Instagram was great until it ruined the art of photography. Somewhere along the way, the app that once celebrated still images traded intention for attention, and in doing so, it didn’t just change photography — it helped ruin the art.
Lately, I have seen more salt poured into Instagram's wounds from photographers. Comments like, “I am deleting Instagram,” and “Instagram is no longer for photographers, I am out!” These statements are factual, especially since Instagram is no longer mainly for photographers. I have never really gotten into Instagram; I have a little more lately, but I am never consistent. I find it more of a place to be inspired and see what others do. Lately, it's hard to do that.
I find myself scrolling, trying to find what I am looking for, only to be served up more reels than I care to see. There are great reels out there, and I do not completely hate them. What I hate is the content they are serving me, and I wonder what I did to have the algorithm serve me the content I am seeing. All these reels are provocative, and the goal is to get me to go to their OnlyFans page. What happened to the photography, and where did the photos go?
The Early Days: Promise and Possibility
Instagram was once the place to be as a photographer. It was simple, portable, and made for discovery. You could grab your phone out of your pocket and instantly have a mini portfolio to show others. You can still do this, which has not been lost, but its simplicity has. There was no pressure; you had a chronological feed. It was not full of reels, but great images! Instagram is still full of great photos—more than ever! You could find photographers worldwide, and a sense of community started to be built. Photographers were talking to each other and discovering each other simultaneously. You could find behind-the-scenes photos from shoots and visual day-to-day diaries. Slowly, a community was built, and photographers interacted and shared information. We loved being there, but no one knew what was lurking in the shadows: an algorithm.
The Shift: When Photography Became Content
The transition to an algorithm-based feed began. Photographers started optimizing for visibility; the days of the chronological feed were gone. They began digging into their social media metrics, where hashtags, posting times, and aesthetic conformity of their profiles took center stage. Worry arose after we were told that our profiles needed aesthetic conformity and that all images should be presented similarly. Don’t get me wrong—it looks impressive, but I know others wouldn’t post a great image because it didn’t match the others.
The metrics mentality started to take hold. Likes equaled validation, the number of followers became your legitimacy, and comments equaled your worth. Photographers began to think we were not legitimate because we had few followers. I prefer 500 highly engaging followers to 1,000 who rarely or never interact. All of this started to percolate, and it began to taint photographers—bad habits and poor mentalities took hold. All this started to warp creativity. No longer were we asking, “Is this meaningful?” Instead, we began to ask, “Will this perform?”
Copy culture crept in, taking the main stage. When asked, “Will this perform?” rather than “Is this meaningful?” photographers were only worried and making decisions based on performance, not art. Then, the rise of trends started, and neon portraits, foggy shots, and milk baths became the next big thing. Soon they faded away, and others took the stage, while photographers tried to create trending content that would perform—or so they hoped. The algorithm rewarded repetition, and we fed into it. The feed lost its originality, and copy culture finally took hold. You couldn’t scroll through your feed without seeing the same image—or now, reel—over and over.
The Consequences: Art Started to Suffer
As art suffered, feeds became all the same. Most images that were once experimental, weird, or imperfect disappeared from the feed. With only a few changes, many were chasing the copy culture, thinking they could amass a following overnight by copying other creators. Entire genres of photography started to become a parody. Take “Instagrammable travel”—no longer about having a photographer’s eye. A playbook had been created, repeated, and repeated over. Feeds were filled with the same drone shot done 500 different ways, or the video of camper vans driving through a tunnel, only to expose a magnificent view at the end, or wedding photographers with wide-brimmed hats.
Photographers curbed their personal work and replaced it with lackluster images missing authenticity. “If it won’t get likes, is it worth sharing?” took the place of emotionally raw photos, telling the story and making the viewer feel emotion. Don't post it if it did not fit the grid—this was also becoming a trend. All of these occurred only to chase reactions from followers so that they could feel validated. Time took a toll. Burnout and disconnection became a reality for many. Comparisons turned into impostor syndrome, and many quit as they were not feeling validated. If they were not getting likes, they felt unseen. Then came the pressure to constantly create so we could post on a regular schedule. Posting consistently was supposed to be the magic bullet, and then the algorithm changed.
