# If you could never share your images



## sleist (May 11, 2016)

Would you still be into photography?
Would what/how you shoot change in any way?

No social media.
You could print, but could not show the images to anyone.
Photography was just about you, your camera, and the world around you.

How many of you would be as interested in photography if it was just for you?
No "likes" to boost the ego, pat you on the back, or tell you your images were "good".
No way to know if you were doing it "right".

Would you care about having the "best" equipment?

If no one else ever saw your images, what would be your reasons for making them?

Why do you post images in a photo forum?
Why do you care what anyone thinks?
If we only take the pictures other people like, won't all our pictures end up the same?

Vivian Maier left behind boxes of undeveloped rolls of film when she died.

If a tree fell in the woods ...


----------



## KC1 (May 11, 2016)

Heavens yes, I have thousands of images I will never share with anyone but my family, and others that will never be shared with them even.
They are for me alone.



> If we only take the pictures other people like, won't all our pictures end up the same?


I have taken a few pictures that others liked, but that was never the intention, it was to please me and capture a memory that will never fade for me.
A couple of quotes that sort of sum it all up for me:


> Hugh MacLeod in _Ignore Everybody: and 39 Other Keys to Creativity_:
> 
> "Art suffers the moment other people start paying for it."
> 
> ...


----------



## sleist (May 11, 2016)

KC1 said:


> Heavens yes, I have thousands of images I will never share with anyone but my family, and others that will never be shared with them even.
> They are for me alone



Not really the question.  Your example implies that some pictures would still be shared.
We all have photos we don't share for one reason or another.  I'm saying share nothing with anyone ever.


----------



## KC1 (May 11, 2016)

The answer to the question is a resounding YES!  
As long as I can go back and look at them myself, if not, then I am not sure if I would or not, it's a maybe at that point. I would at first, but might quit soon after.


----------



## limr (May 11, 2016)

sleist said:


> Would you still be into photography?
> Would what/how you shoot change in any way?
> 
> No social media.
> ...



Yes. I don't think I would change anything about the way I shoot, since I already shoot to please myself.



> Would you care about having the "best" equipment?



If "best" means the equipment that allows me to create the images that I want to create, then yes, I would care about it as much as I do now.



> If no one else ever saw your images, what would be your reasons for making them?



The same reasons I write things that I never show to anyone: self-expression. To get ideas or emotions out of my head and into a tangible, less ephemeral form so I can process them better.



> Why do you post images in a photo forum?
> Why do you care what anyone thinks?



Because despite my better judgment, I accept that humans are social creatures and we sometimes need to be seen and heard, just to remind ourselves that we exist.



> If we only take the pictures other people like, won't all our pictures end up the same?



Not necessarily. Not everyone likes the same thing  I believe we'd certainly end up with less variety, however.



> Vivian Maier left behind boxes of undeveloped rolls of film when she died.



Yeah, but she was kind of a nutter, though, innit?



> If a tree fell in the woods ...



It would still be a tree


----------



## Derrel (May 11, 2016)

I have a couple hundred thousand images I've never shared....just shot, and developed, and stored, either as negatives, or slides, or digital files. I just like the *click!* sound. Even if the internet blew up tomorrow, I'd still be shooting images. I got tired of routinely sharing pictures on-line a couple of years ago. After having shared 10,000 images and receiving a few million page view counts, sharing pics just doesn't matter any more.


----------



## John Hunt (May 12, 2016)

I would still be shooting the same pictures with the same equipment. Everything I shoot is just for me.


----------



## mmaria (May 12, 2016)

sleist said:


> Would you still be into photography?


 yes... because I feel like I have to do and need to do photography. The same is with writing.



> Would what/how you shoot change in any way?


 I think it would. I think I would have milder criteria  for some technical stuff in editing



> No social media.
> You could print, but could not show the images to anyone.
> Photography was just about you, your camera, and the world around you.


I'd be ok with that. I waited a few years to start to share my photographs outside of tpf. 



> How many of you would be as interested in photography if it was just for you?
> No "likes" to boost the ego, pat you on the back, or tell you your images were "good".


it would be different, but not something that would make me quit 



> No way to know if you were doing it "right".


 that's the biggest problem in this whole story. I don't care that much about ego boost, that's just a small percent of what sharing my images mean to me. The biggest minus here is that I would struggle with some issues much longer than I would if someone told me precisely what am I doing wrong.



