I'm an internationally recognized photographer. Feel free to look at my website (https://mttamalpaisphotos.com) and then tell me whether you think photography is dead. If you're worried about whether photography needs to be photojournalism, the answer is no., it can't be. My photocolleague is nearsighted; I am farsighted. We will look at the same scene and see different aspects of it. Our photos are different. We miss different things staring at the same place. He uses a camera and set of lenses with aspect ratios, sensors, and aberrations different from mine. Which lens and sensor do you think is most similar to the human eye? To your eye? Are photos taken at the blue hour or the golden hour less realistic than photos taken when the sun is directly overhead? What about overcast days? What about night photography? Photography, like the human eye, can be journalistic, but it's still idiosyncratic. If you want forensic evidence, you can try for that. but only a hierophant would require it of all photography.

--

Award-winning wildlife and nature photographer (https://mttamalpaisphotos.com), retired from California PUC, EPA, NOAA. Recovering journalist.

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store