It is interesting that everyone has a different idea of who photographers are. To you, Dave, they are the mass of snapshooters. To Mike they seem to be the average camera club Joes, and to Mark they are the art elite. I would submit that the perceptual cultural level of each of those groups has not changed much over the years, decades, or even centuries. Media for the first has always been sensationalized, the second has always been interested in technical perfection without much imagination, and the last in the long term financial value. Only the last has had the funds to preserve their collections and thus they have become the defacto classics.
Of course it has become a lot cheaper to preserve stuff these days, and since the proportions seem to be about 90, 9, and 1% respectively, Elvis and Starwars memorabilia will probably be the art standards of the future. David J Brooks wrote: > That could be true Mark. > > Many of the people i know around here have P&S's and are always > hitting the local Wally World or Shoppers Drug Mart and printing out > all of their pictures as 4x6's except one would quess, the clunkers. > > Volume rates are $0.19 per, with no developing fees, so i suppose they > see it as a cheap way of presenting prints to friends. > > Dave > > On 5/1/07, Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Tom C wrote: >>> I think that's part of Mike's point possibly. The web now seems to be, >>> pretty much, the defacto presentation medium for many photographers, >> Nope. For most average joes, the print is *still* king, thought it >> might seem surprising to us. And at the other end of the spectrum, >> pros and fine art photographers, print is still *the* medium. We in >> this forum don't perceive this because we're a self-selected group of >> people who are more web-aware. >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
