I am working on a dissertation about self-documentation and social media and have decided to take on theorizing the rise of faux-vintage photography (e.g., Hipstamatic, Instagram). I want to start fleshing out ideas and will do so with a three-part series on this blog: I will post part two (“Grasping for Authenticity”) tomorrow and part three (“Nostalgia for the Present”) Thursday.
This past winter, during an especially large snowfall, my Facebook and Twitter streams became inundated with grainy photos that shared a similarity beyond depicting massive amounts of snow: many of them appeared to have been taken on cheap Polaroid or perhaps a film cameras 60 years prior. However, the photos were all taken recently using a popular set of new smartphone applications like Hipstamatic or Instagram. The photos (like the one above) immediately caused a feeling of nostalgia and a sense of authenticity that digital photos posted on social media often lack. Indeed, there has been a recent explosion of retro/vintage photos. Those smartphone apps have made it so one no longer needs the ravages of time or to learn Photoshop skills to post a nicely aged photograph.
In this essay, I hope to show how faux-vintage photography, while seemingly banal, helps illustrate larger trends about social media in general. The faux-vintage photo, while getting a lot of attention in this essay, is merely an illustrative example of a larger trend whereby social media increasingly force us to view our present as always a potential documented past. But we have a ways to go before I can elaborate on that point (see parts II and especially III of this essay). Some technological background is in order.
The first very popular app that made your photographs instantly retro was Hipstamatic app. Instagram is even more powerful with its selection of multiple “filters,” that is, different flavors of vintage (a few not-so-vintage filters are available, too). Instagram also features a popular social networking layer that allows users to contribute and view a stream of Instagram photos with “friends.” Other retro photography applications are available as well.
What do these apps do? Among other things, they fade the image (especially at the edges), adjust the contrast and tint, over- or under-saturate the colors, blur areas to exaggerate a very shallow depth of field, add simulated film grain, scratches and other imperfections and so on. And, importantly for the next post, the photos are often made to mimic being printed on real, physical photo paper. And many of our Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, etc. streams have become the home to one of these vintage-looking photos after another.
Why Faux-Vintage Now?
This trend was made possible due to the rise of smartphones because smartphone photography has at least three important differences from the previous (and increasingly endangered) point-and-shoot digital cameras: (1) your smartphone is more likely to be on you all the time, even while sleeping, than was even the most portable point-and-shoot; (2) the smart phone camera exists as part of a powerful computer-software ecosystem comprised of a series of applications; and (3) the smartphone is typically connected to the Internet in more ways and more often than previous cameras were. Thus, the photos you take are more likely to be social (opposed to for personal consumption only) because the camera is now always with you in social situations, and, most importantly, the device is connected to the web and exists within a series of other apps on your smartphone that are often capable of delivering content to various social media. Beyond being social, the applications make it far easier to apply different filters to photos than did point-and-shoot cameras or using photo editing software on your computer.
But the question I am asking with this essay is not just about the rise of digitally manipulated social photography, but why these digitally manipulated photos showing up in our social media streams are manipulated specifically to look vintage. Why do so many of us prefer to take, share and view these faux-aged photos?
Is Picture-Quality the Reason?
Perhaps, as another blogger noted, it is the low quality of phone cameras that has lead to the rise of faux-vintage. Maybe the current quality of smartphone cameras tends to produce stale photographs which are then made more interesting when given a faux-vintage filter? Photographers have long known that, depending on the situation, a gritty photo can be as good as or better than a technically perfect shot, and now everyone with a smartphone can take an interesting picture with just one additional press of a button. But, this explanation does little to explain why we equate vintage with interesting in the first place. [Also, many current smartphone cameras are of high quality].
Poets and Scribes?
Another reason for the rise of faux-vintage photography might be that these apps allow us to be more creative with our photos. Susan Sontag in the wonderful On Photography discusses how photography is always both the capturing of truth as well as a subjective creation. In this sense, when taking a photograph we are at once both poets and scribes; a point that I have used to describe our self-documentation on social media: we are both telling the truth about our lives as scribes, but always doing so creatively like poets. So, if “photography is not only about remembering, it is [also] about creating,” then the rise of smartphones and photo apps have democratized the tools to create photos that emphasize art, not just truth. But, again, this explanation would only explain why we might want to manipulate photos in the first place. It does not explain why so many of us have so often chosen to manipulate them into looking specifically retro/vintage.
