Why live your life through a viewfinder?

[Evening]

My son emailed me an article he came across. I'll post link and body of the article.

Why live your life through a view-finder? - Telegraph

By Nigel Farndale
Published: 4:57PM BST 22 Aug 2009

Compulsive picture-taking is a modern affliction.

What is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stand and stare. Click. No time to stand beneath the boughs – click, click – and stare as long as sheep or cows. Click, click, bloody click.
For some time now, my loathing of cameras has been bubbling away on a low heat. The other day it boiled over, leaving my metaphorical cooking surface encrusted with matter that was gluey and black.
I was on a cable car climbing high above the cathedrals of Barcelona. It was a cloudless day. The city was shimmering below us, its energy palpable and intoxicating. And a tourist next to me was taking photographs, from the moment we lurched off to the moment we docked at the other end. I reckon he must have taken 120. Click, click, click. He didn't stand and stare at the view once. The only way I could prevent myself from opening the cable car door and pushing him out was to fantasise about bludgeoning him with his stupid camera, and then opening the cable car door and pushing him out.
His was a digital camera, so he no doubt figured he wasn't wasting film, and he probably knew he would never get round to looking at his photographs anyway, let alone deleting those frames he didn't want. As I watched him, it struck me that photography, once a noble art, has become, thanks to the move to digital, a mental illness. Our first instinct when confronted with the sublime in nature, or the frozen music of architecture, or a tender moment with a friend, is not to contemplate it, but to reach for our cameras so that we can experience it later, second-hand – or, more likely, ignore it later, because we are too busy taking the next pointless photograph in order to have a pointless record of everything we ever saw, or would have seen, had we not been taking a photograph of it.
Before the First World War, when W H Davies wrote the lovely poem that I've doctored in my opening paragraph, there was presumably more time to stand and stare. The poetic rhythms of life were not interrupted quite so frequently. And in the 1920s, when the great landscape photographer Ansel Adams set out on foot with his large-format camera to immortalise the American national parks, he would disappear for days, stand in silent contemplation for hours, press his shutter once.
Nowadays? Well, I took my children to see Walking with Dinosaurs at the O2 not long ago and, despite being asked not to, the audience used their cameras constantly, flash, flash, flash, all through it. I don't think they even knew they were doing it. And I remember going to the Taj Mahal and watching people arrive. Instead of gasping in awe, their first instinct was to reach for their cameras – indeed, they seemed agitated until the beauty and grandeur of the place had been captured and reduced, until they had their proof that they were there. After that, they seemed to lose interest.
What's it all about? I think it is as much insensitivity as insecurity. After all, at weddings these days, the solemn moment when the vows are exchanged can hardly be heard for the click of cameras. I was pleased to see that Debrett's is now offering etiquette guidance to cinemagoers – about not arriving late, whispering, rustling sweet wrappers and so on. They might consider advising incontinent photographers, too. "Get a life" would be a good start.

Who's a clicker and who takes time to look at the view?

[Evening]

I have been guilty of forgetting to smell the roses. It was brought home to me when I was Orca watching off the San Juan Islands near Vancouver Island. I don't think I ever saw them without having the camera up to my eye. I realize I'd missed most of what went on because I was so desperate to get a good shot and I had a limited view through the viewfinder at a point where I hoped I'd catch 'the shot'. I've tried to avoid going all out to get a brilliant shot in favour of actually observing something incredible but I suspect my son sent me this article because he has observed my click-happiness. Even the cats give me a withering look when they see the camera!

[no.absolutes]

Good article... I had to learn to give up the camera at family events/birthdays because I was missing out on my kids! I'm still a recovering addict, but at least I know its something to work on.

[aropilot]

I took a flight on a Ford Tri-Motor today. It took all I had to not have the camera in my hand snapping away, but to actually enjoy the history of the aircraft, it's graceful flying and the pure joy of being in one.
(I even got to fly as co-pilot and added it to my log book!)

[JFSanders]

Eh? whatever. Rehab is for quitters. Nigel should unbunch his knickers. Really. Me, I do what I want when I want to. I would say that I pass on a bunch of possible photographs just due to being unable to exclude things from it. But that doesn't stop me from taking my camera everywhere I go. And I do, everywhere. Have a nice day Nigel.

[Digidave]

Originally Posted by JFSanders

Eh? whatever. Rehab is for quitters. Nigel should unbunch his knickers. Really. Me, I do what I want when I want to. I would say that I pass on a bunch of possible photographs just due to being unable to exclude things from it. But that doesn't stop me from taking my camera everywhere I go. And I do, everywhere. Have a nice day Nigel.

[HenBres]

The article has some point but not so much so as to prove the photography addicts wrong. The article talks about Taj Mahal, the beauty of Nature and so on and points finger at photography lovers that we should be awestruck first, that we should spend time contemplating their beauty and splendor. This would have made sense in terms of Ansel Adams but not right now. I bet that TV and internet has shown us so many things that it is impossible to be completely awestruck and marvel at the grandeur and beauty of anything to a great extent.

Few months ago I finally decided to go to a Sea aquarium. I saw so many sea creatures that I had never seen but frankly speaking I was not awestruck at all even though that was my first time seeing them. Countless times I have seen them TV. In others words, I have become immune to them and I think that is the case with so many of us. We have seen every possible scenery, accidents, situations and so on television, magazines and internet that even though we were to discard the camera I don't think we would have any hair standing on our neck. To make us marvel in awe something out of this world should appear. And for a moment, let us suppose that we are awestruck and also we spend some time contemplating but wouldn't that feeling would just dissipate in a while? And wouldn't that mean that it is the time for the camera to do the job?

May be the writer of the article is asking for moderation in shooting. Yeah, that makes sense but if there were just two choices: Camera or no camera in the world, To shoot or not to shoot, then undoubtedly a world with camera and avid shooters would be a better choice.

What do you think?

[JFSanders]

Sorry old chum, already being discussed in this thread.

[Car2n]

As I sat waiting for a tour bus in Ottawa yesterday, I watched a woman with a DSLR take photos of an outdoor cafe while walking towards it. She walked and shot at the same time taking a shot with pretty much every step she took.
I had to chuckle.

[navcom]

I completely understand what is being said there and I agree to a point.

My photography interest lies in landscapes. I think the main reason I became so interested in this type of photography is because I love soaking it up while I'm there. I do take my time and relish the moment, so-to-speak. It's my escape from a busy life. So I completely understand his rationale. For me the photograph is a reminder of the moment that I enjoyed there, not the object itself to be enjoyed. It's the documentation of the relish.

I'm not a sports or action photographer. I don't do animals in the woods. I don't do race cars. I don't do weddings anymore. I will take my camera with me when I can, but it's not the first thing I reach for every time something is happening.

That being said, I understand the need to capture moments as well. But I do believe with some it's obsessive....almost as if life existed for the camera instead of the other way around. But it all boils down to choice. If someone wants to snap pictures and not take stock of what is going on around them in reality, that's their choice and their loss.

I will do an occasional airshow shoot, but that's because I've been in airshows from both the flying as well as spectator role, so not much is new there to me. I just love the aircraft. But if you are going to your first airshow, by all means enjoy it all. Bring your camera but don't forget to remove it from your face every now and then. A picture is not the same as the real thing.