The Great Digital Swindle...

[sojournerphoto]

Perhaps there is fear in my photography with the Nettar - I fear not nailing the focus esp on such a big negative. And with the Nikkor I can nail it, have sharpness mm thick if i want, and everything else looking dreamy. I like that look - it's nice 😉

I am fortunate, Roger, that I really could work 20 hours per week, meet my bills, have no fear and do what I want. It turns out that part of what I want looks like work and people pay me to do it...

I don't think that is inconsistent with the discussion actually. The issue is not the choice to work longer, but the lack of choice to have a 'normal and acceptable' standard of living when working shorter hours in such a productive economy. Part time working, though theoretically promoted, is not well accepted as a normal way of working.

In some places it certainly isn't fear that keeps people working, it's starvation. Of course not so many of people in that condition have internet. Or cameras.

Of course. Perhaps they exist to feed the greed of the 'successful' parts of the world? I hope we all understand that though?

So I take the discussions a little with a grain of salt. A new FF digital camera isn't world peace, or the global living wage, eradication of HIV or any other worthwhile thing. It's an expensive way to achieve what could be done already with century old technology albeit with a little more fussing.

Perhaps that's the the true digital swindle. The workflow advantage for most people doesn't exist. Previously Joe Average took his or her exposed film to a shop and they gave back prints. Joe glued the ones he/she liked into an album (or slipped them if he were cheap and didn't care if they lasted). Now she needs to plug this into that, move files around, log into whatever, upload to the "cloud." Maybe he prints something - at the same shop, with the prep work done herself.

This is clearly true. Even for enthusiasts the film workflow has got much harder with the loss of support services from the locality. Perhaps the camera companies will pay the same price as Kodak when people stop buying the next thing, and the model of replacing film with body upgrades (just moving the spend really) will also be replaced by some other entity that captures the economic value...

 

[alistair.o]

The reward is the power, and that has proven hard to moderate.

That is the bonus not the wage.

 

[alistair.o]

Here in the US power is the wage.

wage is an exchange (equal or not): power is the ability to moderate peoples lives / influence their decision making.

 

[alistair.o]

Perhaps in Dictionaria, but I was thinking of the US.

Have you any references for that? any proofs? please

 

[Roger Hicks]

The reward is the power, and that has proven hard to moderate.

(1) What sort of power are you talking about?

(2) What is the source of that power?

(3) If they are working for the pure joy of working they won't mind heavy taxes or lower salaries.

(4) If they do mind heavy taxes or lower salaries, then it IS the money and one might find people who worked more for the common good and less from selfishness and greed.

(5) The people with the highest salaries, apart from a few entrepreneurs and creatives, are managers in the technostructure, who are easily replaceable (it happens all the time) and who have the power to set their own salaries. Unsurprisingly, they do not set them low.

Sorry: the "power" argument is so easy to demolish as hardly to be worth the effort.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . Here in the US power is the wage.

Oh, boy. "Thou hast delivered them into mine hands, O Lord" See my earlier post about money and power.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Sparrow]

I'll try not to have it happen again 😉

... annoying isn't it

 

[Sparrow]

As noted "greed" does not seem to be the driving force when dealing with ambition? Greed seems irrelevant when money pours -- once a system of ambition begins to operate seemingly without human intervention.

When one lives in a city like London, where million pound flats are the norm, reality is distorted.



Here in the US power is the wage.

We had already been cautioned by another moderator about staying on topic; I feel it's a little unfair when another pops to lead the sojourn

 

[alistair.o]

Defining what motivates the wealthy seems at best a slippery slope -- where many have slipped.

Just to remind you where this part started:-

How do you force the aggressive and ambitious not to work? your question...

 

[alistair.o]

My opinion that Roger, who is really leading the discussion is not off topic.

Then let's have another look at what the 'leader' asked:

What on earth do you mean by "excess" humans?

Statements are either obviously accurate to all or accurate after checking by all or...?

 

[Sparrow]

Then let's have another look at what the 'leader' asked:

What on earth do you mean by "excess" humans?

