The ugly truth??

[tbcass]

The serious young photographers I meet carrying dedicated cameras today (and I do meet them) are almost all shooting film, often in a street or documentary style. Reminds me rather a lot of my own youth.

I haven't seen anybody shooting with film in a very long time.

I haven’t seen many people using dedicated cameras full stop

What do you mean by full stop? I see people using cameras all the time but not as many as in the past. Where I used to see people using P&S cameras I now see people using smartphones. Our experiences are why anecdotal evidence isn't reliable.

 

[tbcass]

There's nothing wrong with using a phone camera for day-to-day use but being the tight ass I am I can't accept phone quality for even snapshots.

 

[Overrank]

The serious young photographers I meet carrying dedicated cameras today (and I do meet them) are almost all shooting film, often in a street or documentary style. Reminds me rather a lot of my own youth.

I haven't seen anybody shooting with film in a very long time.

I haven’t seen many people using dedicated cameras full stop

What do you mean by full stop? I see people using cameras all the time but not as many as in the past. Where I used to see people using P&S cameras I now see people using smartphones. Our experiences are why anecdotal evidence isn't reliable.

Sorry, colloquialism - full stop in the UK means the same as period in the USA. It means “I haven’t seen many people using dedicated cameras at all”.

 

[BackToNature1]

So basically you aren't saying they couldn't be great photographers, it's just that was never likely their intent. Regardless of device being used. So unless most actually spend time learning to doing so, unless one has some natural ability, that's basically where it ends. Snapshots.

 

[Gato Amarillo]

...

For ps5 and games, the system lasts for 5-6 years and the games are constantly on sale. So, compared to cameras, mere pennies. New cameras are out of reach for the vast, vast majority of people due to high prices.

The same is true with high-end smartphones that have the best cameras. Such luxuries have always been out of reach for many people. Back in 1970, a good SLR with a 50mm lens cost about $150, $1145 in today's dollars.

My last serious 35mm SLR, a Canon F1 with motor drive, was about $1,800 in the mid 1980s. An online calculator tells me that's about $4800 in today's money. Body only, no lens.

And don't forget the film. In my commercial business I might spend $500 a month for film and lab costs -- something like $1,300 a month today.

Gato

 

[yardcoyote]

Try visiting a small press comic or zine show, or any kind of maker space, or one of those oddities and curiosities shows. You may even see a TLR in action.

 

[yardcoyote]

I am not a huge fan of this heavily processed type of image, but that water lily is awfully nice.

 

[LeicaEye]

Try visiting a small press comic or zine show, or any kind of maker space, or one of those oddities and curiosities shows. You may even see a TLR in action.

I think as an overall picture cellphone/cameras are the go to, many many others who have cellphone/cameras choose to use and have preference for more orthodox cameras (film/digital) The whole subject is a no go area. Mainly because everyone has a different view, right or wrong, I use both a cellphone/camera when the situation requires and my orthodox cameras on what I call a shoot'... L

 

[Chris Noble]

Usually better to avoid shooting directly into the sun. Technique is more important than equipment.

I disagree in this case. It was done intentionally for the effect.

Interesting. I've seen many cases where shooting into the sun contributes to the esthetics of the image... but not in this case. To each their own.

 

[BrentSchumer]

The hobby with level out at at a smaller number of true hobbyists.

For a while you needed a compact camera or DSLR to take ANY picture: artsy, "bookmark", and everything in between. Many people bought dedicated cameras to get their photos, not because they wanted to operate a camera. Now that everyone can take a good photo with modern smartphones, only specialized types of photography and people who use cameras as a hobby will bother with carrying a dedicated device.

I'm sure if you went back to 1986 you would find some magazine writer complaining about how Fuji disposable cameras were ruining the hobby by allowing people to take pictures without learning exposure or focus. It's the exact same thing, except today's phone photos are 1,000x higher quality.

Photography is more popular than at any other time in human history. You just don't like the shapes of the devices used.

 

[Bob A L]

Agree on being the most popular time ever for interest in photography. And one of the best across the board. Those who say how bad phone cam photos are have either forgotten, or have never seen any of the photos from the old 126 and 110 instamatics from the olden days, or for that matter from the Kodak brownies that preceded the instamatics. And you could even include most 35mm point and shoot cameras in this comparison. If you care to compare you will find just how good phone cams are today compared to what people used to use for their family photos.

 

[LeicaEye]

Agree on being the most popular time ever for interest in photography. And one of the best across the board. Those who say how bad phone cam photos are have either forgotten, or have never seen any of the photos from the old 126 and 110 instamatics from the olden days, or for that matter from the Kodak brownies that preceded the instamatics. And you could even include most 35mm point and shoot cameras in this comparison. If you care to compare you will find just how good phone cams are today compared to what people used to use for their family photos.

