The Fundamental Problem With Photography 

This topic came up in a conversation with a friend and it had the same effect on them as on me: we start thinking in an almost freeform poetry kinda way. It's like magic how you fan the glowing embers of creativity into a blazing bonfire.

I like this argument!

Awesome video, keep up the amazing work!

this video is beautifully put together. I can't agree completely though. I'm not considering myself a photographer (I've only got my first real DSLR yesterday lol), but I've had a few humble attempts at creating something with my phone when I was out in the mountains. looking back to those photos, I'm actually longing for the feeling of being creative, getting around poles and stop signs to capture the idea I have in my head

this 3 minutes felt like an hour

Wonderful. I suppose for me I think of photography as a reality effect. A construction. A feeling. They remind of who we are and who we once were.

Subbed. Interest viewpoint.

You deserve so much more, incredible video! Currently searching references to make a photobook but this vid made me feel like « I have to do a bigger project, where people connect way more with what I lived in this travel ». Congratulations 👏

great storytelling, keep creating!

Kinda makes you think... What even is a memory? Is it the moment? But memories change over time. Photographs don't. Does does a photograph's connection to the memory then fade over time? Does it fail to grow along with the memory? Or does it anchor the memory to reality? Like a chain, forever shackled to the past. An object instead allows a memory to grow and develop organically. But who is to say if that's a good thing? And what does all of this mean for a person like me with a memory so incredibly bad that at least half of my memories are provably false?

[disclaimer that a lot of this comment is word vomit and miscelaneous ramblings] This is an interesting viewpoint, I feel like you'd be interested in Apparatus Film Theory. Even though its focused on cinema, the idea of the use of the "mechanism" of cinema to affect an audience may interest you. Personally, the way I shoot I wouldn't be able to identify with your sentiment here. In high school I wrote an essay about street photography, connecting it to the theory of thin slicing. How Gary Winnogrand left thousands of rolls undeveloped and a curator was only able to create an exhibition of a dozen of these undeveloped photos from rolls that Winnogrand already knew to not have any keepers. Or how Bresson "fished" for moments in compositions he could predict would have a photo in them. I think that's how I live through photography. I tend to remember more vividly the moments leading up to a candid photo of one of my friends. I developed and gave them the photos but I don't' think I ever look back at them that often. I think I thin sliced a feeling or something before I raised my camera. I can't even remember using my camera half the time even though I probably was using my camera half the time. And your bit in the description about recording sound. I've had an interesting revelation recently, I think I get that intense nostalgia that you get from mementos and recordings from the music I listened to at the time. Maybe put a photo together with a song I was really into that period and I could start forming a more accurate association.

Nice video, subscribed! The only thing I disagree with is at 1:35 - we DO see noise/grain/whatever - just that we tend to ignore it. Human vision becomes super noisy (and also black and white, for that matter) in the dark at night, and even in daytime if you are in a dimly lit room with a bright window, look into a shadow/on something dark somewhere and you'll see noise.

I mean...photos never were trying to say whatever the fuck you were trying to say they were.

How about you save the nail polish for the women? Freakazoid