I saw a news article yesterday where the owners of a cat placed a camera around it's neck programmed to take 400 shots a day. The images have since been edited and are to form part of an exhibition.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...rld-storm.html

This reminds me of the story of Alex Soth who, when denied a working visa to the UK, handed his camera to his 7 year old daughter, encouraged her to take lots of photos and then edited the pictures to produce an exhibition and a book.

Call me old fashioned but i like to take pictures that have some intent and pre-visualisation. Have I become part of a dying breed?

Is street photography in danger of slipping into the hands of editors rather than photographers?

I saw something like that during winter at a Denver gallery. It was a video camera strapped to a dog. Stills where printed from the video and a kind of collage was made by hanging several pics on long nails that where nailed only a bit and the pic was pulled towards the head of the nail. VEry cool

I would have liked to see more pics from the pet camera. One of the books I read when I first got interested in photography recommended an exercise in which you had to spend a day shooting everything from the POV of your pet. Things certainly do look different from down on the floor.

I suppose it's possible to get an occasional good image shooting at random. Put a camera in, say, Times Square with an intervalometer that triggers it every 60 seconds, let it run for a week and I have no doubt that something interesting will turn up. But who wants to plod through 10000 frames to find it? I don't think we need worry too much about being supplanted by cats. As for editors, well, they have always had a huge impact on what gets seen and what doesn't. But that's their job, isn't it?

I don't think street photography is at any risk of slipping into the hands of editors. Places like this and Flickr will always have a contingent that enjoy this style. But, editors definitely have a place. I think most of us aren't very good at editing our own work, much less have a good grasp of critique and self-assessment. I think this becomes particularly important if you aspire to having your work seen beyond online communities.

And btw, I'm a cat.

I read the article to which you refer after reading about it on a different web-site (Auntie Beeb, I think). An interesting idea and a rather unusual point of view, but with the advent of easy digital photography, everyone is now a photographer, and this is a boon for editors providing as is does a flood of material for just about all and every occasion. I still think that in the publishing industry though, a good editor is far more valuable than a good photographer.

- Wil

See what they don't show you though are the 397 photos per day that are just of the sunny spot on the carpet the cat has been sleeping on.

Originally Posted by Molotov Everything See what they don't show you though are the 397 photos per day that are just of the sunny spot on the carpet the cat has been sleeping on.