L

 

[Gary Martin]

<Old man shakes fist at cloud>

 

[Glen Barrington]

Facts really don't care about our feelings.

But you will lose a great hobby only if you stop taking photos.

 

[joeletx]

I'm just coming to the end of 3 weeks holiday in the SW of England, , I've been to a variety of attractions and historic places and have taken loads of shots. What dismays me is how many actual cameras I saw being used ,5 to be exact. Only one of those were used by a young person the rest much older. I love my photography but I'm usually the only one with a camera surrounded by dozens of selfie taking phones , they take a shot and send it to all their friends while I,'m still getting my camera put of my bag.I have given 3 dslrs away to relatives who said they wanted to take up photography but have hardly ever used them. So what's the future ? a few expensive cameras aimed at pro's ? I hope not because a good hobby will be lost.

I thought you were going to say, the ugly truth is photography is a bigger hobby than ever and only suckers buy expensive cameras when modern cell phones produce better results for 99.99% of the population.

My kids take photos with their phones that are amazing and could be mistaken for high end pro work.

 

[pmgnut]

The hobby with level out at at a smaller number of true hobbyists.

For a while you needed a compact camera or DSLR to take ANY picture: artsy, "bookmark", and everything in between. Many people bought dedicated cameras to get their photos, not because they wanted to operate a camera. Now that everyone can take a good photo with modern smartphones, only specialized types of photography and people who use cameras as a hobby will bother with carrying a dedicated device.

I'm sure if you went back to 1986 you would find some magazine writer complaining about how Fuji disposable cameras were ruining the hobby by allowing people to take pictures without learning exposure or focus. It's the exact same thing, except today's phone photos are 1,000x higher quality.

Photography is more popular than at any other time in human history. You just don't like the shapes of the devices used.

This is true. I think another element here is many of us { me for one} simply love using a bagful of traditional gear, it just goes along with the hobby { like gear for anything else}.

 

[LeicaEye]

I'm just coming to the end of 3 weeks holiday in the SW of England, , I've been to a variety of attractions and historic places and have taken loads of shots. What dismays me is how many actual cameras I saw being used ,5 to be exact. Only one of those were used by a young person the rest much older. I love my photography but I'm usually the only one with a camera surrounded by dozens of selfie taking phones , they take a shot and send it to all their friends while I,'m still getting my camera put of my bag.I have given 3 dslrs away to relatives who said they wanted to take up photography but have hardly ever used them. So what's the future ? a few expensive cameras aimed at pro's ? I hope not because a good hobby will be lost.

I thought you were going to say, the ugly truth is photography is a bigger hobby than ever and only suckers buy expensive cameras when modern cell phones produce better results for 99.99% of the population.

My kids take photos with their phones that are amazing and could be mistaken for high end pro work.

That is great! Why don't you talk them into becoming smartphone wedding photographer.

I didn't know 'smartphones' got married! L

 

[LeicaEye]

The hobby with level out at at a smaller number of true hobbyists.

For a while you needed a compact camera or DSLR to take ANY picture: artsy, "bookmark", and everything in between. Many people bought dedicated cameras to get their photos, not because they wanted to operate a camera. Now that everyone can take a good photo with modern smartphones, only specialized types of photography and people who use cameras as a hobby will bother with carrying a dedicated device.

I'm sure if you went back to 1986 you would find some magazine writer complaining about how Fuji disposable cameras were ruining the hobby by allowing people to take pictures without learning exposure or focus. It's the exact same thing, except today's phone photos are 1,000x higher quality.

Photography is more popular than at any other time in human history. You just don't like the shapes of the devices used.

This is true. I think another element here is many of us { me for one} simply love using a bagful of traditional gear, it just goes along with the hobby { like gear for anything else}.

For many many years hobby photographers only had a 50mm or a 35mm on their cameras. The advance in computerized lens design allowed far better Zooms than had ever been thought possible.. Good for you if you want to lug around bags full of gear.. Me, with one good zoom I can take a range of photos and enjoy myself, without a mega cardio workout.. L

 

[Trevor Carpenter]

In the areas that interest me, birds, aviation and insects there are many more real cameras than there have ever been. Almost every birder now carries a camera probably a 50 fold increase over thirty years ago. At airshows the value of the kit on show is mindboggling. Once again many more than 30 years ago. If you look for positives in camera growth they are there.

 

[tbcass]

Usually better to avoid shooting directly into the sun. Technique is more important than equipment.

I disagree in this case. It was done intentionally for the effect.

Interesting. I've seen many cases where shooting into the sun contributes to the esthetics of the image... but not in this case. To each their own.

The photographer liked it. That's all that matters. BTW, I like the photo as well.

--
Tom