u/__sicko

I've noticed among a lot of young, trendy, "cool"/"in" photographers these days that the most appealing part of their images is usually some kind of trick or gimmick, almost always relating to some kind of processing, rather than actually flexing interesting compositions or competence at lighting and so on.

Things like scanning photos to add more grain or "film character" (which it really isn't if you know film), crumpling up or staining scans, etc. Or even shooting expired film, relying on the idiosyncratic nature of it, hoping the right light streak will manifest itself at the right part of your frame.

It seems like people will do so much work around actually putting in the work, when actually putting in work where it matters will in the end make for much more impressive, standout, images rather than ones merely adapting to contemporary trends.

Granted, I get not everyone can be a trend-setter, and that people like to copy those guys, and that some people are content doing just that... I just wish more folks diverted all that energy into working on the craft in some actually more meaningful way.

This all isn't to suggest that processing hasn't always been an integral part of the medium, it of course has, but stuff like curves, dodge + burn, contrast, etc. are an actual skill-set while many of these trends/gimmicks are just lazy ways to hopefully say witch an image what you couldn't technically, but majority of the time the attempts fall flat.

I surely won't get much opposition here, as I'm "in the belly of the beast" here, in the RHCP sub, but seriously... I've thought since Helen Burns, which I find especially cinematic sounding, that Flea would really excel at writing music for motion picture, and on Honora he really cemented the thought in my mind that he absolutely should be pursuing a career in scoring films in addition to everything else. I think his interest in avant garde/free jazz especially really shines and is what I like in the tracks I feel have more of a cinematic quality to them- he's really great at dissonance and tension, in a way some of the great composers are. I really don't mean to overly "glaze" him, just very strongly feel he'd be a very welcome/appreciated unique voice in that realm. I really love the journey he's been on of late... he's been a legit GREAT musician for decades, but lately especially I feel him truly, really, wholly, becoming unabashedly himself more than ever, and it's beautiful to observe. He's showing us the inner workings of his beautifully unique mind, and I absolutely adore it... it is in awe and deeply appreciative of the beauty in life and the world, but equally confused and perplexed by the ugliness of some aspects of it, and so much more...

As the title says: as I dig deeper down the rabbit holes of my favourite artists favourite artists, the holes in Spotify become more and more apparent to me.

I guess this must be some pretty niche stuff, though I know many have also withdrawn due to ethical reasons. Also regional restrictions.

I'm just wondering, for those of you whose primary platform for listening these days is Spotfiy, how often you personally run into this, where you can't find what it is that you're looking for?

Are some of the other apps more comprehensive than Spotify perhaps?