Too much is not best.

 Texto en español, aqui

“Less is more.”

—  LUDWIG MIES VAN DER ROHE —

 "Once machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men.
No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man.”
— ELBERT HUBBARD —

“Our job should be making people dream.”
— GIANNI VERSACE —

There are more and more photographers everyday. However, even though the quantity of them increases, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the quality of the images we see on a daily basis is any better. With this amount of new photographers trying to break ground, comes an amount of low-quality images in almost every means, which in return are sponsored by those who have an inadequate ability to assess what is photographic and are deciding what material is going on print; starting from the authors themselves and ending in the so-called editors.

We have left behind the famous less is more, which in terms of photography refers to the final shot, the one that would survive a rigorous selection process and would come victorious at the end of a shooting; it was synonym of a more efficient and convincing communication. It was a unique image resulting of the publishing cost.

Nowadays, we want lots of pictures, whose quality is not important. We want a thousand different shots of the same subject in order to share them in another thousand social network outlets, thanks to the lowest publishing cost it conveys. In many cases, images no longer make the difference and yet they do help ego manifest as being present during a photography production: I was there!

I’ve been telling this to my clients more often, lately. They are the direct beneficiaries of the image. In much less times, I’ve told this to others who are responsible for the image and who, at the same time, are more preoccupied with taking a picture with their cell-phone instead of paying attention to what is going to be the final shot they are going to receive. All this comes with questioning whether or not they are aware of the fact that what is on the line is the image of their brand; the image that will be a projection of their work and is not a photo to remember.

I recall an anecdote of a photographer whose client asked him if he had a certain photo, speaking of it not in relation to the clothing on it but as if she’d taken it from the place and angle where she was. Her cell-phone was at the center of the photographic production.

In the same way, I see more fellow photographers talking ‘professional’ in regard to the way to use the camera, not the construction of the image. They describe the photographer who offers his equipment, has locations available, edits and archives the result of the shooting as professional. These are matters that don’t reflect directly on the final image and that in other places are characteristics of the photographer’s professionalism. The clients by means of the producer of the image are the ones who directly pay for locations, rent of the necessary equipment and obtain as an additional service the archiving and retouching of the images. In these places, the photographer offers a simple and fundamental service: make an image that is convincing when communicating.

Anything else is nothing but words.

125