Becoming Pro

I have become Pro. Flickr Pro. This means that I am going to pay 50,- Dollars per year (and a discounted 35,- for the first year) to prevent Flickr from deleting my images that are above the maximum of 1000 that Flickr allows for a free account.

I have been thinking about this for a while. And considering that I am so critical of Flickrs new policy and that I have just written a rant about this a few days ago, you may wonder how this happened. Am I a hypocrite?

Well, I decided to stay with Flickr because it is my social basis for photography. I have met many people here that I communicate with via Flickr. I love the exchange of comments and ideas about pictures. I use Flickr to test my pictures and to see how the response of my followers is (although I have to admit that I often don’t understand their reasoning for faving and not faving pictures, but that is another topic). And I want to maintain the opportunity of interacting with certain people that I like and whose work I want to follow.

Are there alternatives? Yes, theoretically there are alternatives. 500 px provide a very nice platform with high quality photographers posting their pictures there. Instagram has a huge base of people showing their work and posting social news. But on these platforms (that I actually have subscribed to as a free member) I don’t have the social interaction with the people that I “collected” over the past 5 years. And that is the main reason to stay with Flickr.

From a photographic perspective quality is probably better on 500 px. From a social perspective Instagram has probably more diversity. But I won’t find my “old Flickr friends” there. And that is the reason why I am staying.

I still don’t agree with Flickr’s random change of policies. I loathe the fact that they are threatening to delete art. I am worried that my beloved ****Contrasted Gallery is going to die or at least take a severe blow because hundreds of pictures will be deleted from it. And I find it ridiculous that I need to pay a ransom in order to prevent Flickr from deleting parts of my own collection (although I can afford the amount, this is not the reason).

But I am going to stay for at least the next year. I will observe how Flickr develops. I will see if the change of policy causes the expected further drain of creativity from it. And I will re-consider things after one year. I am still pissed off. And I don’t think I am a hypocrite.

Flickr Kills Art

For the last year and a half I have been one of the curators of ****Contrasted Gallery. ****CG is an online project, founded more than 10 years ago by Manuel Diumenjó. He and his co-curators invite on a monthly basis interesting artists to exhibit a collection of their Flickr pictures at ****CG.

Technically ****CG is a Flickr group where only curators have the right to ‘admit’ pictures. We invite artists, discuss with them their work and ask them to chose up to 50 pictures that they want to exhibit for one month. After the show the pictures remain in the gallery so that interested people always have the opportunity of reviewing artistic work that has been accumulated in over 10 years. So it has become a fascinating place where artistic photography is shown.

And now comes Flickr. And threatens to delete all pictures above 1000 of all its members that have not become Pro. Do you have an idea what that means? According to Manuel’s estimation between 60 and 70% of all pictures that have been accumulated at ****CG over the years will be deleted. Gone! Forever!

So Flickr is not only urging people to decide if they want their own collection of pictures to be deleted if they don’t pay the ransom, they also destroy pro-actively art and the work people have put into this over the last decade. This is a scandal!

Art needs to be protected from barbarians of all kind. Art cannot be “deleted”. The attitude behind this is awful. This is close to fascist behaviour. A company that is deleting art has not understood its responsibility.

Here is the link to ****Contrasted Gallery. If you click the links on the left han side you get to the respective exhibition of an artist. https://www.flickr.com/groups/contrasted_gallery/discuss/

If you think that Flickr’s new policy needs a change, particularly in order to prevent the destruction of art, write them, swamp them with requests! Here is the link to the Flickr help page for this topic: www.flickr.com/help/forum/en-us/72157702923034264/ 

Flickr is Dead!

Today I received the information from Flickr directly on my account that from February 2019 the company will delete all pictures above the number of 1000 of all members - unless we are willing to become “pros” and pay 50,- US Dollars ransom per year.

The company that promised its members in the past that we could upload all our pictures up to 1 TB for free so that we would not need to worry about the safety of our precious images is now threatening to cull everything above 1000 unless we pay them.