We Made These Choices: Not Instagram
Choices were made by Instagram users, not Instagram itself. Instagram just provided a platform to the masses, and we made it the popularity contest it became. It was no longer about the community of photographers and seeing inspiring work on a chronological feed. It was about how many followers one could amass and reaching for validation. When changes started to happen, the algorithm became center stage. Rebelling against it didn’t happen; we embraced it. We began creating for audiences so we could again amass followers. No longer were we making work for ourselves. Risk was replaced by reliability, style with trends, and vision with virality. The photographer’s work was based on trends, not themselves, creating a further landslide into the social media abyss. Many dug the hole, and very few brought the ladder to climb out of the abyss.
How to Reclaim Photography from the Feed
Post What Matters to You (Even if It Doesn’t “Do Well”): Post the experimental work that scares you to post. Don’t be afraid of not doing well or not having your typical “style.” As an artist and creative, keeping yourself confined to a box does not allow you to grow in your art and skills. It holds you back! Also, share the progress and not just the polished, final piece. I took the plunge and started posting more interesting work and images that were way off my normal. I was hesitant to post, afraid it would not do well. I reminded myself that likes don’t pay the bills, and I had nothing to lose. If my work were not being organically found, what harm could it do?
Take Breaks: Do this without guilt! There is nothing to feel guilty about stepping away, taking a breather, and recharging the creative battery. You can only grow from this experience and get better. I took a lengthy break several times over the last few years. I didn’t pick up the camera but went to art museums and events. This only helped to recharge my battery, and I focused on the elements of art pieces—not creating them!
Print More, Scroll Less: Print, print, and print your work. When our work becomes more tangible, we start to value it more. I started experimenting with Polaroid transfers and creating one-of-a-kind pieces, and I am happy I started. I started valuing my work more!
Create Work That Does Not Belong Online: Find a project you can work on that will not be displayed online. Private projects are a great way to create images you want to make without posting them online. They won’t perform because they're not online, and the feeling is that your work is not good. I am not saying that down the road, once it is completed, you can’t post it. Just remember, not everything needs to be posted.
In the End
We can’t take back what has happened, but we can affect what happens next. If that means leaving Instagram and no longer being a part of the platform, good! If it means posting only images you want to and ignoring creating reels, great! Instagram didn’t kill photography—it only revealed what we were willing to sacrifice for attention and 15 minutes of fame. Start shooting as if no one will tap those like and follow buttons. There is nothing to lose by taking a step back to reevaluate things. You don’t need a platform to permit you to be a photographer. You need to remember why you picked up the camera in the first place.
I am curious—has Instagram helped or hurt photography? Let me know in the comments!
Join Vero if you want a chronological feed, no ads and no algorithm :-)
Vero is great, but you do have to play the game of tags if you are into visibility. I'm only interested in viewing photos and there are no shorts in my feed, which I love. I dumped IG long ago.
I am positive it has hurt 'Photography'. I pulled the plug a couple of years ago. I did not like the direction it appeared to be heading. I don't miss it in the least. Great article +++++ stars.
Thanks!
I use Instagram for myself — as a simple way to track my progress. It works well for that. Followers and likes are just a pleasant bonus.
Great Idea
Very good article!
Instagram is still great to connect with new people but very bad to show your work.
It´s true. It is a portifolio and nothing more. Maybe we go back to the time, everybody would bring there printed folder to events :D
I think it's a mistake to look at IG as a portfolio. I would recommend a website for that, so you can control the environment, taking people to a place free from distractions.
I had one in the past but photography is just my hobby. It was so annoying to keep the website up to date (and don´t get a letter from a german lawyer, because you missed a word in your therms and conditions).
If it would be my job, i would agree for sure!
Thanks! Yes it is!
I enjoyed the article, and agree in that we are the problem. But I'd like to add that, after all, the problem is also intrinsic to the nature of social media itself.
