The Future of Photography?

[kellmeister]

I’m going part time next year as anticipation of getting started with a photography business shooting weddings and portraits. I’ve learned a lot from the forums over the years, and I think I’m finally ready.

One thing that does cause some concern for me though, is the technological progress that photography has taken in the last 10 years. I was wondering if anyone has any concerns that technology may overtake the profession in such a way, that professional photographers are not needed as much as they are today. One thing I’ve noticed is that stills and video are coming together. Does anyone think that in 10 years we may all be videographers, moreso instead of photographers? As someone who has really thought long and hard about a business plan and getting everything in order for this career change, I was just wondering how others feel about how the medium of photography is growing and what impacts it may have on professional photography down the road.

[RichardA]

People and companies will still need the photos taken by someone.....that, IMO, will never change.

[amfoto1]

It's really hard to predict the future...

The conversion to digital over the past ten years has meant some things I expected and anticipated... as well as plenty of others I didn't.

You just have to stay nimble.

Both your specialties are under a lot of pressure from "newbies" flooding the market and the "ease/free" perception of digitial (both on the part of new photogs and customers alike). Not that there isn't a lot of potential still, it's just that any profits are more likely to be in places other than the entry- or mid-level of the market.

My advice would be to not quit your day job until your new job is bringing in at least the equivalent income, or at least you are sure it pretty reliably would so long as you put in a similar number of hours.

Be aware that being a small business startup, you will run in the red for a couple years.... And what that means is that you will need to "feed" the business money and will be taking little or no salary for a long time.

It's far more about "business" than it is about "photography", though.... figure about a 5 to 1 ratio.

What's the future going to bring? 10 years out? I have no real idea. I'm rrying to plan for next year.

I do see "photography" in generally continuing to become more and more affordable/accessible to "everyman" and "everywoman", and that their will be more and more "advances" and automation that make it easy to produce higher and higher quality images. The manufacturers are working hard to assure that, because they'll sell more cameras, lenses and accessories if they do. Of course there are more and better multi-use platforms that include photography... Camera phones are just the start, and quality coming from these has jumped dramatically in a very short time. So, depending upon our specialties, our biggest competition could often be our customers themselves.

There will be trends that come and go in a rush. By the time we all even hear about some of these things, the early adopters or vanguard are already on to something else. Facebook was the rage, but is now so "last week" to users. Twitter has probably already seen it's heyday. Geo-tagging is here now, but people will get bored with that, too.

Styles of photography seem to rotate in and out of popularity. What's next? Weddings with fisheye lenses? Somebody is probably already shooting portraits with Lensbabies.

There was a retro trend for a while... That seems to have run it's course.

Everyone is still getting tattoos, piercings... in order to be unique and different!

Yes, people will continue to need photography services and products. We just have to find the ones who are willing to pay for them, and enough so that we can make a reasonable living at it.

[sapearl]

I would worry far less about the blend of video and photo - the bigger issue I feel is that the powerful new technologies coupled with slick marketting creates the illusion that anybody can be a professional photographer.

It certainly is easier these days to capture instant, fixable, images. Some of them are even quite good. Problem is the buying public swallows much of this. They then adjust their attitudes to feel that since "anybody can do it," then the the effort and talent involved is minimal and pricing should follow suit.

This creates more fighting and churn at the bottom - with a lot of the public being burned and ripped in the process - but it probably has far less impact on the true professional artists.

But back on the photo/video thing - most folks don't like to wade through hours of video over and over again. On the other hand, an album can sit on the coffee table and be easily browsed by guests, or the wedding images can cycle throughout the day as a screensaver on your laptop.

......One thing that does cause some concern for me though, is the technological progress that photography has taken in the last 10 years. I was wondering if anyone has any concerns that technology may overtake the profession in such a way, that professional photographers are not needed as much as they are today. One thing I’ve noticed is that stills and video are coming together.......

[ndelacova]

Here is my .02 worth...
As stated very well by amfoto1, the manufacturers have made it very easy for the general public to be able to afford dslr's and be potentially good taking the shots. My dslr is 3 years old and is easily beat in terms of ISO, mega pixels, frames per second, and other features. Yet, people still want to hire me for their parties and they still want to purchase my shots. What differentiates my from the consumner is knowing how to use my dslr and working around its limitations. I also seem to be at the right place at the right time. My vantage points are unique as well as my shooting style. I have also become very good at correcting any images that are less than perfect in the camera. My use of cropping, color correcting is what sets me apart. Most people I deal with have come to rely on my shots even though they took shots of their own. I am not saying that I am great. I am just much better than the common public, dslr or point and shoot owners. I also make the customer feel that they go about in their parties matters without having to worry about getting the shot. That pretty much sums up the difference between a professional photographer and a person with a fancy camera.