Statements are either obviously accurate to all or accurate after checking by all or...?

... and "here in the US power is the wage." which really doesn't add up by the same criteria ...

PS ... sorry no, ignor that I'm falling into the off topic trap, where we are no doubt going shortly ...

 

[Sparrow]

... well, we were debating the OP's question ... without trace of rancour, although a bit of satire on my part I admit.

I feel we could continue to do that if we continue with rational and relevant argument, however, and forgive me for speaking plainly now, if you lead the thread off topic as has happened in the past you will discourage contributions and/or it will end up moved to Off Topic and off the Homepage updates, I would like to avoid that personally

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

The reward is the power, and that has proven hard to moderate

You have, I believe, scored a hole in one. I grew up, possibly like yourself, with the promise of a world where everyone could reach their full potential. BBC programmes like "Tomorrow's World" were full of predictions that, by 2000, the average citizen would work 20 hours per week for a good living wage.

The sole reason that this has not occurred, I believe, is that it would prevent the Boss Men from partaking of their preferred drug.

 

[Ade-oh]

You can of course close the thread if you don't like the fact that philosophy, politics and economics have been introduced. But you can't pretend that it has departed much from the original (mostly philosophical) question.

I think it was the psychology of consumerism that was at the forefront of my mind when I posted the original question but it strikes me that the philosophical ramifications fit entirely within the scope of the original question, FWIW.

 

[MickH]

It occurred to me this morning, whilst reading through the Nikon Df thread, that people were taking fantastic digital photographs ten years ago with cameras which you can barely give away these days. Nevertheless, many of us seem to be salivating like Pavlov's dogs as each new multi-thousand pound/dollar/euro camera body is released, even though the actual impact on the quality of our photography is likely to be negligible at best. Why is that? Are we all slaves to the photographic industry's marketing people? I suppose we must be.

Not all of us ...although I do get the urge to 'upgrade', most recently from M4/3 (Panasonic GF1 12.1 mpx) to DSLR (Nikon D70 6.1 mpx). Honestly, I consider this to be an upgrade as it's a much nicer camera to use and, for my purposes, the difference in final image quality is negligible.

 

[Sparrow]

I think it was the psychology of consumerism that was at the forefront of my mind when I posted the original question but it strikes me that the philosophical ramifications fit entirely within the scope of the original question, FWIW.

I agree entirely ... I was concerned the thread was being bogged down in specifics and triviality when it was about systems and philosophies

 

[Sparrow]

I believe many in the US think that way, although the promise of the "great leader" is always alive. I just live here, I have little understanding of the personality cults. Others would have to express what they feel is the sentiment. I just used the word "many" which i realize is rather vague. A majority? I doubt it. I am surprised what you took from the Rosa Parks post.

I suppose best to leave this to others...

My current signature about covers my feeling about much new photo equipment. I have said enough it would appear.

First paragraph) Rosa Parks is a nice story, however I'm more interested in the larger picture

Second) I am hoping to do just that

Third) We weren't talking about your ethos

 

[DCB]

We have been conditioned for new! It's better than the old piece of junk you have now.

Peace

 

[Graham Line]

You have to step off the carousel some time. I've got some idea of what I will be happy with, and have a fair bit of it.

Exactly. A swindle requires two willing participants. I buy what I need for work and sell what is no longer of use. The fact the highly-capable equipment is getting cheaper is a bonus.

 

[konicaman]

Somewhere in my closet an EOS 10d is stowed away. I used it for pro work for a couple of years. A colleague of mine used a similar camera. The IQ was highly praised 8 years ago. It makes excellent pictures and nice A3 prints.

I still use it for family outings and when I am hiking. There is, however, more than 2 participants in a swindel - I can not bring it on an assignment if the customer has just the slightest knowledge of cameras, even if the camera would be more than adequate to shoot photos for his web presentation 😉

Would bring me app. 50£ if I were to sell the camera body today...

Ohh...and see my signature below: