“But at the same time, you do get the feeling the whole reviewing thing is a bit of a Ponzi scheme, a low-key pyramid industry which is part of the self-replicating mass Mayes refers to. And you do wonder about the reviewers and how this reflects back on them, whether at some point the charging for access to opinion will start seeming more of a money grubbing scam for something that once was, and perhaps still should be, provided for free. Perhaps it is less about providing a leg-up for people that can afford it than about closing off access to people who can’t afford.”
Wonderfully stated. With the rise of social communities on the web focussed on photography, why is it necessary to pay for opinions? The majority of the professional’s who make up the photography industry don’t actively participate in online photography communties, and if they do, it’s only for marketing purposes. What they don’t seem to realize is that the very people who they’re trying to reach in the real world, are right here on the web. This is where the audience is at. Just think if the Magnum web community were as active and engaging as some of the Flick communtiesr? Think of the debates? The wealth of knowledge that could be shared amongst the inexperienced and those that have become successful. It’s a new world and there are certainly people like David Alan Harvey who have jumped in head first and blazed a new path. I just wish more photogapher’s would follow his lead and treat their audience and fans less like consumers and more like a community of peers and friends.
All Photography looks alike: Stephen Mayes and Self-replicating Pictures [Colin Pantall's Blog]
Related posts:
