> I guess the cycle is repeating, the gap in quality between most photographs
> and the few is widening again, returning to
> when the masses took generally awful pics with the likes of Instamatics and
> those with serious equipment and results are
> few.
Why else do you think Mark Z spent a billion dollars buying Instagram?
You need Instagram to make those nasty pictures look nasty and cool.
Honestly, I don't think there is anything new to all this. I've seen
more DRebels with smeared, dirty and fingerprinted lenses than I care
to see. The grunge is just horrible. But the users are oblivioius.
Back in 1989 when I was working photo retail, the average AE-1 that
came into the shop looked just like that too. The brand-x lenses
(always brand-x to save a few bucks) had a cheep glass "skylight"
filter on it that you couldn't even see through. (Don't mean to pick
on Canon users, because they weren't alone--it's just that Canon did
seem to be the most successful company at promoting their SLR products
to the masses).
AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|