of the day the best storytellers are generally the ones who do the footwork, put in the hours and reap the rewards of experience....and wild nature has a way of throwing up astonishing stuff all the time for them - because they are out there to see it and record it.
Andy Rouse didnt get successfull by simply being a gobby larger-than-life character - it may have helped, but he got there by getting out and spending the hours in the field so he knows his subjects, and his markets, and by giving them high quality images on time, all the time.
In twenty years time Andy Rouse Jnr may be doing exactly the same, but using all the new technology available right at the sharp end and all us wannabes will be following on.
We seem to have hit the saturation point of excellence - look at the WPOY entries now, there is very little that is "fresh" or new. - its the fault of the credit boom and information/internet explosion - anyone can now buy Pro big glass. 30 years ago you had to save up and buy from your local camera store, unless you were a pro you shot with a Soligor or Tokina 400F5.6 or 500mm F8. You could count the fingers of one hand the number of wildlife photographers around then - I look at my images from that era now and they are laughable compared to what I can generate now.
Pros will continue to earn a living, less so by selling images but more so by selling their expertise through workshops and photo-tourism. The evolution has been happening for some time now. mu tuppence anyway
Mike's and John's comments are particularly topical. Mike, although the market for photo-tours has exploded so has the competition. When I started running tours 12 years ago, you could count on one hand my competitors - that's changed and we may well be getting to "it's all been done before" with tours too!
For me, John hits the nail squarely and I must confess, I was perhaps trying to tease such an idea when I posted the thread. Very few photographers think about THE STORY and it's potential implications to an audience. I've been working this way for the last three years - as a result of afore-mentioned competition - and I can honestly say that as well as being more commercially rewarding, it is much more satisfying on a personal level and much more beneficial on a communication level.
In my very humble view, photographers with the talent of the likes of Rene should be looking beyond the garden and the hide, beyond the individual image and using their expertise to communicate far beyond this forum. Just my view you understand!
Pete
In terms of how this is portrayed I wouldn't be surprised if 3D imaging is the standard by then. Imagine the possibilities for critique then
We will have bionic eye replacements, with terabyte flash storage and 100Gb wireless lan connectivity. This allows the news press to upload as it happens, puts a new twist on eye focus
Grey squirrels will have been wiped out by a mutated strain of the pox, that the reds spread after becoming immune to the current strain. The market is now flooded with cute red shots. Due to global warming, many species normally found in the south of England, can now only be found in small patches in Scotland. Thus Scotland has now become the wildlife photographers mecca.
But who really knows, 40 years ago we all thought we would have hotels on the moon by now, the thought that gets me is, even now early lost film stock is being found, then digitized and restored for all to see of the early days in photography.
But now its all going digital, with new file formats, hard drives crashing, operating systems changing, how many images are going to be lost to time, technology changes and failures
cool:
I'd also imagine that those who succeed will be famous personalities. I'm guessing that audience will follow said people on line and possibly in real time, sort of like a very lively blog. Money will come from sponsorship rather than sales.
For me it's all about the story. I've fallen in love with "The Wire" and have spent a long time wondering how I could translate that in to something to help wildlife. To date I've no idea but I'm sure it will come to me.
Its all going to be about innovation in storytelling. The technology is secondary to the plot imho.
Good stories, imaginatively told, will always hold people's attention. Digital is a fantastically enabling technology, and I'm hugely excited by the potential it offers. If you've not seen it, hunt down Microcosmos, the French film of a few years back - its 'only' a story about insects, but its one of the most visually stunning and exciting (nature) films I've EVER seen. The audience were literally gasping in the theatre around me.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117040/
That was done using 'old' technology - film (!) , so just think about what such imaginations are doing with digital.
We're facing huge changes in the way imaging is being done - and the ways it can be sold. It's always been difficult to earn a crust at it, and despite the 'ease' that you can make images with digital, it is STILL difficult, and at the end of the day success comes down to imagination and hard work.
The ways in which we communicate I expect will change quite a lot with terrabit and perabits of data flying around to support the extremely large file sizes we are dealing with - life will be madder than it is now. Photographers will continually need to keep up with technology and communications so that they can continue to tell the story of the world at large and all the faceats that entrigue and draw, you, the viewer in.
I'm interested in understanding how many of us as photographer currently use the best and latest mediums for distributing work currently?
---
I tend to agree with some of Johns comments on stories being well told with good visuals and the best and latest technology - breaking new ground.
Hard graft and working on particular subjects I still feel yeilds the best results as it allows you to build up a good relationship with your subject.
Ian
A bit major perhaps but hey ho!!!
Craig
www.craigchurchill.co.uk
" being successsful" What does that mean ? Selling pictures.?
To be honest I don't really care if I never sell a picture again. Been there, etc etc, and I get more enjoyment now than I ever did in the days when I needed to get a pic that might be commercial. That theme also leads to the need to get "that shot " which is different and that kind of desire can lead to some less than nice techniques being used to do it.
As for "where will photography bee in 20 years time" - well it won't be bothering me
JohnR
David
I'm planning on dying in about ten years time, so I'm not really worried about the 'look' of nature photography in twenty years. My misunderstood, photographic master-pieces will receive recognition for being soulful, heartfelt, visionary works of art and (in the tradition of some of greatest painters) will sell for millions. My family's future will be secure and they will be rich enough to escape this dying planet for a new life, on Mars.
Alternatively, in 20 years time, my images will still be attracting poor forum stats and wannabe nature-togs will still be trudging around the (last remaining) 'honey pots', happily handing over copious amounts of cash for the pleasure of producing (non-)carbon(-neutral)-copy images of species in-vogue.
I'm also guessing that the importance of equipment will STILL be over-emphasized, with camera manufactures producing products with even more functionality that no-one really needs, and that togs will still be worrying about which of the two main manufacturers to go with . . . . . . Sony or Panasonic.
Now where did I put that Dignitas application form . . . .
PC laptop - (very un-trendy)
Tired brain (two-day education conference wondering what the hell people were talking about)
Tired eyes (daughter believes she is an alarm clock programmed to go off a 5 . . . every morning!!)
Gut ache (probably something terminal)
Craig
I'd also imagine that those who succeed will be famous personalities. I'm guessing that audience will follow said people on line and possibly in real time, sort of like a very lively blog. Money will come from sponsorship rather than sales.
For me it's all about the story. I've fallen in love with "The Wire" and have spent a long time wondering how I could translate that in to something to help wildlife. To date I've no idea but I'm sure it will come to me.
Nick's point about this forum being skewed towards photographers (obviously) extends to being skewed towards cynical old gits - the club which I undoubtedly preside over. John (uncharacteristically for a highlander) is the beacon of hope!!
Joking aside, we should all perhaps look in the mirror from time to time and think about what we do and why. It's easy to sound worthy but more difficult to deliver.
Over and out and thanks for the insights. I'm off to lie down...on the A9!
Pete
Paul