[mick w]

I've noticed technology has made it much, much easier for people to take crappy snapshots.

Composition + creativity + good light will be just as important in 2019. Unless the cameras start doing that for you....

[sapearl]

Totally agree on that one.

This reminds me of when consumer camcorders got much better in the late 70's and early 80's. Pretty soon it was possible to buy 10 Lux cameras that would shoot under almost any light...... including really AWFUL conditions with flat contrast, high grain, no color, poor definition.... hmmm... sounds just like what some folks do with their dSLR's ;). Yep; GIGO, and very quickly too.

I've noticed technology has made it much, much easier for people to take crappy snapshots.

Composition + creativity + good light will be just as important in 2019. Unless the cameras start doing that for you....

[Karl Johnston]

You don't have to be the best, just better than the competition. A lot more goes into creating a good picture or session for a client..use that to your advantage. Most people who go to see a pro photographer are going after a certain look and are willing to pay a bit more for the premium feature - that's what you need to become. I can't really predict the future but what I do know is like with any business you have to be able to be consistent in delivering excellent service and products and on top of that - consistent in your ability to adapt, grow and evolve.

There's a limit and that's your limit. If you can find that niche, create that market, which is now largely a luxury one thanks to Sears and Walmart - you likely can find a way to survive. Though it's hard and the top is crowded with the best of the best; you're always competing. The irony is you need to network and market amongst those pros in order to survive too.

I don't think technology is the worry - I think the worry is not being able to evolve better as a business, as a service and create a better product than the people who are buying the technology, learning how to use it and then NOT valuing their services

Though, there will always be a niche. Just a matter of finding it.

Think about it this way

The shoe market. You can get a pair of shoes for $20 at walmart.

http://www.skechers.com/shoes-and-clothing/styles/what_s_hot/list;jsessionid=XhyAYFYcgClCn8+yXOATNQ**
So why pay $110 for a pair?

Because they do this:

SKECHERS Shape Ups-Metabolize fitness shoes: 1. Tone your muscles 2. Promote healthy weight loss 3. Make it easy to get in shape! Lace up sneaker. Click on 'Read More' to watch the Shape-ups Instructional video! Read more.
* Shape-ups shoes are not valid for all-site discount codes
* NOTE: Shape-ups shoes all share the same great fitness technology - every Shape-up gives you the same great benefits!
* Smooth leather or nubuck upper
* Mesh fabric side panels for ventilation
* Stitching and overlay detail
* Lace up front
* Padded collar and tongue
* Fabric shoe lining
* Cushioned insole
* Firm polyurethane frame supports and stabilizes the foot
* Kinetic Wedge super soft foam midsole designed to absorb shock and provide exercising effect
* Sculpted rubber rocker bottom outsole
* Running in Shape-ups is not recommended
* Comes with a detailed exercise guide to get the most out of your Shape-ups!

There's 100 people on that webpage asking about buying those shoes. I bet 1/6th of them actually bought them or have them.

They buy them despite the expense because of a few reasons: Better product, better service...and finally..branding.

Why pay for compliments soda for 50 cents when a pepsi is $2.50? Tastes nearly the same, same mixture of sugar and water and coloring...or is it?

See where i'm going with this?

You gotta create a difference, even if one isn't apparent, and then sell that difference.

[Miko40D]

More and more clients are wanting digital files vs. prints. I still see a ton of photogs charging crazy $ for prints and not offering files. Many that do sell files, set prices very high to drive print sales. You don't have to go through a pro lab for quality prints anymore. Obviously it's a digital world and people want digital images.

[sapearl]

Hello Miko and welcome to POTN - stick around a while as it's quite an interesting and informative place.;)

Very true, the expectation is pretty much that a disk of some sort be included in any wedding package. For years I was against providing negatives and files but I now see the hand writing on the wall. Adapt or get surfed over to the next photographer's website.

But - even though you don't have to go through a pro lab to get quality prints, unless you know how to PP yourself you still have to go through the photographer or another pro to achieve beautiful finished prints.

A lot of folks just shoot and burn. They do no PP to the image. I charge a modest amount for enlargements which includes fairly extensive post processing work: sharpenning, any exposure adjustments, blemish removal, dealing with any eyeglass reflections.... and many more. A burned disk of 600 JPG images will likely have very little post on it.

