[ QUOTE ]
Before digital cameras, it took a lot of investment to be a photographer
[/ QUOTE ]
It still takes a lot of investment to be a true "photographer". It's just now it doesn't take as much investment in "equipment" to produce photos.
[ QUOTE ]
The downside-- the advent of digital photography has allowed a lot of crappy photographers and scam artists to enter our business
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. The growth of "crappy" photographers (these words shouldn't even be a part of the same sentence) has certainly begun to saturate the "world" of selling photographs. I prefer to voice it this way, " digital cameras have brought in their wake, a slew of poor shooting picture takers who turn around and sell their pictures at high fees to 'suckers born every min'."
With technology comes ease. As you consider that anyone can own a camera and take a decent picture without knowing a thing about f-stops, shutter speeds, depth of field, etc. Even film was being made to take the "complexity" out of producing good images.
In the end however, the Quality is usually set apart from the rest. Knowledge and experience pay off.
GOOD PHOTOGRAPHY is still an ART form.
Greg
[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]
|