> Would you care about having the "best" equipment?


 probably, but I don't hurry now, and wouldn't hurry then



> If no one else ever saw your images, what would be your reasons for making them?


  I just have to let out something that's inside me. Have to produce/make/say/create something. Yesterday was about finishing a photo, this morning was about writing something. 



> Why do you post images in a photo forum?


 to learn something new, to get some validation for things I'm doing right and to hear what I'm doing wrong from people that sound logically  



> Why do you care what anyone thinks?


 I don't care what anyone thinks. I care what some think because they help me grow and relax



> If we only take the pictures other people like, won't all our pictures end up the same?


   they would end up extremely, extremely boring



> Vivian Maier left behind boxes of undeveloped rolls of film when she died.


 why not? 



> If a tree fell in the woods ..


hm... tough... It's a theme for conversation over a coffee, tee or a walk   

I'm interested to hear what you have to say on all of this


----------



## tirediron (May 12, 2016)

Derrel said:


> ... I just like the *click!* sound....


This!  There's something about the sound of the mechanism, timed with the "Got it" thought.  It's an addiction.


----------



## KC1 (May 12, 2016)

I think a lot of people would do more if there was no chance of anyone ever seeing the pictures.
There would be no pressure to follow any silly guidelines that people have made up over the years. Thirds, ground subject, etc.


----------



## pochemunchka (May 12, 2016)

Yes, of course.

Photography is visual poetry. My connection to the things outside of me. I love it for this reason.


----------



## zombiesniper (May 12, 2016)

I'd still shoot and I doubt it would change what I shoot. 
The only difference would be that learning how to overcome some deficiencies would take longer. 

In short I'd shoot  but suck even more.


----------



## table1349 (May 12, 2016)

I don't shoot for other people any more.  I shoot for me.  Why the hell would I quite?


----------



## ClickAddict (May 12, 2016)

Well since I mostly shoot portraits, it would be hard to convince clients to pose if they don't get the photos.  Same as the stuff I shoot with models for trade.  If they didn't get any photos in exchange I would probably have to pay for their time, which would be a financial impact and certainly diminish the number of shoots I could do.  I would certainly still shoot, but it would then have to switch to shooting mundane objects (which is what I first started shooting and still enjoy so I would keep doing it) and perhaps wildlife, although as much as I admire some people photos in this category, it's never been a passion so probably only a few of these a year.

So yes it would change, unless there was ways of getting people to pose for free somehow.

I shoot and share, but not because I want likes for the sake of my ego (Although yes it is nice to know people like your stuff) but more for the like of the particular person I shot.  If they love the photo, it could be the only "like" and I would be fine with that.  And I've shot plenty for people that they wanted just for themselves and it didn't bother me not to share with everyone.


----------



## Rick50 (May 12, 2016)

Well, I started before there was an internet. I did start printing but not right away. Now, if you took away the internet and being able to share photos would I have a serious temper tantrum. Probably would as I have learned a lot in the process. So, yes, other peoples opinion is important to me but but not so much it would stop me. I would probably just harm more people than I do now.


----------



## gsgary (May 12, 2016)

Yes, I have probably only shared on here maybe 1% of what I have shot

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk


----------



## JacaRanda (May 12, 2016)

I would still shoot.  The routine of charging batteries, cleaning lenses, packing bags, gassing up the car, and going to a nice location to enjoy nature is more important to me than sharing the photos.
I also love the 'Got It' moments. 
Without TPF, what I've learned would have taken longer.  If I couldn't share the images, I would still get to see all the photos of my kids growing up; and if I couldn't share the images, what others thought - would not matter.  I never cared about having the best equipment because I can't afford it.

I share on TPF to contribute and pay it back for all the advice and entertainment it has provided me.

What would wedding photographers shoot?


----------



## vintagesnaps (May 12, 2016)

This seems like a rather extreme premise. People have been sharing pictures in some way since tintypes.

People have always been drawing and painting and sharing their work in some way. Maybe not all of it, and I think many of us are drawn to create something not necessarily with an intent to show others as much as it's inside you and you're compelled to draw it or paint it or photograph it.