In other words: they are threatening to destroy the collection of all people that believed in the words, offers and the goodwill of this company. There are many people on Flickr that have created a collection over many years and that have put a lot of energy and love into this. And the collection of each member is unique. It is an expression of our photographic development over the years. And all this a steal cold company is going to destroy unless we feed them with extra money.

There was hope that things would improve with Flickr after it had been taken over by the new owners Smug Mug. Previously Flickr had taken a severe downturn after the mother company Yahoo had been taken over by new owners. But now it turns out that the new owners see Flickr as their new cash cow. They blackmail members to pay to avoid their collection being destroyed. This is Piracy. This is deception. This is undermining trust. And this is dishonest.

If this is really going to happen I will stop using Flickr. I will not delete my account immediately because I want to maintain my social contacts that I have collected over the years. But I will stop using Flickr as the place to show my pictures.

I am not accepting to be blackmailed. I am not willing to pay money for people who don’t give a toss for previous promises and don’t care about the things their users have created over the years. And I despise this expression of raw capitalism.

FLICKR IS DEAD!!!

CURATING

I have been asked to become one of the curators of the online photographic gallery ****Contrasted Gallery on Flickr.  https://www.flickr.com/groups/contrasted_gallery/pool/

Contrasted Gallery is an exhibition project founded by Manuel Diumenjó in 2007. The gallery exhibits interesting artistic pictures by photographers that post their pictures on a Flickr stream. Currently three curators share the task of finding artists and asking them if they are interested in showing their pictures in this online gallery. The curators are free to decide who they invite and which criteria they apply with regard to their choice.

So all of a sudden I find myself in the situation that I need not only to find an artist every three months who wants to exhibit his work but I also (and that is the trickier part) need to define my own criteria of quality that make me approach a photographer and ask him or her.

It is similar to my question in my last blog. What are the criteria for taking or processing a picture? In this case it is the question how I define "artistry" and "well taken" and "interesting". And honestly - I don't know. I have likings and dislikes. I have moments when a picture or a picture gallery appeals to me, speaks to me and other moments when this doesn't happen. As a decision making criteria this doesn't seem very strong.

Yes, criteria like composition and use of light I take into account. Is it a picture that tells a story? Is the whole gallery able to captivate the viewer? Am I interested in watching the next picture and discover what t is all about? Does the photographer communicate with his subjects (and if it is even on a remote and virtual basis)? Does he or she communicate with his viewers?

What I don't apply are criteria of so called "modern photography". I made once in New Zealand an experience with a gallerist that I had approached with the question if he was interested in exhibiting some of my pictures. He declined my request with the reasoning that my pictures did not exude the feel of modern photography and that it was stuck in the 80s. I pondered about this for a long time and I could really, really not find out what exactly he meant. Sure, some photography deals with the latest social and political dvelopments. The photographers that are represented by the Magnum group work that way, and they do it brilliantly. But other photography is timeless, does not refer to certain new socio-geographical developments. I have come to the conclusion that this criterium is nonsense, at least for my own decision making.

So I approach artists whose pictures "speak to me". I apply my subjective criteria. I get into an dialogue with the artist and his work. And if I am able to maintain this dialogue for a while and if the overall work communicates a message that captivates me I invite them.

I am currently working with the Brazilian photographer Zé Lobarto. Zé creates beautiful street photography where each single picture tells a story of light, lines and drama. But I don't want to ramble. I want to attract your attention to this amazing artist and make you follow this link to his Flickr stream. Yes, exactly this one. Click!  https://www.flickr.com/photos/ze_lobato/

And on 10 June, when the exhibition opens I will add here the link to his work at ****Contrasted Gallery.

The first exhibition that I have curated was with pictures of the German photographer Stefan Speidel who has been living in Tokyo for the past 30 years. His strong black and white pictures of Japan and Japanese life and culture give an impression of how life shapes the view of expats who have to embrace their new environment. And external view from inside. I find it fascinating.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rifugio_bobo

I am captivated. By them. By their work. And by choosing artists and applying my own very subjective criteria. I love it!