No matter what platform we choose, Flickr, Instagram, Vero, BlueSky and so on, those platforms obey only to one rule: numbers. At their core, there's nothing related to the content. Once our content is out there, it's transformed by the container.
In that sense, I don't see any platform succeeding in becoming the right place for photography. The principle is: I publish my photos so that other can see them and react to them. At this stage, it already has become a matter of numbers, in that this premise it only fulfills itself as long as the greatest number of people see my photos.
Some say they use the platform to mostly track their own progress, which might be the truth, but then a simple gallery on one's own computer would do, without the hassle of uploading the content. I think in the end, we all share on social media because we're in need of that relationship, it's a desire for recognition, which is understandable. In fact, at that point, many fall in that trap and become obsessed on how to grow their followers, which is now the main scope of the whole thing, not photography anymore.
Would people spend that amount of energy to focus on their work, and aim at getting their work exhibited in a real gallery, even only once, say, in 10 or even 20 years, I'm willing to bet their work would improve exponentially. But that conception of time is now a luxury of the past.
Well said!
Piero D wrote:
"The principle is: I publish my photos so that other can see them and react to them. At this stage, it already has become a matter of numbers, in that this premise it only fulfills itself as long as the greatest number of people see my photos."
Not necessarily. I don't care how many people see my posted photos, but I do care that certain people see them. Back when I posted, I posted so that those people who I know and communicate with personally would see what I've been shooting, so that they could come shoot it for themselves, if they are so inclined. I mean if I post a warbler that I photographed in Pennsylvania, it is because I want those who know me and follow me to know that they can expect good opportunities with that particular warbler species if they come to Pennsylvania to photograph birds. If I post a photo of a big Whitetail buck, it is so that those who know me and know where I shoot can send me a message to ask about the details, and then I can help them arrange a trip to come photograph that buck themselves.
There are roughly 400 bird and wildlife photographers who I know and keep in touch with via Instagram, and as long as they have an opportunity to see the pics I post, that's good. In fact, I would rather those 400 see my posts than 10,000 random strangers see them. What good does it do for a stranger to see my photos?
Did I miss something? I'm still new to Instragram. But the photos published in the article, none of them look like Instagram shots, while they look like 4 to 5s for Fstoppers, and may do very well on Flicker. Instagram shots are always a certain 'Squarish'/'Ver-Rectangular' style. That's the difference I notice immediately, and the reason I don't really like Instagram and see it only as a means to an end. I don't see instagram shots as a place to show off expansive landscapes, the action needs to be in the center, with a subject that pops.
Great article Justin. I use IG once in a while, but don't chase likes. I post random stuff that I like or represents who I am and what I'm doing. It's only intended for a few dozen people who know me and are vaguely interested. I think it's good to have an IG account, but there's no need to obsess about followers or likes because numbers don't matter. If I have a post that gets my average 30 likes, or one that get's a million likes—so what?
Thanks! Great points!
I completely agree, Simon. I never understood why some people try so hard to get thousands of followers. Having a lot of followers doesn't result in any money or anything. Maybe they have a bit of an ego, or maybe they need affirmation from others to feel like what they're doing is worthwhile. Those are just guesses because I really can't understand why it is better to have 100,000 followers than it is to have 400 followers.
All I want there is to be connected to other photographers who shoot what I shoot so we can stay in touch and share info with each other about wildlife photo opportunities when they pop up. Or plan trips together or to at least meet up for a day of shooting together when we're shooting in the same region. I can only keep in touch with about 400 other photographers so any more than that doesn't really do me any good.
Yes, community is probably the best reason to be on social media. I've met so many photographers who have become friends.
Hi Justin...
Your opening sentence says it all, particularly the phrase "... traded intention for attention..." That phrase goes well beyond Instagram and photography. It can be applied to so many areas of our lives today.
Well said!!
Tom
Thanks!
