4 ms·

I think when you refer to "medium" you mean style. Here photography is the medium to deliver a message. I think we can agree that not every message is best pres

I think when you refer to "medium" you mean style. Here photography is the medium to deliver a message. I think we can agree that not every message is best presented in the same style. Would you present a photo of a party in the same way you present a photo of a war zone? Different photos need different styles of presentation. There is skill not just to picking the style, and adjusting the style to suit the photo. So it's fair to say that a photograph needs a certain visual style to stand out, and photo filters can strengthen a photograph by enhancing aspects of that photo that adhere to the desired style.

hnriot 14y ago
No, not style, I meant medium. These filters are emulating, as do instagrams, different photographic mediums, like color film, b&w film, instant film, etc. Photo filters do not strengthen a photograph, they detract at best. A good photograph of a party, or a good photograph of a war zone are still good photographs. People don't go to a war zone and pick a filter to emphasize the horror. Understanding what makes a photograph work is a complex interaction between the image and the person looking at it. My point is that you can take a boring photo and add novelty by adding a filter, but that's a cheap sham, it's not a better photograph. Making a photograph b&w for example doesn't bestow it with artistic merit. As an example, go look up someone like Bruce Davidson, and see try these filters out on any of his photographs, after a few attempts you will start to see that the images worked before you added any fluff. Style isn't about filters, or about HDR or any of that nonsense, it's about visual intellect, about making a photograph by assembling components in a visual dialog with the viewer.