This conversation is closed.

I want to know a little more about the public's reception of photography

The first approach is the speaker on the public's knowledge of your photos? What kind of knowledge of his photographic production is expected by the speaker? As we see and how we express ourselves about photography which is a product revitalized by new technologies?

  • May 2 2013: The wording of your questions leads me to believe that you are using your second language. It appears you are looking for responses from Dr. Salgado regarding his expectations of the reception the public would have of his work: is that not so?

    Of course, we can't help you there; but as someone experienced in photography, visual art and writing I can tell you that the goal is to convey feelings and Dr. Salgado's work surely does that. I don't think technology has "revitalized" photography...instead, it appears to have made many aspects of it easier for the average person to approach with confidence. From all appearances, though, Salgado's work is "old school". You don't get that technique by using the "Auto" function.
  • thumb
    May 2 2013: Rage and contempt for the industrialized greed . For who ever they are . Great sadness .My soul feels a little emptier .
  • thumb
    May 1 2013: I am not sure I understand your question, but I will try and you can correct me if I misunderstand.

    To many people, it is the image itself that carries the message, even if the viewer does not understand the process by which the photo is produced. The same would be true of the viewer of an oil painting. Most people respond to the painting without understanding how the painter put down his layers to achieve the effect he did.

    Some people's experience with viewing the object of art would be enriched by understanding the process, and others would not appreciate the product more by understanding the process.