Digital photography is kind of spoiling the art. With film, it was expensive so the 30 (or so) shots you took definitely had to count. Now, it's take hundreds of shots, weed out the bad, and photoshop the rest (not to say there was no post editing in the film days - it just took more skill back then). The good points of digital photography are many but it's making it all too easy, cheapening the art. Amirite?

77%Yeah You Are23%No Way
Brandyandtophatss avatar Art
0 3
The voters have decided that Brandyandtophats is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

Although I understand where you are coming from, photography, like everything else, has become more efficient, avalable, and easier as times have changed. That is not necessarily a bad thing. Besides, higher quality photographs on larger scales are still popular among profesionals. Perhapse, by making it more common, it sets the bar higher for the profesionals.

I don't think it really cheapens the art. If someone could only take thirty pictures and they were all bad, it wouldn't be better than someone who had infinite shots (or until the memory card fills up, I guess) and took a really beautiful picture.

The value of art is not based on the level of effort put into it, it's about the finished product. It being easier does not make it cheaper.

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.