New York Times tech writer David Pogue’s fretting about the loss of Firewire from the low-end Apple laptop and the probability that he would be able to edit his home movies going forward lead to a post asking why we shoot videos (and photos) in the first place.
This is something I’ve pondered for a long time.
One reader summarized what I’ve come to conclude:
“What makes you think you I’ll have any grandchildren with the time and inclination to sit through more than a few minutes of your home videos?
“The movies an uncle shot of me and my siblings a few decades ago were projected for about 30 minutes a decade ago, and have not been looked at again by anybody.
“Home movies require a captive audience, for long periods. How many hours could you bestow on your children right now? How many hours would you expect them to sit still for them? And unlike photographs, home movies can’t really be dipped into, flipped through.
“I’m not against home movies. I just question whether the people amassing them at great length have much idea of what they require of the people in them, or who inherit them.
“Kind regards, good luck. I respect your affection for your family.”
Who really cares about the work we produce? Nobody. And why should we care? In the end the only reason I can justify for spending my time on photos and videos is to nourish a little bit of creativity and to have fun.
Just the other night I was leafing through copies of Henri Cartier- Bresson’s “Photographer” and Garry Winogrand’s “Figments from the Real World.” I was struck, yet again, by the sheer joy of seeing.
That will have to be enough.