More and more clients are wanting digital files vs. prints. I still see a ton of photogs charging crazy $ for prints and not offering files. Many that do sell files, set prices very high to drive print sales. You don't have to go through a pro lab for quality prints anymore. Obviously it's a digital world and people want digital images.

[Ernst-Ulrich Schafer]

Miko40D, For me a digital file really isn't a professional product, especailly when I hear, "Oh, you get to do your own retouching and then take them to WalMart for your prints. Who knows on what given day what you might get from WalMart and you know what they really could care less, all WalMart cares about is how much is in their till at the end of the day!

I personally perfer and offer portraits from a professional lab, protected sprayed, textured and mounted on an very nice beveled mount board. Oh, 8X's & 5X's are priced the same at $50 each. They can get digital files from me but not if they don't buy a printed producted from me.

Since your in Sherwood, OR. Please check out Sorenson Photography in Portland, his 8X10 start out at $299.00 and I doubt very seriously that he will just hand over a digital file for ya.

Best regards, Ernst

[MJPhotos24]

I used to do a lot in the music business with indie labels and saw the change from CD's to digital files, a lot of the same questions came up. CD's are still out there, still get bought, but money is made more off digital sales and playing live. There's very similar trends happening in photography that happened in music, except we don't play shows :)

Prints vs. Digital files - people will always want a print to hang on their wall, the way they get it might change though. Printers are getting better, they're thinking short term and not 120 years of archival life, so it don't matter. I went to my sisters house and saw almost ALL of her photos were printed off the crappy printer she had. The movement will head towards digital more and more just like CD's did (people bought digital files to burn to a CD-R...people will buy digital to print at home). So yea, there will be a desire for prints in the future but digital files may take over. Difference though is a CD costs $12 for say 12 songs, so they're making the money by selling them at .99 cents a piece. Photos, if the print is $10 you're not selling a digital for $10 - you're selling it for $40 to make up for lost print sales, you'd be a complete idiot to sell it for $10 when it's stock.

Now for the "show" comparison...bands really make money off live shows, it's their living way more than CD's. Photographers who shoot stock and sell prints may find that is a very unproductive format and may have to come up with day fees people can afford. Sports related could be x-amount for coverage of one player, or game, or whatever. This obviously already happens but it seems the request for it is increasing and newspapers are even going to using stringers more instead of having full timers with benefits. So our show may be shooting day fees while prints sales take a back seat as it may be easier to promise 200 images from an event for $250 than it is to try and make money off print sales. This could hurt though, I know I've had some events/games that print/digital sales were WAY over that amount. One game this year print sales are still going and over 1K - editorial usage is a few hundred - and the company paid me to be there in the first place. It's a great gig! If I did $250 for everyone to have a CD I'd be an idiot. So you have to be tactical in what you do and do it for a reason.

Stills vs. Video - anyone who thinks we may not be doing both is kidding themselves. If you haven't seen the "new" version of Sports Illustrated you should take a look at what they're working on coming out with. It will be a slower process but MANY photographers will now be doing both, especially since the bodies are now doing both. I know in '10 with one of my clients I plan on doing both just to see what can be done. Still photographers will still be around, but many - especially those working in news and for magazines/newspapers/etc. - will be doing both.

Karl's difference - it's pretty much what drives any business. If you don't separate yourself then you'll fail, period. There's plenty of horrible photographers out there that are great talkers and get a lot of business, this I think has already started to change. These are the people always looking for NEW clients instead of retaining them because people see the difference is not much with what they can get with kit gear. These people will be faded out as more and more want to see the quality. This could mean anything from just plain better photos to creating graphics with the photos that they can't create. Actually, I just delivered a magazine cover print to a parent and another says they took their regular photo to wal-mart, scanned it in and put the wording on (not my photo - btw, it was years ago before wal-mart really asked about copyright)...he then starts talking about how he could never do this and that to make it look good, etc. So for him, it's the separator even if he had the digital file - he'd still need someone to create the graphics.

Things are changing, in some instances where there was clients years ago we may lose them because of technology and people accepting cheap/free over quality. That for sure has already happened and has only gotten worse. However, there will be new doors opening up for those staying ahead of the curve - will it be enough for many to make it, probably not but you have to remember in a recent poll 9/10 photographers FAIL already and I do believe it will get worse. Have to find your niche, have to work at it and consistently get better...because the day you are good enough is the day you should retire because you will never be good enough, you will never know it all, you will never reach your peak...and if you do, don't look down because it's the only place you can go.

