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 couldn’t agree more with you! Whether digital or film.. Photography is photography! It is an art regardless of the process in which capturing the image!
Do you think by adding “digital” in front of photography it is taking away from the importance of it? I’m of the impression that most people just assume photographers are using digital cameras these days. It isn’t a question we get asked much anymore. More commonly, we’ll have the question: “What type/model/brand of camera do you shoot with?” I always answer back… “I big black one” because our point is it isn’t the type of camera you use, it’s what you do with it. I think it’s our job as photographers to sell our artistic vision and our mastery of our trade more than anything else. Then it doesn’t matter if it’s digital photography or photography… it’s Art.
I had a planner at a wedding ask me the other day to go ahead and switch to “black & white” while shooting b/c she felt it would portray a different “feel”. I kinda wanted to laugh for a min since I shoot all digitally. I just looked at her and smiled and said… ok I sure will.
I think MOST people assume that photographers shoot digitally but some still ask. So I think it’s sometimes necessary to say “digital photography”
I pretty much started with digital cameras so the whole film thing is a little foreign to me. I couldn’t imagine not being able to have that instant gratification of looking at an image right away. Props to you film folks.
I’m really bored with the comments from film shooters suggesting you can just take any old exposure wth digital and then create the image you want later in post. Sure shooting RAW gives you some latitude, but you better be close if you want a high quality print. And film gave us plenty of lattitude in the higlights, I didn’t have to worry much about overexposure in black and white with film and I didnt have to do any post if I used a lab (I did a lot of my own dark room work though).
But this idea that film is somehow pure and digital is cheating is rubbish, if you’re such a purist why use (relatively) modern film, thats cheating isn’t it? Autofocus? light meters? in camera metering? zoom lenses? Where do you draw the line? And what about darkroom techniques like dodging and burning?
Let me ask you this, if you shoot 35mm film would it piss you off if I demanded you specifically state that it’s 35mm film photography because I shoot MF and I want people to understand what you’re doing is inferior. Or that I only shoot prime lenses so you should call yours 35mm zoom lense photography. Or maybe you should have to say which brand of camera/lens you are using.
BTW it’s only photographers that even care about any of this, most people wouldn’t know or care about any of these differences. It’s like trying to get my gf to hear the difference between CD and vinyl.