• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Where does the rapid evolution of photography leave us

The new technology is only "bad" if you are making your living doing wedding photography.

The reasons people in the past didn't take multiple photos at weddings were technology related. The need for flash, limited cropping options, color temperature issues, etc. Smart phones with high ISO cameras and automatic settings, instant cropping and sharing get around many of those limitations. In addition, many people just want a memento of the event, not an expensive professional print. It is the obligation of the photographer to use his expertise to transcend the images taken by wedding guests. Those who can do so will profit, those who can't will not.
 
“I do highest level, in-your-face candid work, and am the world leader in circular fisheye and infrared flash street photography”

Wow, you must be legendary.

Intergalactic, also?
 
Painters still use paint, guys. Photography has been with us for less than a couple centuries...constantly changing the entire time, constantly evolving. Pick your tools and use them.

“I do highest level, in-your-face candid work, and am the world leader in circular fisheye and infrared flash street photography” Wow, you must be legendary. Intergalactic, also?
I know the world's leader in fisheye infrared photohraphy and it is not slackercruser...but then the fellow I know does not use infrared flash, so there is room on the top.
 

For a second you got me worried. What were the chances for this diabolical combo to actually exist besides our very own living legend?
 

OT: My dad (he's 78) is shopping for a new car. He is not a happy shopper. One of the brands offers, if you buy their car, to provide a free class at the dealership to teach you how to use the myriad of features available on the dash. The man has been driving for sixty years and doesn't want to sit in a classroom to learn how to program the "f**king touch screen", which he sees as a combination of amazingly powerful and idiotic at the same time, requiring you to take your eyes off the road to do pretty much anything. Basically he wants a normal vehicle from the past that no longer exists. He'll get a new car soon and learn how to use it properly, but still. Cars are not cameras, but technology creep is an issue with both.

OT#2: The book you mentioned is a classic and I purchased copies for my teenage sons even though we have no VW.

https://www.amazon.com/Keep-Volkswagen-Alive-Step-Step/dp/1566913101
 
It is not for me to wonder. Just happy that I can still get out with my large format camera with loaded film holders.
Yes!

It is my own evolution as a photographer I am most worried about. Besides, it is the only part of the equation I have any control over.
 

Yes. Plus a bunch of mostly-old-men (Photrio) injects a lot of ignorance and attitude into a process that's arguably far ahead in other places.
 
+1​
 
OT: My dad (he's 78) is shopping for a new car. He is not a happy shopper. One of the brands offers, if you buy their car, to provide a free class at the dealership to teach you how to use the myriad of features available on the dash.
He could buy a good used car. My gently used 2010 Honda CRV has 111,000 miles on it, runs like a top, and doesn't have anything touch screen on it. It did take me a minute to figure out how to reset my clock this weekend though. Kind of like buying an old film camera.
 
I, the interplanetary leader in telephoto images of crustaceans, agree with the OP. We're headed in the mirrorless direction, for reasons of economy and quality.

I've been working with mirrorless cameras since 1993. Ones a 4x5, the other's an 8x10.
 
I've been working with mirrorless cameras since 1993. Ones a 4x5, the other's an 8x10.

Very nice.

I'm reminded of a quote from Chuck Close that I can't find anywhere, where he basically said photographic equipment hasn't improved much in the past hundred years or so, and I think there's some truth there.
 
Last edited:

Your 2010 CRV is almost totally electronic compared to the machines of yore . No points, no carb...probably even tells you when your tire pressure is low, a door is open, and your seat belts aren't secure. It's almost a robot with a human passenger.
 
Last edited:
Yes!

It is my own evolution as a photographer I am most worried about. Besides, it is the only part of the equation I have any control over.

Interesting use of "evolution." IMO that's not the same as "change." Darwin said something about survival of species...which entails constant change as well as death of some things that can't change. The "best" doesn't necessarily survive or dominate. Me, I miss certain films and I mourn the survival of certain photographic aspirations.
 

Yep, and he and I have been having a good time researching places that rebuild and warranty interesting and simple cars with some years on them. And there still are a few simple vehicles available - I drive a '17 Jeep with wind-up windows, manual transmission and no touchscreens and he likes that a lot. His current vehicle has sat nav and a screen but it's an early enough version of that technology that the car can be operated without it. It's not a big deal and he'll find something used or new that he likes soon enough. I keep telling him how much he's going to like back-up cameras, which I think are wonderful.

All this tech on cameras doesn't amount to a hill of beans to the general population, but tech on a 4,000 lb vehicle that makes you take your eyes off the road really makes you wonder, so I do see his point.
 
Well, evoliution is not so rapid as some claims.
If we talk about optics.

Meniscus
Lens groups
Cementing elements
Multicoating
Zoom lens
Aspheric lens

Thats it - in almost 200 years
 

My impression locally (midsized city) is that the prospering "wedding photographers" shoot video. They normally have assistants that shoot digital stills.
 
A better way of looking at evolution is not that organisms change to meet changing conditions, but that some organisms were lucky to already have the adaptations needed to survive the changes in the environment. Otherwise, organisms would not adapt fast enough to survive the changing enviroment.

So if you do not already have it in you to survive the evolution of photography -- its too late!
 
The original premise that photography is evolving is false. Photography, like oil painting, marble sculpture, etching, engraving, etc claims it's own identity with its own parameters. In particular it's a method of making pictures out of light sensitive materials.

What is evolving rapidly is the way people make pictures to share with others. I predict that for the near future pictures on monitor screens viewed with the eyes will be the most popular method. For the more distant future I predict that pictures will be beamed directly to the mind bypassing the eyes entirely. And as sure as anything there will be an ingenuous cohort still calling this photography.
 

APS is not dead. You can buy film, just like for 110. Back in business.

The digital mp wars are over except for a few easily impressed. You are correct, in most cases, there is no advantage of sensor sizes over.......pick a number......10? mp. Only for extreme cropping or blowups, perhaps. I read somewhere that fine grain film and lenses top out at something like a 24mp sensor. If I remember and understand correctly, that means unless you have a NASA lens, anything over 24mp......and that's a best case scenario........is a waste. Except for bragging rights, I guess.
 
Photography has always been evolving. I would say the big quantum leaps were:

From plates to flim
Reliable color with Kodachrome, ca. 1935
Digital

Phones seem to have better built in computerization than a lot of "real" cameras, in my limited observations. The ability to better match SBR, reaching into shadows w/o blowing out highlights. I'm more likely to get a quick, usable image with my phone than my Pentax DSLR. And the latter certainly is not quick.

The courts long ago settled the question of needing permission if one is in a public space. You don't.