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?
Not going to happen.
The word “digital” sells.
I do not agree. Digital Photography and Film Photography are not the same thing. Sure, the end result is an image captured, but no, not the same.
For someone who has started on film and to this day uses both mediums film & digital, stereotyping is
unnecessary in photography, it’s the end result that matters.
Agreed, Chase. I always say I am a photographer. If someone asks whether I would shoot their project with film or digital, I answer. I think the painting analogy is on point. Nobody says they are an “oil painter” or watercolor painter,” but rahter, a painter. Then, they proceed to discuss the tools and media.
I consider digital and film photography to be one in the same regarding photography as an art. Though there are different skills that are unique to each kind of photography, isn’t the objective the same for either side? Convey an idea through a captured moment in time? Never has it crossed my mind that I was exclusively a digital photographer. Just sayin’.
Thanks Chase!