Ed Schlotzhauer

An artists journey

Category: Attitude

Death by GPS
Apparently, some people blindly follow GPS directions. Sometimes leading to death. There are actually topics on the internet discussing death by GPS.
Maps
I am on record as an advocate of using maps when you are photographing or traveling. My position has not changed. I will be going on about a 3000 mile trip in a few weeks and I will go armed with maps for all the regions I plan to go through.
A quick summary of my beliefs on this is that GPS is for directions directly to a destination, when you only care about reaching the destination. Maps let us see possibilities. It shows points of interests and all the alternate routes to take.
If I am photographing or traveling for pleasure or exploration, I will use maps. If I am in a city and need to find my hotel, GPS.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Death by GPS
There is actually a wiki topic on “Death by GPS”. It looks like rangers in Death Valley National Park coined the term. There are so many dangerous incidents of people getting in trouble by following GPS directions instead of using common sense that their web site says:
GPS Navigation to remote locations like Death Valley are notoriously unreliable. Numerous travelers have been directed to the wrong location or even dead-end or closed roads. Travelers should always carry up-to-date road maps to check the accuracy of GPS directions.
DO NOT DEPEND ONLY ON YOUR VEHICLE GPS NAVIGATION SYSTEM.
Drivers blindly following GPS directions have died of thirst and heat in the desert. Others have died trying to follow GPS directions to drive from an island to the mainland, even though there was no bridge. A North Carolina man died after being led by GPS to cross a bridge that had been out for 9 years.
Some have been taken on inappropriate back roads where they ended up getting stuck and were in bad shape before they were eventually located after searchers looked for them for days.
One story I like was the elderly woman in Belgium who tried to use GPS to guide her to her home, 90 miles away, but instead drove hundreds of miles to Zagreb, only realizing her mistake when she noticed the street signs were in Croatian. Having to stop to fill up with gas several times for the 90 mile trip did not register as a problem.
A personal example is from a trip to the Oregon coast. This was in the early days of GPS, before iPhones were common. We booked reservations at a restaurant across the bay from the small town we were in. The GPS in our rental car insisted that we must drive straight across the bay. It re-directed us that way multiple times as I ignored it. I finally turned it off, since it seemed determined to drown us.
A 2025 study examined how blindly following GPS directions can lead to dangerous, and sometimes fatal navigation errors. This study identified 52 fatalities and a number of serious injuries.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Online dependent
But the reports of people dying or being injured by following their GPS directions causes me concerns. Granted, some are understandable. Like in a storm after dark and you can’t see an unmarked bridge out until too late. But in general, it seems an outgrowth of the total dependence and unquestioning belief people now have on their mobile technology.
Statistics gathered in 2025 say Americans check their phone nearly 200 times a day. And they spend over 5 hours on it a day. 40% of people surveyed say they use their phones on a date. Nearly 30% report using their phone in the car. When I drive home tonight, I will see several people using their phone while driving, even though it is illegal in my state.
Technology is not bad. Being dependent on it to the exclusion of thinking, and relationships, and what is going on in “real life”, is.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Use your head
The part of Death by GPS I can’t understand is, why did people trust what the computer said more than the evidence they could see? If the GPS says drive across the ocean when there is no bridge, doesn’t that cause a pause for reflection? If the GPS is taking you on a “shortcut” that is turning into a Jeep road, doesn’t it seem advisable to turn around and find another route? When it takes you on a road that would probably be good, except it is covered with a foot of unplowed snow, shouldn’t you decline?
This is a topic of scientific study called Automation Bias. It is “the propensity for humans to favor suggestions from automated decision-making systems and to ignore contradictory information made without automation, even if it is correct.”
Do not be a robot controlled by your GPS. You are a thinking, sensing, feeling human being. You are the one driving the car. That makes you the responsible one. Accept the GPS input as suggestions that you are free to ignore.
Before phones we had to think and learn to use tools like maps. Humans have not evolved away from being able to think. Not yet.
Do you want your obituary to say: “He died following his GPS, even though all the evidence was to turn around.”