...and read this
http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/2082

[Karl Johnston]

I used to do a lot in the music business with indie labels and saw the change from CD's to digital files, a lot of the same questions came up. CD's are still out there, still get bought, but money is made more off digital sales and playing live. There's very similar trends happening in photography that happened in music, except we don't play shows :)
Oh but we do ;) these are called "exhibitions."

[harroz]

loads of great posts in here, the only thing I can add, and I'm not saying this as a dig, but more because it is happening through universities etc.. The growth of the amount of people who want to be a photographer is very rapid. Yes I know, it's always been happening, it's just these times are very visual/photography/design focused and so there's going to be a hefty influx over the next few years not seen before. As it is here, there really isn't room for another photographer here, and yet they still keep popping up. we have 40photographers in a town of 80,000 people, not good statistics, and in the past couple of months I've meet 2 more who have returned from Uni wanting to start businesses here, and know of 2 more who have come from overseas. It's intersting times.

[sapearl]

Regardless of photography's future, happy holidays everybody :D

[sapearl]

I agree with what your saying here Mark, but - not trying to be critical, I had the same conversation with my fellow photogs in the student union back on campus in the late '60's and early '70's. Not much has changed.

Prices had been coming down. You could get an excellent Canon SLR new for $250-400. Photo classes on campus were booming and everybody wanted to to be the next great photojournalist. You had the anti-war movement in full swing and everybody wanted to be a photographer. Things took off even more after May 5, 1970.

Every generation faces social and technological changes which result in people like you, me and many others here making these kinds of statements. It tests our cleverness for survival. The web just makes it far easier to share the ideas, and faster than before the net ..... to see what works and what does not.

But we have more advantages now with forums like POTN. The younger shooters get to tap into my experience, social skills at dealing with people, and longer perspective on the industry in general. At the same time, older folks like myself get to tap into your energy, your vibrant creativity, and your perspective of what's up and coming.

We don't all agree on what's coming down the pike. But I would be a complete fool to completely ignore and write off what you younger folks have to say. At the same time, the up and comers would be unwise to ignore the experience of the veterans here. The individual who can synthesize the best of both viewpoints will come out a winner ;). - Stu

loads of great posts in here, the only thing I can add, and I'm not saying this as a dig, but more because it is happening through universities etc.. The growth of the amount of people who want to be a photographer is very rapid. Yes I know, it's always been happening, it's just these times are very visual/photography/design focused and so there's going to be a hefty influx over the next few years not seen before. ...... It's intersting times.

[MJPhotos24]

Oh but we do ;) these are called "exhibitions."
touche - though not all photogs play shows :) Don't think you'll be seeing an exhibit any time soon from me...

[MJPhotos24]

loads of great posts in here, the only thing I can add, and I'm not saying this as a dig, but more because it is happening through universities etc.. The growth of the amount of people who want to be a photographer is very rapid. Yes I know, it's always been happening, it's just these times are very visual/photography/design focused and so there's going to be a hefty influx over the next few years not seen before. As it is here, there really isn't room for another photographer here, and yet they still keep popping up. we have 40photographers in a town of 80,000 people, not good statistics, and in the past couple of months I've meet 2 more who have returned from Uni wanting to start businesses here, and know of 2 more who have come from overseas. It's intersting times.
It did happen in film but you are right, they're popping up everywhere. Most will fail, but it will not slow down. In this small town there used to be one main guy who did most, was booked up fast, and is VERY good - now there's two more, and I hear about 2-3 more wanting to jump in. Simply put there's not enough business to go around in this little town. Now that guy has his clientele, I have mine (though most of what I do is not local), a 3rd takes the run off of the first guy and is not very good, the others wanting to jump in who knows what they'll end up doing. Competition will increase drastically, especially with places like Yahoo publishing articles that say all it takes to be a pro is you like to take photos :rolleyes:

[RDKirk]

Prints vs. Digital files - people will always want a print to hang on their wall, the way they get it might change though. Printers are getting better, they're thinking short term and not 120 years of archival life, so it don't matter. I went to my sisters house and saw almost ALL of her photos were printed off the crappy printer she had. The movement will head towards digital more and more just like CD's did (people bought digital files to burn to a CD-R...people will buy digital to print at home). So yea, there will be a desire for prints in the future but digital files may take over. Difference though is a CD costs $12 for say 12 songs, so they're making the money by selling them at .99 cents a piece. Photos, if the print is $10 you're not selling a digital for $10 - you're selling it for $40 to make up for lost print sales, you'd be a complete idiot to sell it for $10 when it's stock.

