And some of us were concerned about cellphones...
BebuLamar wrote:
So if they can't sell enough "single purpose" cameras to make profit and they stop making them don't we have enough cameras already?
-------
There is never enough cameras.
jamesl wrote:
-------
There is never enough cameras.
So did you buy all of the ones on the market yet?
While it is very interesting that Technology can do these things, and over time they will no doubt get better at creating these approximations of reality , they are still just that, digital approximations. 'A' waterfall with mountains and trees... but never 'THE' waterfall with mountains and trees that you saw at a particular time in very specific light.
'A' human like face, but never the face of someone you love as you saw them.
There is no specificity or context.
Film has been 'dead' for 20 years, yet lots of people who so desire are using it
I do not see it as a threat as much as the evolution of technology that we could not stop if we wanted to.
It is not without issues, the 'discriminator' component of the technology can only work because it was 'trained' using real photographs either purchased or taken without the creator's permission.
But creative people always find a way to be creative, they show us new things , and familiar things in new ways.
I don't see that changing much.
Photography's magic has always been specificity, the ability to capture and preserve not only the Thing (event, location, person, action,_ but also context of time and light, and preserve it.
No matter how good, approximations can never be the thing itself.
Don't worry, be Happy......
AI will never be able to duplicate the thrill of watching bears catching fish or a herd of Bison surrounding by truck.
I'll stick to my cameras.
MrBob
Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama
burkphoto wrote:
Anyone remember the holodeck from Star Trek? Someone will always be trying to create another reality...
As for killing off "single purpose cameras," that happened a long time ago. These days, the device we carry in our pocket is likely a "smartphone," which is like a supercomputer connected to every other computer on the planet via cellular and WiFi Internet services. Its camera is capable of stills, video, FAX, barcode reading, and more. Add a few million potential applications via software, and you have a revolutionary tool.
Many of us still have dedicated photography tools, but even they are likely to be combination stills/video recording devices.
Anyone remember the holodeck from Star Trek? Someo... (
show quote)
I have mentioned this MANY time before and I will say it again... The Label needs to be changed from " Smartphone or Cell phone " to something More INCLUSIVE with all the potential capabilities these devices offer... For Apple, I like
" My i ".
MrBob wrote:
I have mentioned this MANY time before and I will say it again... The Label needs to be changed from " Smartphone or Cell phone " to something More INCLUSIVE with all the potential capabilities these devices offer... For Apple, I like
" My i ".
Plenty of folks run businesses with just a smartphone and a computer and an Internet connection. Heck, there are lots of folks running successful YouTube channels with little more than that.
alexol wrote:
...killing off "single purpose" cameras?
Another threat to photography at an entirely different level - link in the next post.
Technology relentlessly marches forward. Accept it, embrace it or try to hang on to the old ways. It’s the users choice. The level of frustration and enjoyment may vary depending on which of those paths the user takes.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.