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Mindfulness
From the point of view of photography and living a rich life, I believe mindlessly following GPS has other dangers besides serious injury. I have not seen a study, but from my experience, I believe that when we are being directed by GPS, we tend to narrow our focus to the road right around us. We become mostly oblivious to anything that is not interfering with our driving. We virtually become a robot being driven by GPS.
In a lot of my writing, I preach being mindful. Not is a mystical Zen sense but just paying attention. Being aware of what is going on around you. Quieting your mind and being receptive to what is there. Seeing things that do not register with most people.
This can be challenging going down the road at 70 mph, but it is not impossible. I often see something that might be interesting, but it takes a few seconds for it to register with my conscious mind, and I turn around to go back to see it. I do not have to contend with the GPS sternly telling me to “return to route”, because it is not on.
The routes I take are the ones I choose. If I want to wander off on a side trip, I do. My maps are showing me an overview of where I am and what options I have to get to the destination I want. My path is often not direct, but it is usually interesting.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Take back control of your life
The author Robert Heinlein once said:
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. — Specialization is for insects.
I would add to that read a map and be able to look around and decide the GPS is getting you in trouble.
Technology should help us fulfill our goals and lead a better life, not turn us into mindless robots.
People are starting to see danger in letting AI run unchecked, but other technologies are equally sapping our responsibility. Resist. Defend your humanity. One small rebellion is to use maps for navigation on your next trip. Spend some time studying the map to see all the roads and towns, rivers and mountains. View what you see as an invitation for exploration. It is exciting to spread a map out in front of you and consider all the possibilities ahead.
I have convinced a few friends to try avoiding freeways and staying on secondary roads. So far, they say they like it better. It is slower-paced and they discover charming small towns. Perhaps they are just being kind, but I know it works for me. Add that to your travel plans.
But more important, take back responsibility for your life and for your attention. Retain control of your route. Recognize danger when you see it and don’t be afraid to change plans. Be the one to exercise judgment. And always look at everything. around you as a potential photo opportunity.
You’re an artist, not a machine being controlled by GPS. As a photographer, death by GPS, to me, means it makes me miss the awe and wonder all around me for the sake of being guided along the shortest and fastest route to my next destination. Emerson was right when he said, “It’s not the destination, It”s the journey.”
Get a map. 😊
Afterword
I spoke strongly to make a point. I recognize that I am presenting my personal position and preferences. You have no reason to adopt them, other than I can speak from long experience.
In summary, my points are:
- Blindly following GPS can be dangerous
- Maps are a tool for exploring. GPS is for getting to a destination.
- Mindfulness is important to photographers. GPS tends to block mindfulness.
September 23, 2026
Documentary Shots
Documentary shots, or record shots, are something I have avoided for a long time. There came a point where I did not consider them “art”, and therefore, not interesting. I have changed some.
Documentary shots
Documentary shots record a place or event or person. They can be excellent images by themselves. If I go to an iconic location, I probably shoot a few frames of it, just to remember it. Likewise, when I am traveling, I often shoot some images of a new place I haven’t seen before. Again, just to remember it. I have no thought of putting them in my portfolio. And when we shoot pictures of family or events, likewise, they are for the memory.
Sometimes I will shoot these with my phone, since they are not “serious” images. I may put careful consideration into the framing and exposure and composition, but they are not intended to be published.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Art?
These are second class images to me because they are records of something rather than an interpretation of it.
I consider that most of my work in at least the first 20 years of my photographic journey was record shots. We would go to some great location in Colorado, and I would have to photograph it all. The sweep of the mountains, the ruggedness of a Jeep road, mountain waterfalls and streams. All well exposed and sharp, but really just “I was here; look what I saw” shots. Mostly uninteresting, from an artistic point of view.
The term “record shot” became synonymous to me as boring and not artistic. That was probably an overreaction.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Epiphany
Recently I had a mild epiphany. I have been studying American Civil War history lately. Somewhere along the way I realized that there is a wealth of photographs from the era. They are very impactful when they appear in a video or in a book to supplement the historical narrative.
It shows the people, the locations, and, sometimes, the horrible aftermath of battles. This is straight documentary photography. The equipment was large and the film speed was very slow, so they could only do tripod shots of people or landscapes. Things that sit very still. But I was seeing reality 160 years ago. That is impactful.
