What do you want to tell us with that? Do you compare that to photography? Do you want to say that the quality of photography is going down in general?
The opposite is true. 15 years ago, normal P&S camera, supermarket prints compared to now, normal digital P&S camera, supermarket prints. Less wrong colours, better print quality now. For the big market share of the typical happy snapper the introduction of digital is equal to a huge increase in quality.
What I am saying it that the critical manner in viewing at this detail is going down in a similar manner. What is achievable and what is viewed all ready differ. At one time people looked to prints as the bench mark. This group is decreasing down to the collector, the critic, and those who make the pictures. Print sales are down, not only mine, but other people that I am friends with that sell on the international level. I would like to hear an argument that does not support that more people view their photos on the computer, phone, and digital picture frames than by attaining high quality prints. So, would my custom print shop, and other printers I have spoken to in the USA. These mediums are all inferior to the print. This has been well documented. If you see this as something other then a trend towards mediocrity. We are going to strongly disagree.
This trend could be different in other parts of the world. But, I highly doubt it is different in China and Japan as they are very much into high tech. And, they soon will eclipse the USA in being the largest consumer groups. So, now we have a substantial degree of the consumer market, that hardly takes advantage of the detail that high end digital is capable of attaining. With this comes less of a discerning eye. Do you believe that one is just born with a critical knowledge of photography? Or is it developed over time with exposure to what is truly possible? individuals that are hardly viewing in the most critical manner, are hardly going to care if this detail is lost or regained in time. What the OP has addressed as the failings of digital, certainly matter to many of us photographers. But, we are not the ones buying the prints; and, this type of critical detail does not show up on the little jpg that people are viewing on their computers.
As for the example given, it pertains as follows. Very few people listen to music at the level it is capable of being reproduced. They are happy with the convenience and a better reproduction level than they had before digital. But, they have not embraced the fact that analog reproduction is better then it has ever been, and high resolution digital is just now equalling analog, and is far better then mp3 files. The print qualities the OP has described are much like the musical qualities inferred to in this example.
My head hurts from having to go into this kind of detail to explain this simple example. I am going to go, grab my camera, and enjoy my Saturday.
Kindest regards,
