The impact of photography on commercial activity, especially potent, eye-catching original images, is well documented. Whilst advertising or pure creative professionals will presumably endeavour to mitigate a series of reproductions of tired cliches on the market, whether it be of the business handshake, the world as a globe or the portrait of CEO with a sympathetic smile, cliched pictures continue to be ruthlessly exploited in order to turn their lazy marketing effort to instant profit, which means copying. Although both texts consider the negative effect of cliched images, this essay will express certain reservations about it and reveal an indispensable role for them as a close ally.
The first text voices deep disappointment at the urban consumer society coloured in this trend which is only dumbing down the original but also disrespecting photographers or art directors who brought it to the market. Highlighting the fact that groundbreaking photographs, despite those creators wearing their fingers to the bone, will stand much more chance of becoming cliches than leading the photography industry, which is not surprising given the explosion of easy applications to copy their style. It is high time to strictly avoid copying victorious attractive images for the future of photography and return real pure originals back in the light.
The second text adumbrated the crucial position of images in our digital age. which also, ironically allow business people to copy original, provocative photographs in their marketing activity. Pointing out usualness normality as the cause of cliches, with disfavour at used cliches in everyday life, such as old fashioned Xmas cards, it concludes that not only artists but also future customers could cliched photographs give a negative effect on.
As opposed to the above ideas, the cliched visual material, in my opinion, would adopt a new role as a barometer of creativeness or commonness in the current trend. In short, in the decision-making process in the creative world, especially with a certain chunk of a budget, quite a few people with different ages, nationalities and backgrounds have to involve. If there were no common recognition as ubiquity, such as ”cliched barometers”, no decision would have been made either in time or convincingly. To sum up, contemporary people are bound to rely on visual concrete examples, moreover, it is all relative, neither does cliche exist, nor the stylistically creative image.
Comments