There was no consideration of AI fakes. They had little opportunity to be overtly dishonest. Of course, there are always the decisions of what is shot and what isn’t, where the camera is placed, and what is excluded. Those design elements were part of photography then as they are now.
But the hardy photographers back then knew they had an opportunity that never existed before to capture scenes of this war. It looks, from the images I have seen, like they were trying to be brutally honest. I believe this was the first time a war was extensively documented on film.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Context
This got me rethinking record shots. Although none of the images I have seen would win any prizes today based on their composition or artistry, they are valuable evidence of what happened. They are records of history.
Being able to see portraits of Lincoln and Grant and Lee and Jackson and other leading figures of the time makes them much more real. Seeing Lincoln at Gettysburg just a couple of days after the battle is powerful. Images of the battlefields at the time helps understand how the terrain contributed to the battle plans. And a picture of the aftermath of a battle captures the devastating destruction and loss of life and suffering better than a simple narrative can.
Did these photographs become good just because they are old? That’s partially it. But it is more than just age. They became more valuable because they are records of scenes that are gone. They could not be taken now.
These old photos bring us realities of people and places and events that are past and can never be again. That makes them unique and valuable historical documents.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Eugène Atget
I was also reminded of a photographer I heard about one time named Eugène Atget. He photographed Paris street scenes and architecture in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. It was a time of great change, and he recorded scenes that were disappearing.
Here is an example of one of his images in Paris:
Storefront of Little Bacchus, rue Saint-Louis-en-I’Ile, Paris (1901). By Eugène Atget from Wikimedia Commons(Public Domain).
He was virtually unknown during his life. An American photographer, Berenice Abbott bought thousands of prints from Atget’s estate after his death. She exhibited them and built recognition and appreciation for his work.
After his death, Atget’s style influenced the American realist/documentarian movement of the 1930s and 1940s. He even became associated with the surrealist movement. Man Ray even used one of his photographs as a cover image for the surrealist magazine la Révolution surréaliste. Art galleries in the USA also paired Atget’s photos with surrealist art in exhibitions.
C.S. Voll, in a Medium article, says “He had been so immersed in his project to document Paris that he hadn’t been aware of how avant-garde the images were at that moment.”
Good idea
These have got me to thinking about the history I have seen and the historical documentation I have done. Cities grow and spread. Wheat fields are permanently destroyed by housing development. Climate change alters the landscape. Buildings are torn down and new ones built. Companies I have worked for no longer exist. Many people I have known are dead now. Opportunities that will never happen again. How many pictures do you have in your files that could not be taken now?
Is there value in the records of these happenings? There could be. For ourselves, if for nothing else.
I have decided to embrace “record shots”, shoot more of them, and keep them. I have witnessed many changes in my life. Some of them I have photographed. I wish I had shot more of them. While I do not expect any of these to make me famous or to start new art movements, I believe they have value.
Documentary shots are not necessarily second class to art. They are a different photographic expression. My primary intent is fine art images, but I now see documentary images as a valid and useful thing to do. Some of them can be art, too.
September 18, 2026
Intro or Extro?
Which is your natural approach to photography? Introspection or extrospection? Intro or extro?
Psychology
Psychologists work hard to try to explain human behavior and thought processes. Sometimes their ideas seem insightful. Sometimes, off the wall.
There are many different personality tests and other tools that attempt to sort people into convenient boxes. Mostly with the noble goal of helping to understand ourselves and other people. These can help some, on a surface level. But humans are far more complex than can be captured in a simple test.
Across most of the personality tests, one of the important axes that seems to occur in some form is introvert vs. extrovert. And the common underlying definitions are based on whether you get your energy from being alone (introvert)or with people (extrovert)
Personally, I believe most humans are.far too complex and interesting to be put into a box. It causes us to make snap judgments about them, or ourselves. And they are often wrong.
But lets go with the introvert/extrovert model for a while, since it seems true of many people, Introverts tend to “live in their head”. This leads to self-awareness, introspection. Extroverts, not so much. They tend to look out more than in. The term is extrospection.
