Does digital/computerized photography make it so easy to get great shots that it diminishes the labors of those who studied for years to master the skill of manipulating light and darkness the hard way?
How important to the photographic process is the selection of the subject matter anyway? 10%? 15%? More? Would it be a better photo if the aperture and shutter speed had been calculated instead of selected by the machine's internal computer? And isn't that what they are now? Machines?
The upper of the two downtown office building photos leads me to think of a piece of representational art trying to become non-representational. (My incipient dementia isn't allowing the term to come to mind.)
ReplyDeleteWherever it lands, I'm wondering if the result doesn't trump the method, as in "hand set vs machine set."