I thought at first Vivian Maier was an unusual example but then again, there have been works of art or unfinished sketches discovered years after the artist was gone, or an artist didn't even become well known until after the person's death.


----------



## pjaye (May 12, 2016)

Yes. 
Because for me, photography is therapy and I need it. 

And what Zombiesniper said.


----------



## pjaye (May 12, 2016)

zombiesniper said:


> I'd still shoot and I doubt it would change what I shoot.
> The only difference would be that learning how to overcome some deficiencies would take longer.
> 
> In short I'd shoot  but suck even more.


You most certainly do not suck.


----------



## DarkShadow (May 12, 2016)

It wouldn't change a thing for me. It's my therapy.


----------



## manaheim (May 12, 2016)

I'm a narcissist and an attention-whore.
I'd find a totally different hobby.


----------



## table1349 (May 12, 2016)

manaheim said:


> I'm a narcissist and an attention-whore.
> I'd find a totally different hobby.


We thought that you already had.


----------



## manaheim (May 12, 2016)

Damnit, the guy SWORE he wouldn't put that on the internet!


----------



## table1349 (May 12, 2016)

manaheim said:


> Damnit, the guy SWORE he wouldn't put that on the internet!


Love the heels.  Are those Christian Louboutin?


----------



## sleist (May 12, 2016)

I don't think I really care if people like what I see or how I see it.
I tell myself I shoot just for me, but I know I would want to share that awesome capture ...

I think I only shoot for myself.
The process of finding and capturing an image is a solitary thing for me.
I enjoy being in that place by myself and finding that groove where I _*see*_ things.

If 99.9% of people think your vision is crap, does that mean anything?
What if only one other person saw the world the same way you did?
Would you ignore them because they were in the minority?
Or would you think you found your soul mate?

Anyway, after some soul searching I printed some of my favorite shots and then deleted 7 years of photographic blah blah blah.
Only way to prove I shoot for myself me thinks ...

Starting over feels good.

Look at all that hard drive space.

[Don't try this at home.  I am a professional.]


----------



## snowbear (May 12, 2016)

sleist said:


> Would you still be into photography?
> Would what/how you shoot change in any way?
> 
> No social media.
> You could print, but could not show the images to anyone.


I'd just ignore the rules and show them anyway.


----------



## pjaye (May 12, 2016)

gryphonslair99 said:


> manaheim said:
> 
> 
> > I'm a narcissist and an attention-whore.
> ...



That REALLY needed some kind of warning. I just spit my water everywhere.


----------



## mmaria (May 13, 2016)

sleist said:


> I don't think I really care if people like what I see or how I see it.
> I tell myself I shoot just for me, but I know I would want to share that awesome capture ...


you're just a human after all 



> The process of finding and capturing an image is a solitary thing for me.
> I enjoy being in that place by myself and finding that groove where I _*see*_ things.


 I'd like to think that most photographers feel that way, but I know that's not the case



> If 99.9% of people think your vision is crap, does that mean anything?
> What if only one other person saw the world the same way you did?
> Would you ignore them because they were in the minority?
> Or would you think you found your soul mate?


 soul mate



> Anyway, after some soul searching I printed some of my favorite shots and then deleted 7 years of photographic blah blah blah.
> Only way to prove I shoot for myself me thinks ...
> 
> Starting over feels good.
> ...


 I haven't backed up my images for a few years. I was aware that all of those thousands pictures could be gone in a second. Valuable memories, some good shots, fails...never mind.  So what? I'll make new ones. 

I backed up most of my images recently, but I still haven't backed up shoots I did a couple of months ago till today... 

I'm not attached to things I create. They are mine but they don't belong to me. The same is with writing. I wrote lots of words. They're mine, they came out of me, but as soon as they are written they don't belong to me anymore.  
It's just the way I look at the world. 

I don't think you need to prove something to yourself, I think you can be "aware" of things. Why would you prove anything to anyone?Including yourself.


----------



## KenC (May 13, 2016)

Yeah, I would do it.  I like looking at them and going out to look for them, so anything else really doesn't matter.  I share because it's fun to do so and sometimes I get insights that are useful.