For your inner Geek: intro is Latin for inward. Extro is Latin for outward. Spect is Latin for looking at. So these words are just describing whether we tend to look inward or look outward.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Introspection
An introspective person examines their thoughts, feelings, and actions. They look inward and are self-aware. We (this is me) reflect on our emotions and judgments and feelings.
Ordinarily this is a good trait. Being self-aware lets us see ourselves as others do and work to improve ourselves. We tend to be thoughtful rather than just reactive. As an artist, we tend to seek and practice creativity.
But in our photography, it can slow us down and distract us from what is around us. There can be a tendency to filter what we react to by what we are feeling or concentrating on at the time. If your work is based on what you find in the world around you, this can be a problem.
I had a world respected photographer tell me in a workshop that I think too much. Then later that day as we were showing some work, he said he had never seen that flower viewed like that and he was going to steal the idea. Go figure.
On the other hand, a great photographer Mike Langford said in Better Photography magazine: “Each destination starts with a process of quietly sitting
for a while and absorbing where I am. I genuinely try to feel
what is different about being there, as if it’s my first visit, with no
preconceptions. By being in tune with my emotions and innermost thoughts,
even the most familiar things can be seen and photographed in
a new and different way.” That sounds like a good form of introspection.
Introspection can lead to creatively trying new variations or approaches to what we are doing. It may slow us down and it may blind us to some great shots, but the potential creativity may well be worth it.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Extrospection
Extrospection is defined as the observation of things external to one’s mind. This would imply reacting to external stimuli. Many people, especially extroverts, look outward for their stimulus and validation.
Photographers with this view tend to more easily see what is there around them.They abandon preconceived plans and work freely with the reality in front of them. I have quoted Jay Maisel on this many times, but this is exactly what he means by “going out empty”. Don’t go looking for something specific. Instead, see what is there and work with it.
I said above that this is reacting to external stimuli. At least, that is the way it works for me. I think of it as shutting off my mind, at least the critical reasoning parts, and getting into a form of flow state. Shooting becomes instinctive. I’m sure a lot of it is based on experience. The scenes before me trigger the response. Composition becomes part of the instinctive response.
This is a form of mindfulness. The extrospective person is highly aware of their surroundings and ready to work with them without judgment.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Both and
So, which approach is better? Trick question: neither. Both are valuable and can lead to excellent results. Your inherent nature determines which approach you tend to.
But you are not locked in to either one. We can learn to behave in both ways. I have said that I am an introvert and I tend to introspect. Maybe too much. But I have also learned to go out with no judgment and embrace what is there at the moment. It may be harder for me to to “get in the flow” of that, but I can do it.
Both/and thinking says that you can feel more than one thing at a time. That you can hold conflicting thoughts without confusion. It is a realization that life and humans are complicated. They can’t be accurately modeled by one simple label.
When I think I am shooting with no judgment and embracing what is there, I know that that is not literally true. I try to allow myself to react emotionally to the environment, but behind the scenes, sometimes subconsciously, sometimes much more conscious, years of training and examination are guiding what is happening. Decisions about exposure and focal length and composition are being made, I just try not to let them intrude too much on my emotional state.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Do we have to decide?
I see introspection and extrospection as complimentary traits, not conflicting ones. Extrospection lets us be in the moment, to see and react to what is around us, even if it is not what we anticipated. Introspection lets us analyze what we are seeing and maybe take it to a higher level. It seeks to find the essence and answer “what if” questions.
Extrospection helps us find interesting material. Introspection helps us creatively make the best of it. Together, they make our art better.
We are not stuck just blindly following our basic nature. You are not a helpless robot. Part of growing and maturing is to learn to adapt new behaviors. To practice new thought processes. We can learn to expand our thinking. Mindfulness and creativity compliment one another. We can hold and practice both in our mind at the same time. Without breaking anything.
Don’t just react or just think. Do both. At the same time.
Intro or extro. It does not have to be either/or. It can be both/and.
September 2, 2026
Innocence of Eye
The phrase innocence of eye is from Minor White. He uses it to describe the child-like wonder we should hold on to. That’s hard.
