Welcome to PhotoForumz.com!
FAQFAQ      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

What is real impact of digital on photography profession?

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
   Digital Photography Tip (Home) -> General RSS
Next:  Discussion fodder for rec.photo.digital refugees  
Author Message
bogus

External


Since: Jun 09, 2004
Posts: 22



(Msg. 31) Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2004 7:23 pm
Post subject: Re: What is real impact of digital on photography profession [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>moderated (more info?)

In article <403ed85e$1@newsflash.abo.fi>, firstname.lastname RemoveThis @abo.fi
says...
 > Might not be the case as we move to 64-bit processor architectures.
 > Although they have (atleast for now) 32-bit emulation, it might not be
 > enough for that 16-bit shell for an 8-bit OS.

I read an article yesterday about how Intel has gotten the clue that
people want backwards compatibility forever. They had tried to move the
world on the 64 bit computing via the Itanium CPU series which could not
run 32 bit code and found themselves locked into only the high end server
market. AMD came out with their 64 bit CPU's that could also run 32 bit
code and they started selling like hot-cakes.

So we may be able to run those old OS's for quite some time. Besides, as
new machines get faster and faster they are able to emulate the older
machines at their old performance levels pretty well.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->

 >> Stay informed about: What is real impact of digital on photography profession? 
Back to top
Login to vote
bogus

External


Since: Jun 09, 2004
Posts: 22



(Msg. 32) Posted: Thu Mar 04, 2004 7:23 pm
Post subject: Re: What is real impact of digital on photography profession [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In article <uugn301evdua8klqd9ekf8rg39lio0htc7.RemoveThis@4ax.com>, do_not.RemoveThis@e-mail.me
says...
 > On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:21:07 -0800 (PST), sbrav.RemoveThis@aol.com (SBrav) wrote:
 >
  > >Or in the long term will it effectively kill
  > >photography as a profession?
 >
 > No more so than the Kodak Brownie, the SLR, the Polaroid, and
 > disposable cameras.
 >
 > There's a lot more involved in taking a good picture than the type of
 > camera used -- particularly true of studio photography (amateurs
 > sometimes get luck in the out-of-doors, but how many good photos have
 > you see amateurs take of products used in advertising, as just one
 > example).

I was just about to say the same thing. However, after reflecting on how
e-mail has affected writing and spelling skills, I am starting to have
some doubts. When e-mail first started to become popular there were all
kinds of articles about how this would improve writing skills since
people would be writing more. But what has actually happened is that the
expectations of readers has dropped drastically. No one expects an e-mail
to be grammatically correct, be spelled correctly or even to not be chuck
full of terrible typo's.

When the web surged in popularity there was a huge demand for content. Do
you think they waited for an entire army of writers and graphic artists
to be trained properly before they started throwing up site after site of
supposedly compelling content. Not at all. They just grabbed whoever they
could and pressed them into service. The results were barely worth
reading, and sometimes were barely readable, but they are all out there
claiming to be the most important thing you will read all year. What's
worse, is that there are people devoting their lives to archiving all
this 'content' as if it were really important.

Anyway, I have seen the same thing when it comes to photography. While
there is still a demand for high quality photographers, more and more
people are doing themselves what they used to pay professionals to do. I
see this primarily in the boring field of photographing items for special
purpose catalogs. A manufacturer used to have to hire a professional
photographer to photograph all of their products. Now they just hand a
digital camera to their secretary and have them go at it. It ends up
looking like crap but people still buy the products. There are chapters
in books just about how to photograph products for display on eBay. I
even see photographs in brochures that are just abysmal. The buying and
viewing public just doesn't seem to care.

The general view seems to be if you do care about the quality of anything
other than a sports team then you are just a freak that is too negative.

The point of all this rambling is that making it easier for regular
people to do anything not only reduces the need for highly skilled
professionals but it also greatly reduces the expectations of the general
public. This constitutes a double-whammy which seriously affects the
ability of those who are highly skilled to continue to demand the
compensation they were getting before.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->

 >> Stay informed about: What is real impact of digital on photography profession? 
Back to top
Login to vote
usenetmaps

External


Since: Aug 31, 2004
Posts: 272



(Msg. 33) Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:10 pm
Post subject: Re: What is real impact of digital on photography profession [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Grant Robertson <BOGUS.DeleteThis@BOGUS.INVALID> wrote in
news:MPG.1ab12655bdb9d3c7989788@news.sunflower.com:

 > So we may be able to run those old OS's for quite some time. Besides,
 > as new machines get faster and faster they are able to emulate the
 > older machines at their old performance levels pretty well.
 >

I'm not sure if you actually "got" what I was trying to say.

You will be able to run *any* OS for as long as you like because the
hardware is increasingly irrelevant.

I can run Macintosh System 7 software, even though I don't have a Mac
anymore, because I can download an emulator for the Quadra 6xx series
that runs under Windows. I can likewise run Amiga software, Nintendo
software, dedicated video game machine software.

If you use Linux, you can download Wine and run a lot of Windows
software on whatever Linux hardware you happen to have.

The quality of emulation will only continue to improve -- 20 years from
now, you will be able to download a PC emulator that will allow you to
run Windows 2000 on whatever sort of hardware you own.

So I'm not even worried about being able to open my RAW (.nef) images,
let alone .jpgs or .psd files.

I think the CD/DVD format will be with us for a very long time. I
predict their "demise" will strongly resemble the "demise" of vinyl and
VHS. Slow and noisy -- CDs have been in mass production 20 years, and
they still make LPs.

