Hello, everyone!
I hope you’ve enjoyed a good week.
A while ago, I followed a professional photo journalist who writes a lot about their work, ethics and other related topics. I find their stuff okay. There’s nothing groundbreaking. Then one day, they posted a note about people unwilling to hire professional photographers now. Instead, they hire inexperienced ones for less money and accept bad deliverables, etc, etc, etc. Again, it’s nothing new, or controversial until I saw the picture posted under the note. Edge to edge, it screamed AI slop, which, it seemed, had slipped through the critical eye of the poster. That gave me pause. How did that happen? How did such a slop make it past a professional? In the comment section, people pointed out that it was a slop. That was when I got distracted and forgot about the thing. Later, when I looked back on the matter, the post was gone. I had no idea what transpired before the note was taken down. As a result, I unfollowed the person. The reason is obvious. Then, last week, I saw the same person leaving a praising commenting on another AI slop someone else posted. It almost made me question my own judgement, which I shouldn’t have. It got me thinking. How many people out in the wild are faking and selling their expertise? And how many more are falling for said “expertise?” It’s not enough to keep an eye out for AI slops. Fake experts can do just as much damage, if not more. One of the most important lessons I’ve learnt from journalism school and my previous work is that journalists should know the limit to their knowledge and expertise. Journalists are rarely experts in any given subject, and hence should not play one on tv or in print media. Unfortunately, in our age of algorithms, flashy confidence and grandiosity are rewarded, which in turn feeds the ego of those who benefit from such atrocities. The result? The world is a dummer place.
If you’ve made it this far, thank you! I don’t know what I just rambled about. Let me know if you’ve figured it out.
On to today’s topic.
For the past week, I planned to post some UltraMax photos I shot on summer solstice. Unfortunately,-fortunately for you- the local lab told me it was gonna take two weeks to develop and scan the C41. Two weeks!
Fortunately for me, the six rolls of film I sent to my Hong Kong lab were developed, scanned, and sent back to me. At least now I have something to post about. Now sending film to Hong Kong is cheaper, with better quality, and faster turnaround than my local options. What am I to do?
Anyway, a few weeks ago, I went to the national museum. And again, I was more impressed by the spaces than by the exhibitions there. So I took some photos on the P30.
Silhouette under the arch.
On a bench.
Through the window I.
Through the window II.
Through the window III.
Through the window IV.
“All chairs should be stacked as such!”
That’s it for today. Sometimes I look at the photos I’ve taken, and think : “maybe I should stop doing this.” When I looked at the scans I got back this time, it happened again. A lot of the photos turned out way worse than I remembered. Anyway, you will see in the coming days and weeks. Thank you for stopping by! I hope you have a good week ahead of you. See you soon!
Love the windows and the windows-within-windows.
I’m so curious as to the post you saw, more so who posted it. P30 is such a gorgeous stock and you put it to work, I really need to score some.