Well, you know, we are living in a world that is besieged by images. Here in the US there is no flat surface remaining without some sales message attached, usually with an image of some type too.
On television we become accustomed to the"Short Attention Span Theater" where scenes cut, one to the next, in milliseconds and any image remaining intact for more than 1.3 seconds worries producers that dead air space is creeping up on them.
Within the present context, I have always maintained that the great photographic icons would not fare very well. They were of and part of their time and, at that time, successful — meaning talented, opportunistic, prepared or just plain lucky in various measure.
I'm glad to be able to view and experience their images. But, enter most of these classics in head-to-head competition in the chaotic modern glut of imagery and they would be just more stuff that no one has time to consider.
I contribute to this glut myself through internet stock sales and my use of computers and my use of digital imaging. I wonder where it will lead? My opinion is that the value of any one image will be less and less as more and more become available.
