[stoppingdown]

People should gravitate towards what appeal to them.

 

People are free to do that, of course. But good and bad aren't defined by the majority.  That's why they have to be distinguished.

[miro]

 Empty message please delete

[JJ_SO]

I was not taking part in this thread because I don't have much insight into possible futures - my crystal ball is in service. But I see things like this Sony RX10 IV as a possibility - instead of massive gear collections.

 

https://photorumors.com/2017/09/12/surpr...announced/

 

The slow mo is amazing and I'd be curious how good Sony became with AF-C and tracking. I think for 90% of the situation a holiday photographer can face, this machine will deliver results where other photogs are still busy with preparing the right gear. No offense.

[mike]

Lot's of valid points. We tend to be a "craze" driven society. Around the early to mid 2000's it seemed a lot of people who were never into photography were all of a sudden buying cameras like the 20d and many other people were buying point and shoots. To reiterate, these were people who were never really into photography before. 

 

On top of that, the technology has really matured. Until my old gear grew legs, I hadn't felt the need to upgrade. Whereas, early on I was. To me mirrorless was just a curiosity that intrigued me, but I wasn't going to make an investment into it. My current cameras were doing just fine.

 

Now, for most people who were just p&s users and millennials, the cell phone cameras are plenty. You get instant gratification, you can share immediately, you don't need a home computer (something else which is going away), and they don't print their photos (not much ruckus on photo printers anymore either). So why not? I was just on vacation in CDMX and all my GF used was her smartphone.  In fact, I rarely saw an SLR or Mirrorless, even at very touristy sites like Teotihuacan Pyramids.


 

[JJ_SO]

I'm not disagreeing, I just like to put some other thoughts to it:

 

 

Lot's of valid points. ...To reiterate, these were people who were never really into photography before.

 

Don't think that way. Photography until then was dealing with kind of complicated stuff, paying loads of money for prints which were "never the way I saw it" - lack of technique, sure. But if not a lot people were in photography, how would Kodak have sold millions of film rolls per year? Only for the pros?

 

Now, for most people who were just p&s users and millennials, the cell phone cameras are plenty. You get instant gratification, you can share immediately, you don't need a home computer (something else which is going away), and they don't print their photos (not much ruckus on photo printers anymore either). So why not? I was just on vacation in CDMX and all my GF used was her smartphone.  In fact, I rarely saw an SLR or Mirrorless, even at very touristy sites like Teotihuacan Pyramids.

Even here: Availability of complex, yet easy to handle technique makes it so easy to try a picture until I'm happy. Selfies, food porn, party shots, weddings with thousands of pictures are pretty cheap to make and so a lot of people get into it. First taste is with a smartphone. People do print, but the send their own postcards these days, their own invitations, menus, photobooks to look at pictures offline, whatever - labs have business. Posters are so much less complicated to do, 8 × 10" prints? no problem, black and white or color. Photography has become more approachable, more affordable for people who want to express themselves and feel unfit to draw or paint.

 

We should not become defenders or lawyers of photo industry - it's the way it is, it has become more easy to snap a memory and tell others - but to create a picture worth looking at is still the same fight, learning, work, effort and patience. I think the joy of watching a great picture, drawn, painted or printed will remain.

[mike]

I'm not disagreeing, I just like to put some other thoughts to it:

 

Don't think that way. Photography until then was dealing with kind of complicated stuff, paying loads of money for prints which were "never the way I saw it" - lack of technique, sure. But if not a lot people were in photography, how would Kodak have sold millions of film rolls per year? Only for the pros?

 

Hmmm, I didn't mean to come off that way or sound negative! I think it's great that many people are into photography! It creates competition, innovation, keeps prices down, and great new talent keeps emerging. However, there was definitely an SLR boom in the early 2k's (at least in the USA). Many of the people I know who jumped into the DSLRs back then have more or less moved on. At least their enthusiasm has waned.

 

 

Even here: Availability of complex, yet easy to handle technique makes it so easy to try a picture until I'm happy. Selfies, food porn, party shots, weddings with thousands of pictures are pretty cheap to make and so a lot of people get into it. First taste is with a smartphone. People do print, but the send their own postcards these days, their own invitations, menus, photobooks to look at pictures offline, whatever - labs have business. Posters are so much less complicated to do, 8 × 10" prints? no problem, black and white or color. Photography has become more approachable, more affordable for people who want to express themselves and feel unfit to draw or paint.

 

We should not become defenders or lawyers of photo industry - it's the way it is, it has become more easy to snap a memory and tell others - but to create a picture worth looking at is still the same fight, learning, work, effort and patience. I think the joy of watching a great picture, drawn, painted or printed will remain.

 

I totally agree about the accessibility and affordability of photography. At the pyramids EVERYONE had their smartphones out taking pictures. That's not an exaggeration!

 

It sounds like some things are different in Switzerland. I can't even think of full fledge camera store where I live (~1 million people metro). Most, sadly, are gone. There's a handful of fine print shops. There's one shop I use for prized photos. Otherwise I just go to a kiosk at the local Walgreens, still fine quality. My GF kids (HS through 25) and their friends are constantly taking pictures. But never print.

 

I must admit I'm guilty about doing that too nowadays. I tend to put my vacation photos in albums on Facebook and only print what I may want to hang on the wall. It saddens me sometimes that I can't, easily, do that with trips I made a long time ago.Worse is my ex wife was a scrapbooker and took all the old albums

[JJ_SO]

Hmmmm, I got my 15th photobook back from my printer company, next to a couple of others I made as presents. It's funny, these kind of things are still very special and although costly, they became affordable. So I just like to exclude myself from the persons who never print (I wouldn't be so sure about that, though  )

 

As a side not I once heard Zack Arias talking about these Fuji Instax printers, just to give his models a (tiny) print for free - wasn't that the excitement we had with Polaroid? I'm also thinking about getting one for these occasions, but I admit, I like the books better than a small sheet.

 

No city here is one Million inhabitants, but we do still have nice photo dealers with quite a selection. 

[mike]

Hmmmm, I got my 15th photobook back from my printer company,

 

No city here is one Million inhabitants, but we do still have nice photo dealers with quite a selection. 

 

Pardon my ignorance, but what's a photobook? Who prints them, publishers or photo labs? 

 

When it comes to population I should put things in perspective. The state I'm in has 8 times the area of the whole country of Switzerland. Yet, it has 1/4th the population. The town I'm in is 490km^2 and has 550k population. By Metro I mean all the adjacent/adjoining towns and unincorporated areas. 

 

BTW, I rented an apartment, third story of a house, for a month about 15 years ago in Thun. What a great place you get to live in!

[JJ_SO]

A Photobook might be a "coffee table book". It's something like this: https://www.bookfactory.ch/en/photobooks...mium-flat/

 

My usual size is 30 × 30 cm (11.8" × 11.8"), so a double page is 30 × 60 and looks pretty impressive. After I'm done with the layout, be it book or calendar, I can use the same pictures and layouts as well for smaller products. Last time it took less than 6 days to gte two books and 20 big posters.

 

Over the years I started to think about how pictures could work together - but I still like to take the first one from Edinburgh (which was from Apple and pretty expensive for what it is). Oh, not trure: The first one I had to as a bookbinder to make it from HQ laser prints, which were scanned films and edited. That was a lot work to do, but these days I'm ready to send it within 4 hours - given, the pics are rated and "edited to taste". Which I do anyway..

 

 

It's true: A picture is a picture once you can hang it on a wall or look at it in a book.