Minor White
Minor White (July 9, 1908 – June 24, 1976) was an American photographer. He was contemporary with and friends with Stieglitz, Ansel Adams, Paul Strand, Imogen Cunningham, Dorothea Lange, and many others.
He became a disciple of Stieglitz’s theory of “Equivalence” and taught and wrote about it extensively. Actually, he was more of a poet and writer and editor than a photographer. He assisted Ansel Adams in starting the photography department of the California School of Fine Arts, He also held teaching positions at the Rochester Institute of Technology and at MIT. In 1952 he, along with Ansel Adams, Dorothea Lange, Beaumont and Nancy Newhall and others, formed Aperture Magazine. White became the first and long-time editor of it.
None of this is really important, except to establish that White was very knowledgeable about the theory and practice of fine art photography and a voice to be listened to.
The quote
A more complete version of the quote about innocence is:
… innocence of eye has a quality of its own. It means to see as a child sees, with freshness and acknowledgment of the wonder; it also means to see as an adult sees who has gone full circle and once again sees as a child — with freshness and an even deeper sense of wonder.
Minor White
One reason this is impactful for me is that he describes not only the normal child-like innocence but the possibility of rediscovering this innocence as an adult. This is a problem I have acknowledged.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Child-like
Think of a child, with their spirit of wonder. Everything is fresh and new. Nothing is silly. It’s a world of possibilities. Why can’t the sky be green if they want it to be? Why can’t a giraffe be purple? And that flower they just saw – it’s the prettiest flower in all the world.
How do we hang on to or restore that spirit when we are old? I think it can be done, but it requires conscious work.
Problems of maturity
As adults, we become tough, cynical, jaded, and skeptical. We’ve seen it all, maybe too much. Nothing seems as exciting anymore. Very few images seem fresh and new to us. It is all just variations of what we have already seen and done.
Whatever your interest is, you’ve probably shot it thousands of times. Is there anything new that can be said about it? Why just repeat the same things?
This is where many people give up and conclude they are not an artist anymore, because they can’t do fresh, creative work. I recently wrote about doing a major culling exercise in my. library. It took a long time. One of my takeaways was that my images are getting too predictable. I’m following the same paths and thought patterns. Part of that is that I’m too mature. I “know” what works and seldom stray from it. I need to shake it up some.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Rediscovering innocence
How do we recapture that child-like view of the world? I think part of it is replacing cynicism with curiosity. Easy to say; hard to do. But when we are cynical, we automatically eliminate choices. We say to ourselves “that won’t work.” So, we never try it.
Curiosity is a positive force. It leads us to learn new things and try new things. Curiosity expands our thinking and our ability to see things.
Ask questions
Do you remember being a child and asking questions constantly? Why does that happen? How does that work? What if I did this? Most of us have that squeezed out of us by the time we’re in High School. That is one of the major faults of our education system.
To regain that, we must become sincerely curious. It almost doesn’t matter what about. I’m old enough to remember a set of printed books called an “Encyclopedia”. They have disappeared now, but what a marvelous experience when I was young and curious. I would head into one to look up something for school and get sidetracked by all sorts of interesting concepts I stumbled across on the way. Looking up a simple fact that should take a few minutes could take an hour or more because of the interesting things I discovered along the way.
Of course, the Encyclopedia has gone the way of the Dodo now. That’s sad. But we have a tremendous amount of the world’s knowledge immediately available to us. We have Google search (I strongly recommend Duck Duck Go instead), AI chatbots, and Wikipedia, for instance. I recommend looking up 3 random things every day. When you see or hear a reference to something that sounds interesting on the news or an article, go look it up. It does not matter at all if it is “useful” to you. Curiosity and knowledge build on lots of random facts that you start tying together over time.
Dig in
When you find something you think you might be a little bit interested in, dig into it more. A couple of hours spent going deeper into something that tweaked your curiosity is not wasted. You might discover a real interest that coaxes you to spend more time with. I have read that if you spend 10-20 hours studying a subject, you will know more about it than most people in the world.