Instagram was ruined basically when girls got their body parts out and get 1 million followers I'm gonna be really really frank because being honest and frank is the best way to be in life. It's interesting that you can get banned for one comment on Facebook or Instagram, but you can stick your arse out showing whatever you like. You can basically have your tits out as well and you'll get 1 million followers and Instagram will love you. This is the problem with Instagram. It is very sex driven and it's a real issue. You can be a great photographer and probably will only ever get to about three or 4000 followers but if you're a hot chick you'll have 1 million followers in no time and the problem is the betrayal of women as sexual objects in 2025 is a real issue. It also affects young men and the way they perceive women. It's a real issue. I see it in my day job as a therapist counsellor and I'm also a photographer. All that aside I have used it. I will continue to post a photo every couple of days and I do get some contacts and business leads out of it so it's still useful from that perspective but my goodness what it's become is a bit embarrassing for Instagram to be really honest and they don't police i. It's basically a soft porn site and if you want to argue with me over it go for it, but that's what it is. Mini rant over.- JUST being honest ... and if people struggle with the truth that's their problem that is the truth of Instagram!
I don't see any soft porn images in my IG feed, just photos from other photographers. I must be doing something wrong. 🤔
My point is I don't see a lot of it either but my point is this that the whole algorithm is driven by soft pornography and that is reality
Nev Clark wrote:
"My point is I don't see a lot of it either but my point is this that the whole algorithm is driven by soft pornography and that is reality"
Well, if you don't see a lot of it, and if Simon Burn (who you replied to) doesn't see any of it, then how can the whole algorithm be driven by it? I am trying to make sense of that statement, and I just can't see how the two facts can be simultaneously true, as they seem to contradict each other.
"Whole" means the entirety of something, 100 percent of something. So that means that the only content the algorithm ever pushes is soft porn. Yet, you and Simon both say that you don't see a lot / any of it. So that is why your statement about "the whole algorithm" does not seem to be consistent with you not seeing a lot of that content.
Can you please explain what you wrote in a way that it does not seem like you are saying two things that contradict each other?
I see it because i do alot of teen photography for schools and im a youth counsellor by day also. So i see it in my practice ...trust me mate instagram is one big soft porn page
Yes there is a lot of it there, I am not questioning that. But it is NOT NOT NOT 100% of what is there - anyone who says anything akin to that is simply wrong wrong wrong.
The advertising and revenue on Instagram is generated by the people with the most followers think about it and guess who has the most followers on Instagram right now it is people who are promoting their only fans pages. That's how it works. You can deny it all you like, but the majority of the revenue being generated on Instagram is by people promoting their sexual sites. You need to open your eyes to see it.
I am not at all denying that there is A LOT of soft porn on Instagram. There is, agreed.
The majority, yes, that's plausible. But the wording you used in a previous comment - "the whole algorithm" - makes it seem as if you are saying that 100% of the algorithm is driven by soft porn, and that is simply not the case. It is probably more in the range of 40% to 70% of the algorithm being driven by soft porn.
You do realize that 100%, "the whole algorithm", would mean that the algorithm would never ever ever show you even one photo that wasn't soft porn, don't you? And all of us see some images there that are not soft porn, which completely disproves "the whole algorithm" phrasing that you used.
Semantics are so incredibly important. It is imperative that every word we use be accurate and precise, and for us to avoid phrasing and common expressions that are not actually correct.
I don't know the exact that I probably come from a slightly annoyed perspective. I work in counselling as well and I see what this soft pornography does to young people and their mindset around sexualising women and even photography to some degree has crept into that now there is some artistic creation with photographing scantly clad women but a lot of it. I just look at it and go soft porn. There you go soft porn there it is again. It's not doing anyone any good. I've worked in counselling for 14 years I understand human behaviour really well. Maybe I don't understand the photography sphere probably as well as I understand human beings but I can tell you right now that if all of the only fans crap was taken off Instagram Instagram would go broke overnight. It would fold.... so think about that what's driving that platform is soft pornography that's where they're generating a large chunk of their income. I don't know what the percentage would be but it seems like there's a lot and I delete those followers from my platform when they follow even but you can't delete every single one of them once you get over 5000 followers you spend a lot of time on Instagram blocking people
Agreed! Very well stated.
