The German-American photographer of the early 20th century, Alfred Stieglitz, once said that the only thing that temporarily halted the fashion of photography was the craze for bicycles. Now, as we are accustomed to more sophisticated means of transport, the trend of photography has made a strong comeback. When we talk about trends, our mind goes to change, renewal, surprise, or anything else that can distance us from the boredom of what we consider known, to reintroduce what we deem unknown.
In Art, the only real surprise and innovation is the presence of the artist himself. A new trend is the ingenious presence of a creator who tells us the same things (since nothing remains unsaid) filtered through his own sensitivity and perception. The surprise based on the "new" cannot be the starting point of emotion, especially since the new usually pertains to the surface, not the depth.
In the 1980s, artistic photography succumbed to the aesthetics and perception of advertising. The advertising concept combined with morphological impressiveness led the viewer to treat photography as just another image to be consumed in familiar daily ways, rather than as a unique and mysterious work of creation. The more the desire for surprise was incorporated into the surface, the more it was removed from the content. However, in recent years, museum directors and exhibition curators have started to realize that this trend, based entirely on a concept, has nothing more to offer, since the element of surprise was its very presence, which has already been exhausted. Hence, there is a shift towards older values, back when photography spoke about the photographed world.
This time, however, the world of the photographer differs from the broader social space. Perhaps the saturation of images, (and, naturally, usually uninspired), of familiar moments and events, combined with the now-documented bankruptcy of every artistic alignment. Perhaps the realization of the essential inability of photography to "play" the game of the visual space, within which it cannot survive with dignity. Perhaps, again, the general shift of people in search of personal supports, now that the often harmful supreme values have faded, has led photographers to adopt a more personal theme that moves from the outside world inwards and not from the photographer outwards. The photographed world is the photographer's world. His intimate and personal space.
In the realm of so-called reportage photography, photographers, forced to remain attached to the "outside" world, considered the adoption of morphological extremes as a signature of their personal presence in events. However, it appears they have realized that the reporter is the conveyor of events, not the creator. And that highlighting the photographer's presence must be inversely proportional to the importance of the event.
The new technologies can only benefit photography externally. After all, no camera, lens, or film made the artist. Computers are another step, useful if treated correctly, namely as a means and not as a surprise, in the journey of an art born from technology.
Whatever medium the photographer uses, and whatever theme they adopt, their work will be contemporary if it moves us, and its content new if it is based on their personal world and not on the prevailing fashion at any given time.
Plato Rivellis