The Great Digital Swindle...

[Ade-oh]

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.

 

[Keith]

More like slaves to style I suspect ... but I'm ok with that as long as it involves consenting adults! 😀

 

[gilpen123]

It's just like anything new; TV, car, house, laptop, tablet, cellphone, etc. That's hpw this materialistic world revolve. I'll buy it though.......

 

[daveleo]

We were trained early on "not to fall behind" in the race forward.
But, you get over this silliness as you get older. (Generally.)

 

[Dan]

It is becoming a redundant game of the manufacturers creating rapid cycles of desire which keep many of us from ever getting to truly know and utilize the capabilities of our equipment. Look over the history of 20th century photography and you will see amazing images in all disciplines created with some of the most basic machines and materials ever worked with.

It's not like great sports photography, for instance, wasn't accomplished without the use of 39 billion focus points and a speed-of-light frame rate.

Our equipment simply does not prevent us from doing ANYTHING at this point, but our endless chasing of the next big thing does.

 

[tunalegs]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

"Instilling in the buyer the desire to own something a little newer, a little better, a little sooner than is necessary."- Brooks Stevens.

It's the same with everything really. Just look at razors for example...

 

[Roger Hicks]

It's just like anything new; TV, car, house, laptop, tablet, cellphone, etc. That's hpw this materialistic world revolve. I'll buy it though.......

Dear Gil,

there's quite a big difference between materialist and consumerist. Personally, I prefer to buy things that work, and keep them. My newest car is 23 years old, and the oldest parts of my house are several hundred years old.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Rodchenko]

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.

 

[louiseFED]

Its just the modern world that we live in. The relentless push 'forward'. Everything new has to be 'better' than what came before it. It makes me wonder where it will all stop!

 

[Livesteamer]

I got a recent e mail ad from a large photo retailer and it had the phrase "trend sensitive photographer". A current new car ad states "Extremely New". That marketing seems to work. Joe

 

[Richard G]

I like technology. I still have the original iPod and don't have another. I still have the original iPad and haven't upgraded, despite increasing excuses to do so, and will have to soon. I still have iPhone 4, and would still have the 3GS if I hadn't lost it. I still have the M9-P. And I still have the M2. Apparently the M is better than the M9. It will be some time before I find out I suspect. I have been very tempted for particular reasons to get the Monochrom, but probably won't. The M9-P will do me till it fails and is unfixable. The M2 was my main camera for over 20 years. It's loaded with Ektar even now. Some of my best pictures were taken with the 4MP Coolpix 4500. That's still going too.

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

But, you get over this silliness as you get older. (Generally.)

i call bollocks, it has nothing to do with age.

 

[daveleo]

i call bollocks, it has nothing to do with age.

maybe I should have said "as you get smarter" ?

There's a corolary to this discussion - and that is buying stuff (old and new) just to stimulate your brain.
I'm serious - I mean buying this and that because (for example) it's a different experience using a Nikon F than using a Fuji X100 -
you don't "need" both but it keeps different corners of your brain activated.

(How's that for an excuse to buy stuff?)

 

[MikeAUS]

Canon 1DS Full Frame DSLR cost $8000 in 2003. So I reckon we get a pretty good deal on far superior Full Frame cameras in 2013. Hardly a swindle ...

 

[rluka]

You made it sounds bad 😀

It might be a game made by the marketers, but not everyone is concerned about quality, practicality, philosophy of art or anything "a sane person would". They enjoyed using new product, because they like it.
They take the offer from the marketers and ride along because they choose to do it instead of stay quiet. There's even peoples who would join the fun of partying in the internet, yet put up excuses like waiting for more review or cheaper discount/2nd hand price.

Is it so wrong that a person (lets not use the term "photographer", it's a sensitive word) enjoyed the gears more than the true art ? 🙂

There's a corolary to this discussion - and that is buying stuff (old and new) just to stimulate your brain.
I'm serious - I mean buying this and that because (for example) it's a different experience using a Nikon F than using a Fuji X100 -
you don't "need" both but it keeps different corners of your brain activated.

(How's that for an excuse to buy stuff?)

Acceptable 😀
How about comparing it to people who always need to explore new places to get inspired because they're not the type that can motivate themselves and make great works for a decade from one same corner of the street, every single day.
An adventurer who blaze through the unknown corner of the world, versus a Researcher who left no stone unturned.

 

[Sparrow]

Here's a old filum camera taken with a old digital one ... they both still work OK although its really difficult to find slow compact flash these days

 

[JChrome]

Depending on the work you do, using an 8mp image rather than a 38 mp image can make a big difference.

If your posting images to the web, it makes little difference.

If you're making large prints and need the ability to alter things in post, it makes a huge difference.

I can tell you that for nature and underwater photography, having the ability to make such large prints is very important (at least to me). It was a significant hobby of mine... But I got out of the digital rat race altogether and only shoot 120mm film at this point.

Sometime in the future I will go back and dive back into the digital world for underwater photography... And I will be so glad I will have all of those mp!!!

 

[Major Tom]

Every reiteration is a "revolution" in the postmodern world. Improving existing technology is good, but when your entire economy is based on incremental improvement to squeeze out as much money as possible innovation is stifled and overall progress is slowed. We have traded great leaps for tiptoe steps.

 

[iamzip]

It depends upon your reasons for wanting new things, however it seems that camera makers are only recently starting to manufacture very high quality compact digitals, that are rangefinder-like. Previously if you wanted a high quality digital, you had to get an SLR. All of these new products in a market previously starved are bound to cause some excitement.

 

[L Collins]

I'm just not sure how Robert Frank, HCB, Chim, Robert Capa, Eugene Smith, Walker Evans, Dorthea Lange, Diane Arbus, Garry Winogrand, Joesph Koudelka and Eduard Boubat got along without 36 megapixels.