Now for the "show" comparison...bands really make money off live shows, it's their living way more than CD's.

It seems to be getting darned hard to download CD-quality music directly off the internet. I can buy an MP3, but having heard live music, I'm not content with an MP3. I'll have to go to the expense of ordering the CD through Amazon. I'm not the only one.

Homo sapiens has had big pictures on his walls for as long as homo sapiens has had walls, so big pictures on walls aren't going away anytime soon. Nor IMO will there be a disappearance of people who want big good pictures on their walls. And I don't think the proportion will be any less than it ever has been. The mass of people have always had little pictures on their walls (smaller than 16x20) and high-end artisanship has never been important to them.

But portrait painters still make a living at $5,000 to $50,000 per painting, and photographers (both portrait and wedding) can market to the same clientele. It's not even as tight a market as you might think to crack.

[MJPhotos24]

It seems to be getting darned hard to download CD-quality music directly off the internet. I can buy an MP3, but having heard live music, I'm not content with an MP3. I'll have to go to the expense of ordering the CD through Amazon. I'm not the only one.

Homo sapiens has had big pictures on his walls for as long as homo sapiens has had walls, so big pictures on walls aren't going away anytime soon. Nor IMO will there be a disappearance of people who want big good pictures on their walls. And I don't think the proportion will be any less than it ever has been. The mass of people have always had little pictures on their walls (smaller than 16x20) and high-end artisanship has never been important to them.

But portrait painters still make a living at $5,000 to $50,000 per painting, and photographers (both portrait and wedding) can market to the same clientele. It's not even as tight a market as you might think to crack.

Unfortunately you and I, since I do the same thing buying CD's rather than mp3's, are in the minority. MP3's are not the highest quality for downloads, but they are the fastest/easiest so what is the norm. However, CD sales have declined along with an overall decline in music sales period because people are not paying as much for entertainment as they have in the past (13 million fewer music buyers in the U.S. in 2008 than 07). Photos are in the same boat as people may want them, they just don't need them.

As for the high end photography and painting - that can be a bit different. High end painting there's on in existence, and for that original people are going to pay. A photo could do the same if you cut it off at one copy but not many do that, very rare.

Most photographers will never work high end, it's not an easy market to crack into for most for several reasons. The main reason being different types of photography. If you want to be a high end wedding or portrait photographer, live in the right area, and there's a need - then you have a chance. If you want to be a Sports Illustrated contact photographer - yea, get on the waiting list and don't expect a call any time soon. Talking with someone that was working at SI this year he asked about a photo job with them, they said maybe in 15 years they'll have a desk job for him to work his way up. There's differences depending on what field you want to work in - and tell you one thing I wouldn't want to be a high end wedding photographer because, well, I'd be shooting weddings! Just depends what high end you want to aim for, what type of photographer, where you find your niche, what goals you have, etc. Regardless of all that - most will still fail to make it.

[RDKirk]

If you want to be a high end wedding or portrait photographer, live in the right area, and there's a need - then you have a chance.

You don't have to live in the right area, you have to market to the right area.

[fotoworx]

I wouldn't like to be paying all my bills from being a photographer.

[airfrogusmc]

You don't have to live in the right area, you have to market to the right area.

I shot med high end weddings and marketing was courting wedding consultants. Getting them to recommend you to their clients for a commission of course was KEY. So I got business from previous clients recommendations and wedding consultants. One of the most exclusive florists I knew didn't even have business cards and he turned more work away than he did. He had to want to do your wedding. I would also interview brides. When I switched to commercial/ advertising work 12 years ago and stopped doing weddings my min was $5500.

I have been supporting my family with photography full time since 1986 and theres nothing that I'd rather be doing. This past year has been a very good year and I credit that to having a niche and a steady loyal client base; repeat business which you won't get if you can't deliver the product and to just market and hit and run is not going to make in the future. A client base built on relationships is in my opinion the future and word of mouth and recommendations is what gets me in the door as is for many that work in niche markets. Knowing the market and people within that market is how I've built my business. And I'm glad I'm not in the wedding/portrait business today.

[MJPhotos24]

You don't have to live in the right area, you have to market to the right area.

When you're talking for a majority of photographers it will be in the area they live. This could be 30 minutes or 5 hours away, depends where the money is and what kind of travel the person wants to do and what demand that person is in, how good they are in marketing, etc. The high profile high end jobs are just not that common and it can be shown in the median salaries of photographers. If they were more common they'd be a lot higher. Of course they exist, but not easy to get. It's like a 10 year old wanting to play major league baseball, chances are not good that he will. It's the same in most fields - there's plenty of levels of any job and those high end ones are not easy. Then again, guess that could depend on what some consider high end.