Great points
" Instagram just provided a platform to the masses, and we made it the popularity contest it became." While I fully agree with this, I also think two things can be true at the same time: we made it the popularity contest and Instagram followed by giving us the algorithm and the feed that would raise the engagement thus making us spend more time using the app.
As a hobbyist photographer, I use it for myself and post both my personal stuff mixed with the photos I took. Sometimes I post before and after type of pictures if I want to brag about this new trick I just learnt in Photoworks or make reels for funsies. Instagram has been serving me quite well recommending great local photographers to follow and places to visit, but I can imagine this not being enough for someone who does photography for a living.
Justin Telford, the author, wrote:
"I find it more of a place to be inspired and see what others do. Lately, it's hard to do that.
.....
What I hate is the content they are serving me, and I wonder what I did to have the algorithm serve me the content I am seeing."
Justin,
I still use Instagram as a source of inspiration for my wildlife and nature photography endeavors. And the algorithm is working well for me in that regard.
Here are some tips that may help you see more of what you want to see on Instagram:
Follow and interact with photographers whose work you are inspired by, If you follow someone, their work will show up a little in your feed. If you follow them and comment on their posts, their work will show up more often. If you follow them and comment on their work and they reply to your comments, their work will show up even more frequently. Finally, if you follow them and comment on their posts and they reply to your comments and you message back and forth with them, their posts will be constantly showing up in your feed.
I frequently interact with over 100 different wildlife photographers on Instagram, and we repeatedly comment on each other's posts and are always writing messages back and forth to each other about various things related to wildlife habitats and photography. And posts from these 100+ wildlife photographers are continually showing up in my feed. In fact, they dominate my feed. At least 50% of all the posts that Instagram shows me are from people who I follow and interact with. I have hand-chosen these people, so at least 50% of everything Instagram shows me is what I have chosen to see. The remaining sponsored content is easily scrolled past without even reading it. The "suggestions" are often spot-on, as Instagram repeatedly finds wildlife photographers for me who I am not yet familiar with.
I haven't posted anything to Instagram in over a year, but I am still extremely active there, interacting with other wildlife photographers and using Instagram as a research tool for upcoming wildlife photo trips and various species-specific objectives.
Instagram is an invaluable tool for me and my photography.
Insta has 3 primary goals. Get you engaged, keep you engaged, use said engagement to feed you ads. It cares nothing about supporting or growing anything other than ad revenue. Like all ad platforms it uses psychological tactics to get people addicted to try and monopolize as much of the user's time in front of ads as possible. The days of insta being a photography platform are long gone and will never return.
it's an advertising platform for soft pornography and only fans. That's exactly what it is because they generate the most following some of those Scanley clad women have millions of followers and they are the ones making money out of Instagram.
You nailed it. I have created several different accounts and spent HOURS across several days trying to "train" my algorithm to not show naked women in my feed and my FYP but it still forces that shit in my face. It's like if you sign up and insta figures out you're a man they start shoving naked women in your face. I have never and will never spend a single red cent on that crap. I only have an insta as fast way to view and show my portfolio. I saw another commenter talking about a platform called Vero that I'm gong to take a look at. If it's similar to original insta then I'm moving over to Vero.
Something else I have notice on Insta too is not only is it constantly shoving pornography in your face but it's also constantly showing me negative ads and videos that express hate towards various groups be it groups of color, culture, political affiliation, or gender and it always boils down to "other side evil. My side good". I'm sick of seeing that crap and it's a poison of the mind. Like they're trying to shape peoples minds to think and believe things that aren't true. like if people put down the phone and went outside they'd see for themselves all of this crap on not just insta but facebook, reddit, truth social, 9gag, X, Blusky etc. Mostly isn't true or blown WAY out of proportion. This media is constantly using inflammatory verbiage to rile people up and make them angry at literally nothing until eventually it does become something. It reminds me of that saying "If you look for problems you'll find them". These platforms are lying to people and creating hatred where there wasn't before but the hatred is coming from a place of nothingness to drum up engagement and generate revenue through ads because for some reason our stupid monkey brains get addicted to conflict. I'm real sick of social media to be honest.