While in a communications class recently, the topic of Instagram came up for discussion.
A comment a classmate made stuck with me: “Personally, I don’t really like Instagram, but that might be because I’m a real photographer.”
Although the majority of the class, teacher included, scoffed at the pretention of the remark, they all essentially agreed that Instagram shouldn’t really be considered art.
They’re right.
Instagram isn’t art, but rather an application by which art can be created.
Andy Warhol, an artist known for his paintings, films, photography an, more importantly, his approaches to art, once said, “A picture means I know where I was every minute. That’s why I take pictures. It’s a visual diary.”
Warhol pretty much captures the ethos of Instagram. Most people are using it as a visual diary, a reminder of where they’ve been, what they like and the things that are important to them.
Yes, a lot of the photos are of people’s faces or of food, but both of these photos can be artfully done.
So, what is so wrong with trying to artistically document your life? Isn’t that what most artists are trying to do?
More importantly, why isn’t Instagram seen as a valid form of expression in the medium of photography?
I can only try to assume what the real photographer meant by her comment. Was it that Instagram doesn’t reach the standard of quality that real cameras achieve?
Quality of technology has never been an issue in the world of art as far as I’m concerned. Technically, cheap art can sometimes be the most genuine. Look at lo-fi music, an entire genre of music that prides itself on its lack of hi-fi technology.
I’ve seen entire exhibits at museums of Polaroids and Holga-photos. Aren’t these essentially toy’s in comparison to a “real” camera?
In fact, these are the very cameras that Instagram is trying to mimic.
Maybe that’s the reason the “real photographer” has such a problem with Instagram – that it’s trying to mimic something that already exists.
Instagram exists now, and it doesn’t look like it’s going anywhere. It’s likely that 20 to 30 years from now our children will all be talking about the artistic merit of such novelty devices as the iPhone.
Art is a reflection of the culture by which it’s produced, and Instagram is clearly a reflection of where our culture is at.
We glamorize the past with filters like Amaro, Rise, Earlybird and Toaster that make us feel nostalgia for yesterday.
It’s alarming and sad that we live in a world where our futures look bleak, yet art will always be a perfect way to express and deal with that frustration.
A good deal of what people shoot on Instagram will not be considered great art, but that can be said about any camera. It should not discourage people from trying.
What does discourage people is stigmatization, and Instagram is the perfect target for professional photographers to do just that.
They don’t want to feel they’ve wasted money on equipment, and they haven’t!
Better lenses and newer hardware will make your art better, but it won’t make your art for you.
Simply put, expensive high-quality hardware doesn’t make great art – great artists do.
Dane Rivera is a senior creative writing major and a contributing writer for the Daily 49er.
