Kevin Waterson wrote: > > [cut, snip] > >My problem is that photography has become more of a production line >than an art. Many have argued that only the capture mode has changed >and rather than a darkroom, everything can be done on a computer. Wrong. >All these things can be _simulated_ on a computer, which is an entirely >different technology. Sure, there is an 'art' to computer enhancement >and digital manipulation, but what of the art of photography. It seems >to me it has been replaced by 'digital workflow' and other buzzwords. > > [cut, snip]
Chemical photography is just as buzz-word laden and technical as digital photography. It can be just as much of a "production-line" as work done on a computer. If you've decided that a digital workflow doesn't speak to you and a chemical one does, that's fine. It seems to me that you are criticizing digital as a medium because it does not "scratching your itch"