In the next post, I will argue that the rise of faux-vintage photos using apps like Hipstamatic and Instagram is part of a grasp for authenticity. The photos evoke “a nostalgia for the present” that grants them a feeling of being more authentic and real. The third and last part of this essay will describe how the faux-vintage photo is indicative of a larger trend surrounding how our lives are increasingly always a potential document, and I will conclude the essay with a prediction about the future of the faux-vintage photo.
look out for part II tomorrow and part III thursday
Comments 15
On Faux-Vintage Photography and Nostalgia | specializedstudio — May 11, 2011
[...] The Faux-Vintage Photo Part I: Hipstamatic and Instagram by Nathan Jurgenson, an extensive essay on the digital and virtual and their connection to a desire for authenticity. [...]
The Faux-Vintage Photo: Full Essay (Parts I, II and III) « n a t h a n j u r g e n s o n — July 17, 2011
[...] From May 10-12, 2011, I posted a three part essay. This post combines all three together. Part I: Instagram and Hipstamatic Part II: Grasping for Authenticity Part III: Nostalgia for the Present a recent snowstorm in DC: [...]
Instagram is debasing real photography | Technology News — July 19, 2012
[...] There’s an interesting discussion that suggests the aim is to make our photographs stand out among the zillion or so that get posted every day: are we striving for an authenticity in an age when the sheer quantity of images by definition devalues our pictures? [...]
Instagram is debasing real photography | Tech News — July 19, 2012
[...] There’s an interesting discussion that suggests the aim is to make our photographs stand out among the zillion or so that get posted every day: are we striving for an authenticity in an age when the sheer quantity of images by definition devalues our pictures? [...]
Instagram is debasing real photography | Web Guru Guide — July 19, 2012
[...] There’s an interesting discussion that suggests the aim is to make our photographs stand out among the zillion or so that get posted every day: are we striving for an authenticity in an age when the sheer quantity of images by definition devalues our pictures? [...]
Richard Gray — July 20, 2012
Fascinating stuff, Nathan. I think vintage photos are probably on the way out now. These things go in waves. I saw a photo on Instagram yesterday and someone described it as modern-day grunge. It was a cubist sort of digitised mashup. But I think the vintage obsession was linked to a desire to give our present a nostalgic narrative.
I disagree with the scribes and poets view. How do you take a photo as a scribe? You always make choices when you take a photo, even with a simple camera. And your choices are your subjectivity (=poet).
Totally agree with your point about democratisation. And part of the negative reaction is because ordinary people suddenly now have tools (cheap ones at that) to be creative. It's no longer the exclusive domain of geeky photographers with expensive kit.
Instagram is debasing real photography - 7Photoshop.com | 7Photoshop.com — July 22, 2012
[...] There’s an interesting discussion that suggests the aim is to make our photographs stand out among the zillion or so that get posted every day: are we striving for an authenticity in an age when the sheer quantity of images by definition devalues our pictures? [...]
Is Instagram Ruining Photography? | Geoff Livingston's Blog — August 14, 2012
[...] photo network because it filters most images with a vintage Poloroid look, the resulting widespread proliferation of Instaphotos across social networks, and/or the additional doctoring that occurs through a variety of apps like Snapseed and [...]
bookmarks, issue 27 | my name is not matt — September 25, 2012
[...] The Faux-Vintage Photo Part I: Hipstamatic and Instagram — Nathan Jurgenson [...]
The Faux-Vintage Photo Part I: Hipstamatic and Instagram » Cyborgology | iPhoneography-Today | Scoop.it — October 24, 2012
[...] [...]
The Faux-Vintage Photo Part I: Hipstamatic and Instagram » Cyborgology | Instagram Stats, Strategies + Tips | Scoop.it — November 10, 2012
[...] [...]
Facebook And Documentary Vision: Viewing The World As An Always Potential Past…Or As A SnapChat | Draper's Den — February 13, 2013
[...] Riffing off his earlier piece on Instragram and the faux-vintage photo (No, just because that filter makes me and my friends look like we are from the 1940 doesn’t make the frame important or worthy of memory), Jurgenson argues that the abundance of our Facebook galleries have lessened the value of the photograph. All the rehearsed posing and desperate retouching coupled with the limitless capacity of smartphone snapping and storing makes our digital museums less memorable, not more. In a culture where everything is seen as a potential, sharable post, smiling for the camera can be exhausting. (Pretend like you are having fun! Cheeeeeeese!) [...]
Week 9- Final Project | Bloggin' — May 28, 2013
[...] http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2011/05/10/the-faux-vintage-photo-part-i-hipstamatic-and-inst... [...]
‘Instagram is debasing real photography’ Article | Photography & Critical Theory — January 29, 2015
[…] ‘There’s an interesting discussion that suggests the aim is to make our photographs stand out among the zillion or so that get posted every day: are we striving for an authenticity in an age when the sheer quantity of images by definition devalues our pictures?’ […]