...is accessibility. It used to be there were barriers to entry in the photography world. You had to have a (for the time) expensive camera - either good 35mm or medium format. You had to know what you were doing with respect to film, filters, printing and developing. In the field, you had to be able to make the right choices with the technical side of things to bring the picture home. This was in addition to your ability to compose a shot and choose the correct moment. You also had to get it right more than you got it wrong, because film and developing did cost money - and space - and hassle. A person who could put all of that together was called a photographer.
Now most of this has changed. All of the "craft" stuff associated with film is gone. You don't need to know about film types or speeds because it can all be done in-camera. You don't need to know about developing because many pictures never see paper these days. If you need prints, you do them yourself on a $500 printer. Equipment is less expensive overall (adjusted for inflation) - a Rebel with a kit lens will produce great results in a pretty wide range of conditions. Adding a few pro lenses only makes it better.
But the biggest, most significant change is the fact that it cost almost nothing to take hundreds of photographs, and you can see if you are right while standing at the location. This changes everything. A person doesn't have to always be the best technically - they just have to be persistent and know which buttons to press to make the appropriate adjustments.
What this means is the value of the tradecraft has diminished significantly, and what you're left with is the actual art of photography. Good photographers have become better photographers in the digital world. Average to poor photographers are now seen for what they are because they can't hide behind a bunch of tradecraft that nobody understood. If you stink at composition, you have no excuses now.
It also means that people with little technical background but significant artistic skills can enter into the world of photography. Art directors are buying $1,000 digital cameras in droves and they are producing great work because they have excellent artistic and compositional skills. They still can't light worth a darn, and their files probably aren't as tight as a pro, but they are good enough for what they need.
This is the problem with doing photography as a business these days. Photographers used to have a monopoly because nobody wanted to tackle the technical side of taking photos. If you wanted an image, you had to go to a photographer. Now a huge number of images can be made just fine by the customer with their own cameras, and they can call the photographer only when they need something really special - or don't have time to do it themselves.
I think we're at a great point in photography. It is good that there are more people than ever taking photos. The emphasis should be on the art and not who has the magic combination of film and chemicals.
