Chat GPT:

 

What you're describing is **artistic courage**—the willingness to make photographs that might confuse, disturb, bore, or even alienate people because they express your own way of seeing rather than what is expected.

 

In much of the 20th century, many influential photographers weren't trying to make "beautiful" or "likeable" images. They were willing to:

 

* Photograph ordinary or ugly subjects.

* Break compositional rules.

* Leave technical imperfections.

* Present uncomfortable realities.

* Develop a personal visual language even if few people appreciated it at first.

 

Today, a lot of photography is filtered through social media, where the incentives are almost the opposite. Success is measured by likes, shares, and followers. That encourages photographers to produce images that are immediately appealing and familiar:

 

* perfect sunsets,

* dramatic color grading,

* shallow depth of field,

* attractive people,

* epic landscapes,

* symmetrical compositions.

 

It's not that photographers have become less talented. Rather, the environment rewards **approval** more than **individual vision**.

 

There's also a psychological aspect. When photographers shared work in galleries or books, they might reach a few thousand people. Now they post to hundreds of thousands online and receive instant feedback. That can make people unconsciously optimize for acceptance instead of exploration.

 

Some of the most respected photographers today still take artistic risks, but they're often less visible than influencers because their work isn't designed to go viral.

 

Your observation reminds me of a quote often attributed to the photographer Garry Winogrand: he photographed "to see what something looked like photographed." That attitude values curiosity over pleasing an audience.

 

In a way, photography has shifted from asking:

 

> "What do *I* want to show the world?"

 

to often asking:

 

> "What will the world reward me for showing?"

 

Of course, there are plenty of exceptions, but I think that's the change you're pointing to. The medium itself hasn't lost its capacity for boldness; the dominant culture around it has become more oriented toward popularity and affirmation than toward taking artistic risks.

----------

  

I am always trying to explore uncharted waters, think avant-garde.

soft is good.

软好！

 

The most important piece of equipment every photographer should have is.. a two step wooden stool.

 

"..And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. "

 

In darkness the subject is defined not by its (subjective) shape, color etc. but by the (objective) way directional lighting (by moonlight, street lamps etc.) is reflected by it.

 

"There is a crack, a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in." -L. Cohen

 

I find the song Down By The River by Neil Young very inspiring, It shows that technique is not a limiting factor. When you can't reach the high notes you work around it. Happy birthday Neil!

 

A good shot is like a good joke, it triggers spontaneous reaction.

 

I love sharp shots that show incredible detail. I also love soft shots that look like paintings. It depends on the shot.

 

I think that for a shot to be amazing it must not include a single thing that looks amazing (an amazing castle, an amazing looking woman etc..) It can include several things that look amazing together, though.