[airfrogusmc]

When you're talking for a majority of photographers it will be in the area they live. This could be 30 minutes or 5 hours away, depends where the money is and what kind of travel the person wants to do and what demand that person is in, how good they are in marketing, etc. The high profile high end jobs are just not that common and it can be shown in the median salaries of photographers. If they were more common they'd be a lot higher. Of course they exist, but not easy to get. It's like a 10 year old wanting to play major league baseball, chances are not good that he will. It's the same in most fields - there's plenty of levels of any job and those high end ones are not easy. Then again, guess that could depend on what some consider high end.


I considered 5500 minimum med high end 12 years ago I would say 10K plus today would be high end today. You have to get in and learn the market. I worked for a very high end guy for several years and made connections and met the right consultants and catering managers at the top hotels and its all about connections and even more so about connections in what I do now. My clients right now would never hire a photographer for anything important from the internet or direct mail piece.

[MJPhotos24]

This past year has been a very good year and I credit that to having a niche and a steady loyal client base; repeat business which you won't get if you can't deliver the product and to just market and hit and run is not going to make in the future. A client base built on relationships is in my opinion the future and word of mouth and recommendations is what gets me in the door as is for many that work in niche markets. Knowing the market and people within that market is how I've built my business.
Ditto - and I'm in a niche market that is flooded with people giving it away and long history of not having much money to begin with, but is what I want to do even though there's more money elsewhere. The word of mouth though along with loyal clients is what does it for me and have done nothing but grow each year. 2010 is aiming to be the best year so far, and can't say I've ever really advertised. One ad in a magazine they gave me free and one in a program. Both were years ago and did nothing...all built on word of mouth and recommendations.

As for the florist - that does seem the way to go. I had a DJ ask me to team up with him as he doesn't advertise either but just booked all the time. Could have made a very good chunk of change - however, it's weddings and after doing two I stay away.

[MJPhotos24]

I considered 5500 minimum med high end 12 years ago I would say 10K plus today would be high end today. You have to get in and learn the market. I worked for a very high end guy for several years and made connections and met the right consultants and catering managers at the top hotels and its all about connections,even in what I do know. My clients right now would never hire a photographer for anything important from the internet or direct mail piece.
Definitely agree with that. Though, do have some clients that go cheap instead of right for important stuff which always turns into a mistake and they just don't seem to learn. Like I said, not the greatest market but love being in it and will expand into at least one other in the future as for past few years have been held back by something that is gone now!

[sapearl]

That's why a lot of us have regular FT jobs and have been doing this on the side for a number of years.;) I could not have survived on this alone - but it certainly helped send the kids to some pretty good colleges.

I wouldn't like to be paying all my bills from being a photographer.

[Nightstalker]

It seems to be getting darned hard to download CD-quality music directly off the internet.

I haven't found a source for WAV quality legal music downloads - TBH I don't think I've found a legal source that offers 320Kb's either. 128Kb/s or maybe 192Kb/s is typical fair and I agree that this is just not good enough.

When I can download a 9Mb file direct to my Phone from the internet in under 1 minute there is no reason for selling files commercially at 128Kb/s anymore.

[airfrogusmc]

And then theres the audiophile market and a renewed interest in vinyl.

[sapearl]

Who knows Allen, maybe fine art BW prints will make a comeback for a larger buying segment?;)

And then theres the audiophile market and a renewed interest in vinyl.

[airfrogusmc]

Who knows Allen, maybe fine art BW prints will make a comeback for a larger buying segment?;)

Can't hurt to hope :lol: Seriously I have a friend that coats her own platinum paper and makes these beautiful 2 1/4 X 2 1/4 contact prints and uses 8 ply white 16 X20 museum board. The presentation makes the images so intimate. The thick over mats also add to that feeling. Her work is AMAZING.

[RDKirk]

There is plenty of debate about the quality virtues of digital versus analog regarding both the best of digital music and the best of digital photography, but my fear is that too many people will settle for inarguable poor quality in either case.

[sapearl]

And that's very true for many folks...... they value the convenience and ease of use far more than the extra nuance of quality.

There is plenty of debate about the quality virtues of digital versus analog regarding both the best of digital music and the best of digital photography, but my fear is that too many people will settle for inarguable poor quality in either case.