Margu
Established
i think the camera sales are still higher compared to film era.
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
It's all so pointless - just an exercise in futility. We're all going to die anyway. Why bother buying cameras or making photographs to begin with?
mfogiel
Veteran
"If you think about it the hobby of photography from the dawn of digital to now really had very little to do with the desire of most people to make wonderful images. "
This feels quite accurate to me. As a matter of fact, it reinforces my idea of sticking with film FOR the sake of trying to make beautiful images. I want to be as far away from this wave of digital image flow digesting as possible. I even tried to buy a phone WITHOUT a camera, but there weren't any available...
This feels quite accurate to me. As a matter of fact, it reinforces my idea of sticking with film FOR the sake of trying to make beautiful images. I want to be as far away from this wave of digital image flow digesting as possible. I even tried to buy a phone WITHOUT a camera, but there weren't any available...
lawrence
Veteran
And it's been that way since the 1890s: "Photography as a fad is well-nigh on its last legs, thanks principally to the bicycle craze." Alfred Stieglitz.
regularchickens
Well-known
I agree with the observation about photo gear reaching technical stability, and the idea of gearheads getting bored with their toys is also pretty likely. But the end of the article tilts a bit too much toward hoping the toothpaste will go willingly back into the tube. The "flood of images" will never stop, because it's become part of how we communicate and self-express now. The tools will continue to change, as will the role of photography in society.
From the article:
This has already happened and is an ongoing process, but it's both centralized - in the form of online publications - and distributed - in the form of self-curation. The tools are easier to use and venues for photography are easier to find than ever, so creativity is less burdened by technical requirements than ever before. Along with vastly more images comes new tools for finding, organizing, and viewing them. Learning to use these tools - actively curating content for one's own viewing - is part of using the internet as it has come to exist.
Photography will continue to change as its equipment and media of transmission change. I think the digital market going through a correction is a small bump on that path.
From the article:
This has already happened and is an ongoing process, but it's both centralized - in the form of online publications - and distributed - in the form of self-curation. The tools are easier to use and venues for photography are easier to find than ever, so creativity is less burdened by technical requirements than ever before. Along with vastly more images comes new tools for finding, organizing, and viewing them. Learning to use these tools - actively curating content for one's own viewing - is part of using the internet as it has come to exist.
Photography will continue to change as its equipment and media of transmission change. I think the digital market going through a correction is a small bump on that path.
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
charjohncarter
Veteran
This was for me a tedious article, but I will comment on my Costco which I go to 2 times a week for photos (at least). They have over the last 7 years experienced a huge drop off of prints made per day. The only thing saving them is the Summer vacation prints and the Christmas card business. My Costco is in an upper middle class area, and they charge 13 cents per print (4x6). So I really don't think it is the economy. The cloud, Flickr, email, and any other online photo servers have replaced the 'print.'
As for digital camera sales, iphones seem to be just fine and much easier for most people. I couple of years ago I asked in complete ignorance and sincerity for the names of some great digital photographers. I sure there are some, but I will bet they are doing portraits, fashion, or advertising.
As an aside, my daughter is a Dermatologist. I, off of Ebay, bought her a Vivitar Macro Flash 5000 ringflash and fitted it to her DSLR. I set it up to flash on auto and she did not have to make any adjustment. Basically it was a high quality point and shoot. I asked her if she was using it: no, I use my Iphone, because I can send the image to the front office for filing and to the referring doctor. Yikes!!
As for digital camera sales, iphones seem to be just fine and much easier for most people. I couple of years ago I asked in complete ignorance and sincerity for the names of some great digital photographers. I sure there are some, but I will bet they are doing portraits, fashion, or advertising.
As an aside, my daughter is a Dermatologist. I, off of Ebay, bought her a Vivitar Macro Flash 5000 ringflash and fitted it to her DSLR. I set it up to flash on auto and she did not have to make any adjustment. Basically it was a high quality point and shoot. I asked her if she was using it: no, I use my Iphone, because I can send the image to the front office for filing and to the referring doctor. Yikes!!
michaelwj
----------------
Yep, I lost my drive once the second point was introduced, I thought it was just about done, point made, and then it just ... kept ... going ...
michaelwj
----------------
Classic, I often find myself with my phone at the eyepiece of a $20k microscope to get an image of a sample. Its going to be emailed to email around. Its easier, and is "good enough" for my purpose.
Michael
KM-25
Well-known
By the 8th paragraph, I had read all I needed to in order to get the great points bieng made, the other 15 were not as easy to get through, that's Kirk for you, great article and I feel it is spot on.
Personally, I think more and more everyday that after shooting digital for 19 years, going back to film will turn out to be the very best career move I will have ever made. Kirk's article is just one example of many in terms of reasons why.
Thanks for sharing it!
Personally, I think more and more everyday that after shooting digital for 19 years, going back to film will turn out to be the very best career move I will have ever made. Kirk's article is just one example of many in terms of reasons why.
Thanks for sharing it!
David Hughes
David Hughes
What I find worrying is how much people like the bleeding obvious being restated over an over again and see it as an insight. And they let them vote...
Regards, David
L Collins
Well-known
No need to apologize. I found it very thought provoking, certainly more so than99% of the " drivel" that gets discussed here.
JeffNYC
Well-known
I enjoyed the article....... I've followed Kirk Tuck for some time now, and he's provided some interesting perspectives.
One thing I will say though is that maybe the process has become too mundane. Maybe we long for the days when visiting our relatives meant seeing a bunch of 4x6 photos of a vacation. Or even better, a slide show from a projector.
Margu
Established
the two things that has changed in photography from film days are 1) you cannot make money with photography 2) anyone can take a decent photo and share it immediately. you can make money but if you're good at making money try some other business with better returns. finally if you like things to be difficult in order to feel skillful, pick up painting.
