I heard it again yesterday for the billionth time: “Digital Photography”. Isn’t it time we drop the word ‘digital’?
Seems we’ve managed to drop the “electric” from “electric guitar” in common parlance.
We found it easy to drop the word “acrylic” from “acrylic painting” when that came on the scene with oils.
We quickly ditched the “digital” from “digital music” when it took the lead over records and tapes and CDs.
I suppose by-and-large our industry has dropped the word, but given that digital and analog photography are fundamentally the same thing, isn’t it time we implore the rest of the world to assimilate the term “digital photography” back into “photography” as a whole?
I prefer to be called a digital photographer. Bobby digital photographer.
I know in french, I’m french canadian, “digital photography” mean “photography with your finger” and we should say muneric photography to refer to photography take by electronic device.
But I really don’t know in english.
I’m actually defending your view as a person for my Photo Processes class right now.
http://chasingstaphon.blogspot.com
I’m going through and proving that you only need the phone that is with you to take great photos by taking photos with my iPhone and reviewing camera apps.
Chase, I totally agree. Its superfluous and somewhat redundant. Photography is photography whether its a DSLR, film, point-and-shoot or mobile.
There is a difference, a visible difference. They are different processes. As “photography” they are two different approaches to making images. They are two different image making “tools.” Similar to the difference between oil paint and water color. They are different, it’s that simple.