Bob

--
remove the backwards "SPAM" to reply.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: What is real impact of digital on photography profession? 
Back to top
Login to vote
user65

External


Since: Jun 06, 2004
Posts: 167



(Msg. 34) Posted: Sat Mar 06, 2004 11:34 pm
Post subject: Re: What is real impact of digital on photography profession [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 16:23:19 -0800 (PST), Grant Robertson
<BOGUS DeleteThis @BOGUS.INVALID> wrote:

 >In article <403ed85e$1@newsflash.abo.fi>, firstname.lastname DeleteThis @abo.fi
 >says...
  >> Might not be the case as we move to 64-bit processor architectures.
  >> Although they have (atleast for now) 32-bit emulation, it might not be
  >> enough for that 16-bit shell for an 8-bit OS.
 >
 >I read an article yesterday about how Intel has gotten the clue that
 >people want backwards compatibility forever. They had tried to move the
 >world on the 64 bit computing via the Itanium CPU series which could not
 >run 32 bit code and found themselves locked into only the high end server

They wouldn't have found that, they knew it ahead of time. The hopes
were that software vendors would jump on the band wagon and write, or
recompile their applications to run on 64 bit processors. For the
vast majority of applications there is nothing to be gained by going
to 64 bit processing.

 >market. AMD came out with their 64 bit CPU's that could also run 32 bit
 >code and they started selling like hot-cakes.

There are very few applications available that will, or can take
advantage of the 64 bit processor, but the 16 and 32 bit will run on
it.

The AMDs only advantage at present is the one meg on board cache.
That in itself should speed things up.

 >
 >So we may be able to run those old OS's for quite some time. Besides, as
 >new machines get faster and faster they are able to emulate the older
 >machines at their old performance levels pretty well.

Some where, some one is going to have to make a break with backward
compatibility for legacy applications or we'll be stuck with hugh
Operating systems that have to be made even larger.

OTOH Windows has already orphaned a *lot* of software by not
maintaining backward compatibility with XP which is based on NT and
not the old win9X kernel. Some of those programs can be run in
emulation mode, but not all.

I think it's only a matter of time before they pitch the old
architecture for something new and more elegant. They may have to use
a transition period, where systems will run both, but it can be done
with enough computing horsepower.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.rogerhalstead.com" target="_blank">www.rogerhalstead.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: What is real impact of digital on photography profession? 
Back to top
Login to vote
hrosita1

External


Since: Jun 06, 2004
Posts: 134



(Msg. 35) Posted: Mon Mar 15, 2004 3:22 pm
Post subject: Re: What is real impact of digital on photography profession [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Hi,

In my opinion, photography has developed because of the point and shoot demand,
just like the Model T has made the car affordable to the masses.

The professionals have embraced digital for the ease of viewing the results,
the economy of the electronic storage, the capability to fix small problems,
and the ease of printing. I know two pros here in Sarasota that went digital
years ago when setting up a digital shop cost $100,000.
Another pro that has embraced digital is George Lepp (known for his magazine
articles).



Rosita
 >> Stay informed about: What is real impact of digital on photography profession? 
Back to top
Login to vote
user1483

External


Since: Mar 27, 2004
Posts: 3



(Msg. 36) Posted: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:21 pm
Post subject: Re: What is real impact of digital on photography profession [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

This is the longer version of my previous posting (Wink

One interesting impact of the new digital age is in my opinion the Price a
given photo can achieve on the market.
Considering the traditional photography with film, the film developing and
scannnig led to a significant final price of the photo.
The scanning process limited also significantly the number of photographies
a medium talented photograph could create during a date. So the number of
phtographies produced were limited due to the process it self. According to
the laws of the market, if the supply is lower, the prices go up.

So we are entering now a new age, where the number of pictures which can be
produced per day is dramatically higher. Thus, the price per image will
decrease, following the law of the markets. This trend can be obvserved
already in some photoagencies, compare the prices of new photoagencies
working exclusively digital
with the traditional Photoagencies. The
photographers are earning less, but on the other side the number of
photographies is significantly higher. This mean a medium talented
photograph need to send much more pictures to get some income.

On the other side, a limited factor is the quality. It is very easy to shoot
an amazing number of pics using digital cameras, however how many pics are
REALLY great ? The talent will not increase or decrease in dependency of the
technique used.

It is true that the demand for images is getting higher, but this increase
in the demand is in my opinion lower then the increase of available
pictures. The typical prices paid for photos (10-15 EUR) of the mentioned
photoagencies confirm this assumption.


Alex Timaios <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.alex-images.de" target="_blank">www.alex-images.de</a>


"SBrav" <sbrav RemoveThis @aol.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:20040223075814.20271.00000221@mb-m04.aol.com...
 > I'm new to the group, apologies if this has been discussed ad nauseum
here...
 >
 > I'm curious about opinions on digital's real impact on photography as a
 > profession. Has it created new opportunities? (such as millions of web
sites
 > in need of digital images) Or in the long term will it effectively kill
 > photography as a profession? (by putting easy image capture &
manipulation in
 > the hands of everyone) Just wondering how folks expect this to play out
over
 > the next 5-10 years.
 >
 > Gracias!
 > S
 >
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="https://www.geocities.com/bravardmedia</font" target="_blank">https://www.geocities.com/bravardmedia</font</a>>
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: What is real impact of digital on photography profession? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
   Digital Photography Tip (Home) -> General All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]