KM-25
Well-known
Odd, how is it that I am making really good money full time in photography, it does not feel like work as it is truly the most rewarding thing I have ever done and yet you say one can not make money in photography and if one is making money in it, to do something else because they will make more money....?
I must be doing something wrong then, lol!
Pioneer
Veteran
I worry about this every now and again as well. My kids and their children are part of this new digital/smartphone generation. Then I realize that there are a lot of my own ancestors of whom I do not have pictures, or at best, one faded picture hanging on the wall or hiding in one of my photo albums. Maybe it really isn't as important as some of us think.
Kwesi
Well-known
Actually, rather than sounding the death knell of the digital camera, smartphones have provided a huge wake up call to the industry vis-a-vis the creation and distribution of photography in the internet age. Any new camera without built in wifi is DOA 1 touch social media upload even better. Professional photographers will also benefit.
as to Franko's concern that his Grand kids wont have pictures of themselves as kids to share, I beg to differ. They will have a glut of images to choose from. The question is who owns those images? Especially if the original photog is now deceased. Will they have to buy/lease their own images from the future flickr/facebook/internet forum in oder to make a scrapbook?
as to Franko's concern that his Grand kids wont have pictures of themselves as kids to share, I beg to differ. They will have a glut of images to choose from. The question is who owns those images? Especially if the original photog is now deceased. Will they have to buy/lease their own images from the future flickr/facebook/internet forum in oder to make a scrapbook?
hepcat
Former PH, USN
There's one interesting thing about having lived for more than a half-century and having been in imaging for over forty years: you begin to notice patterns in the ebb and flow of the pace of life. Anyone remember CB radios? How about the first ten years of the PC market? How about the first ten years of analog cell phone service? Now they're all ubiquitous. Well, except for the CB radios which were supplanted by cell phones. And the market forces governing sales of all those items has changed. The pundits are now saying that cell phone re-sales are, for the first time, cutting into new cell-phone sales. That market is slowing to a crawl as well. The new iPhone 5c is being heavily discounted and even so, isn't selling; likely for the same reasons camera sales have died.
Now what's REALLY interesting is that the same thing happened to camera sales in the late '60s. Rangefinder cameras were at the pinnacle of their success. They were finicky, complicated and difficult to use but there were scads of them sold to regular consumers. There was a lull in sales as the market had saturated, and few consumers were even using the RF cameras they'd bought much less replacing them. Along about 1970, the SLR hit the market in a big way and all those folks who found the RF daunting bought SLRs... that was about the time I started selling cameras... and we sold cameras by the BOATLOAD to people who had no business buying them nor really had a use for them. We processed millions of rolls of film and billions of 3x5 prints that are either in landfills or filling shoeboxes in closets. Then came the automated SLR and once again folks queued up to pay tons of money for cameras they didn't understand, didn't need, and couldn't operate. Those '80s beauties litter eBay and thrift shops yet today. And then the Canon EOS series was introduced with AF and the race was on again, and then came digital.
During those times there was the Brownie. And then the Instamatic 104. And then the 110 cameras, and a bunch of others, all of them aimed at folks who take photos with cell phones today.
Now digital is mature. Millions of people once again bought cameras they have no need of nor do they really know how to operate... only this time the cameras still performed and allowed them to make technically proficient exposures of mundane stuff which has filled the cyber world. They're not making prints anymore because they inherently understand that their images aren't worth printing... flickr is the new cyber-shoebox in the closet. I've got over 16k images warehoused on flickr myself alone.
Photography has been, for the past fifteen years, largely a fad. longer lived perhaps but not unlike the CB radio craze in the '70s. Now the technology has matured and the output is ubiquitous. The public is tired of imaging. The markets are adjusting once again.
Photography has a future, but I suspect we'll see a change in market forces again.
Things will sort out.
Now what's REALLY interesting is that the same thing happened to camera sales in the late '60s. Rangefinder cameras were at the pinnacle of their success. They were finicky, complicated and difficult to use but there were scads of them sold to regular consumers. There was a lull in sales as the market had saturated, and few consumers were even using the RF cameras they'd bought much less replacing them. Along about 1970, the SLR hit the market in a big way and all those folks who found the RF daunting bought SLRs... that was about the time I started selling cameras... and we sold cameras by the BOATLOAD to people who had no business buying them nor really had a use for them. We processed millions of rolls of film and billions of 3x5 prints that are either in landfills or filling shoeboxes in closets. Then came the automated SLR and once again folks queued up to pay tons of money for cameras they didn't understand, didn't need, and couldn't operate. Those '80s beauties litter eBay and thrift shops yet today. And then the Canon EOS series was introduced with AF and the race was on again, and then came digital.
During those times there was the Brownie. And then the Instamatic 104. And then the 110 cameras, and a bunch of others, all of them aimed at folks who take photos with cell phones today.
Now digital is mature. Millions of people once again bought cameras they have no need of nor do they really know how to operate... only this time the cameras still performed and allowed them to make technically proficient exposures of mundane stuff which has filled the cyber world. They're not making prints anymore because they inherently understand that their images aren't worth printing... flickr is the new cyber-shoebox in the closet. I've got over 16k images warehoused on flickr myself alone.
Photography has been, for the past fifteen years, largely a fad. longer lived perhaps but not unlike the CB radio craze in the '70s. Now the technology has matured and the output is ubiquitous. The public is tired of imaging. The markets are adjusting once again.
Photography has a future, but I suspect we'll see a change in market forces again.
Things will sort out.
Photography has always had a fad aspect since the introduction of the brownie.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
I think the point of the article passes me by because just to get the opportunity to shoot is so rare and precious (for me) these days.
Printing in my darkroom still feels like creating something special.
Printing in my darkroom still feels like creating something special.