In terms of the effect of shooting for others, I always think of the quote from Cyril Connolly (who I've never heard of otherwise): "*Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self*"

It's an exaggeration like any generalization, but there's some truth in it.


----------



## jaomul (May 13, 2016)

I'd still shoot, but it wouldn't have the same holds on me that it does now. I am not so pushed about sharing on social media like Facebook and Flickr, though I do enjoy it a little and share here sometimes, but I love printing photos and showing them to people,be it portraits of themselves or that sneaky animal shot up in a tree hiding.

If I lost that final part it would be a big loss to my interest in photos and photography


----------



## waday (May 13, 2016)

vintagesnaps said:


> This seems like a rather extreme premise. People have been sharing pictures in some way since tintypes.


I have to agree--I'm not one for extreme, unlikely hypotheticals. It may stem from being a vegetarian and getting these types of questions quite often, such as: "if you were on a deserted island, would you eat meat/fish to survive?" I don't know what I'd do, because I'll likely never be in that situation. If I am, and I get out alive, I'll let you know what happens.

Same answer here. I don't know what I'd do, but if I'm ever in the situation, I'll let you know. I like to think that I'd keep shooting, but the wife and I routinely share our love of hobbies with one another. If I can't do that, yes, it probably would impact me.


----------



## jcdeboever (May 13, 2016)

For me only, I feel pretentious at moments .


----------



## Rick50 (May 13, 2016)

mmaria said:


> I haven't backed up my images for a few years. I was aware that all of those thousands pictures could be gone in a second. Valuable memories, some good shots, fails...never mind. So what? I'll make new ones.
> 
> I backed up most of my images recently, but I still haven't backed up shoots I did a couple of months ago till today...
> 
> ...



You nailed it!!!!! Making new ones is where the fun is.


----------



## table1349 (May 13, 2016)

symplybarb said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > manaheim said:
> ...


----------



## Trever1t (May 13, 2016)

I understand your question BUT art is created to share, always and from the time our ancestors started painting hands on cave walls.

Art is not photography but photography is an art. I suppose I'd still shoot landscapes but how would I hide them, at the very least I'd hang them in my home.

No, art is meant to share. Do o get a rush from likes, yeah I do. Should the praise not be as important to me as it is, not influence what I share, yes indeed, guilty!


----------



## chuasam (May 15, 2016)

Most of the pictures I take are for myself. Am I allowed to make money off my images ?that will determine the price of my gear.


----------



## clel miller (May 15, 2016)

Derrel said:


> I have a couple hundred thousand images I've never shared....just shot, and developed, and stored, either as negatives, or slides, or digital files. I just like the *click!* sound. Even if the internet blew up tomorrow, I'd still be shooting images. I got tired of routinely sharing pictures on-line a couple of years ago. After having shared 10,000 images and receiving a few million page view counts, sharing pics just doesn't matter any more.


Every silver lining has a dark cloud. 
Definitely the sad truth.
While helping to (hugely) escalate the interest in photography, digital technology has also assisted in devaluing it.


----------



## Overread (May 15, 2016)

No because if no one could share photos I'd never even have known to pick up a camera. How on earth would I have known that the camera could produce such amazing result and that I could even attempt to get near to such results if I didn't see the works of others first?


Ok so sure lets say that this mystical disaster happens right after one picks up the camera - or after one picks up enough skill to be confident with the camera. Eh of course I would. Part of photography is the moment; its enjoying that moment and capturing the photograph. 

However we are, at our core, social creatures. Even the most isolationist people cannot ignore that we are designed to function within social groups. Thus any hobby or interest which lacks any sense of community attachment or social worth or even just exchange and sharing can lose its appeal. Photography is not like reading a book or watching a film; photography is about creativity. It's about the person not discovering or learning something so much as it is about them creating something and that in itself is about contribution. You create to contribute and thus there's a desire for others to see that contribution and to give it value - or rather to add to its value. 



Sure I'd keep shooting probably; I've got lots of shots that I've never shown and might never show because I enjoy the act of photography itself. However I also respect that there's a difference between choosing not to show* and being forced not to show or denied. The former is a choice and option; the latter is an ultimatum which is very different. 




As for how much we shoot for others and for ourselves that is an open ended concept that has no fixed rules. 

*being to lazy to edit


----------