As an example, I have recently re-discovered my interest in American Civil War history. I am about 20 hours into a 24 hour video lecture series and have read 2 books on the subject. I have 2 more queued up to read. It has absolutely nothing to do with photography, other than I’m building an interest in doing a tour of battle sites. But it has help awaken my curiosity in general. I am finding it helps me bring a fresh view to my photography.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Distractions
We have an insane level of distractions in our world now. Besides the “normal” things like jobs and family, we have whole industries spending billions of dollars to capture our attention every second possible. Social media, TV, news, and our phones constantly are screaming “ME! ME!”. Each wants us to believe it is critically important to stay glued to their channel.
Amongst all that noise, it is very hard to think independent thoughts. Or think at all. Psychology research shows that we can’t learn effectively unless we have quiet time to allow our brain to assimilate the new information we take in.
The constant noise and information drown out thought, and thought is necessary for curiosity. Sometimes disconnecting is the best thing to do. Letting our minds wander, especially when we are out in nature, is extremely healthy for us.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
A better photographer
Will asking questions and researching things and giving ourselves quiet space to think make us a better photographer? Yes, indirectly. I believe it will make us a better person, which is part of the equation. Jay Maisel once said, “If you want to make more interesting pictures, become a more interesting person.”
These things by themselves will not automatically give us back the child-like innocence and curiosity we miss. But they will help. It is a personal battle we all must fight.
Maybe it could bring us the balance of having the innocence of eye with the vision of an adult that White described. Perhaps we can be one who has gone full circle and once again sees as a child.
It is a real joy when those “What ifs” lead to “Oh, WOW!”.
Try it when you are out shooting. Disconnect. Let your mind wander. Give in to your curiosity. Make shots that your adult mind says are silly, but that seem fun and, who knows, they might lead to something. Even if they don’t make some great new image, you tried something new and had fun.
I will try, too.
June 24, 2026
The Weakness of Photography
I love photography. It is my chosen art form. But photography has a weakness that weakens and cheapens it, in some people’s eye. Can it really be art?
Literal
We point our camera at a scene, press the shutter release, and it is recorded. Everything in the field of view is captured. We didn’t have to arrange it or decide what should be there. It is all scooped up.
Therefore, most photographs are straight views of literal scenes. Little thought and consideration went into it. There is trash and power lines we are expected to overlook. And that telephone pole growing out of the subject’s head: yeah, ignore that.
If we want to document a place or time, that can work. But we wouldn’t call that art.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Too easy
Along with that is just the fact that taking a photograph is too easy. Anyone with a phone can take a pretty good picture with no thought or effort. An amazing amount of computational science is applied in your phone to make it look good. And just like everyone else’s.
This is clearly seen in the trillions of photographs uploaded to social media and photo sites each year. And by the billions of hours of video uploaded to YouTube and TikTok. Everyone can do it, and they do.
If everyone can do it, it must not be special.
Too mechanical
And photography is criticized for being too mechanical. It seems more technology than art. People don’t need training to do it. Just Point and Shoot.
We capture a photograph in an instant. It can be sent anywhere in the world in milliseconds. We can paste it on social media for the world to see and comment on.
How many people shooting pictures on their phone are spending much time considering the artistic elements of the work? No, there is little to consider. Click the button. If you don’t like it, use the AI editing controls to make it good, or just shoot it again.
It’s just an automatically produced thing. It is no longer a picture; it is a commodity.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Is photography worthless?
To me, who likes photography as art, that sounds very bleak. So, has photography become worthless?
I like to think not.
Photography is an extremely challenging art form that requires intense effort and years of practice. At least for me. And at that, I’m just getting somewhat competent at it. I don’t think I will ever consider that I have mastered it.
That sounds contradictory. Thoughtless image capture that anyone can do or difficult and thoughtful art. Obviously 2 different things. That’s where we go off track in the argument. It is not photography that is art or not, it is our intended purpose and expectation. Are we capturing an image for a utilitarian purpose or creating a piece of art?
The same tools and processes are used for both. That confuses things.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
The difference
On the surface, it is hard to tell the difference between photography being done for art vs for utilitarian reasons. The subjects could be the same, the equipment could be the same, the locations could be the same.
If you watched the photographers work you would probably spot some differences, but not always. That is not a reliable indicator.
It may be overly simplistic, but I think the difference is what is going on in the photographer’s head. Their intent and purpose, the feeling and insight they bring to the scene, and their experience. It becomes art because there was an artist present, involved, responding, feeling, creating. This can transform a simple scene into art.
The subject
If we are creating for art, the depth of our involvement must become far more intense than a simple snapshot. One of the traps many people fall into is the consideration of the subject itself. Did you just capture the obvious shallow view of the subject, or does the image say something about our feeling or perception of the subject? Did we delve deeper and try to bring our something that is not obvious on the surface?
A representation of the subject is just that. What you see is what you get. But if we can bring our something different or new or insightful to challenge the viewer, the image could have staying power.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Composition
Most people walk up to a scene and snap it. An artist thinks about composition. About how the parts relate and are perceived. And about what to include and what to leave out.
Often the artist has no ability to re-arrange the scene, but they have freedom to change their position or to zoom in to parts of the whole. Small changes of location or framing can make huge changes in the visual effect.
If we are serious about photography, we know the basic principles of composition: placement on thirds, leading lines, visual weight, etc. How we use them while making an image depends on our personality and experience. I don’t have a checklist of composition rules with me. For me, it is more subconscious recognition of them. As in “there’s a potential leading line; can I exploit it; will it make the composition stronger?”
A well composed image will be seen as designed, intentional, crafted, and more whole.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Form
An artist will look at the same scene as anyone else and see interesting shapes and patterns. They are aware of textures and reflections and how the light is playing across the subject.
Sometimes form is the whole purpose of an image. This is especially common in black & white. One of the reasons for producing an image in black & white is to remove extraneous elements like color and immediate subject recognition, leaving the forms and tones as the focus.
Subtleties like this are not usually obvious to the snapshot shooter.
Gesture
This is a favorite of mine. Gesture is not just a certain movement. It is what shows the innate character of something. The great Jay Maisel is a huge proponent of the concept. He goes so far as to say:
It’s light, gesture, and color. It really doesn’t matter what you photograph.
Jay Maisel
That is, the subject is less important than capturing that thing or moment that shows its essence. Discovering the gesture can be hard, but it is worthwhile. We could take a picture of a thing, or we can look for something that shows what the thing does or feels or how it behaves. That gives it life.
Finding and capturing the gesture usually requires intense concentration and attention. You must approach it with the will to find it. But it is a process of the artist looking deeper and with more intent than the snapshot shooter.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Are photography’s problems solvable?
Yes, because it doesn’t actually have a problem. Photography is a wonderful practice and every bit as artistic as any of the other established art forms.
The fact that the vast majority of pictures are taken as snapshots/throwaway/selfies/travel memories does not invalidate that the medium can be used for artistic purposes. That would be like saying most people can’t write well, so writing is not valuable.
I use my phone to grab quick shots all the time: a sign with a name or telephone number I need, a part I need to find at the hardware store, something that amuses me, or my grandson. These serve exactly the purpose I want. Either a throwaway or a memory. Every day I also take my “real” camera with me and occasionally see something to shoot from an artistic viewpoint.
These are 2 different activities with completely different purposes. Neither invalidates the other. Both exist together and do not compete. The same technology is being used for different goals. It’s not the subject or the equipment or the location that separates them. It is the intent and skill of the photographer. And it is the desire of the artist to create.
©Ed Schlotzhauer
Is photography as an art going away?
As far as photography as art going away, I would claim the opposite. Since most pictures taken are mediocre, at best, when we come along with an image created with skill and an artistic style, it will get noticed. It will be obvious to most people that this is different and special.
The introduction of photography caused many painters to fear it would replace them. Instead, it freed them from a lot of routine and repetitive work, like basic portrait commissions, and allowed them to create. Impressionism and other artistic directions emerged. I believe we will see some of the same.
As photographers who are trying to lift our work above the base level, we should not be apologetic about photography or feel inferior. Our intent is to produce art. We should not price our work at giveaway prices because many people expect that. Look for a market that appreciates the difference.
You are an artist. You are creating things that are unique and special – aren’t you? If not, you will be swallowed up in the giant flood of ordinary and AI generated images.
June 11, 2026