I can appreciate this, but it is not really the main thrust of my thinking. In having watched this unfurl for many years, I often get the feeling the move to digital is a smaller wave on top of a pretty big one at least in terms of social changes and their impact. I think in the next 20 years, we are going to see huge changes in what photography becomes, I am trying to keep an open mind as to how that might work out, but those changes be a comin' man.....

Been using "Post capture" for 20 years now, you learn, it's easy, and I will continue to use it for that work along with motion programs. But the whole idea of what a photograph is, is too changing and in much broader terms than most can perceive. I have no idea where it is all going, so I think about what is important to me and stick to what feels right.

In a way, photography is like life, you choose a path and get on with it.

Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
I'm annoyed by this sort of hanky-wringing. Photography isn't capture-media specific. Just as many dolts shot crappy pix with a Spotmatic as they do now with a Rebel dslr. Post-capture manipulation isn't easy. Learning curves for most professional editing programs can be more like a rock face. Great photographs are still being made, whatever the medium. But obsolescence is what you get when you sit still and shut down.

Several friends have started using tablet PCs for presentation to clients rather than hanging work in online galleries. Their clients like holding these "proofs" or seeing them on a large LCD screen, thanks to the tablets' HDMI connection. They have gone back to film recently for some of their work, especially b&w, and tell me that clients can see the difference--and pay for it.

It's the direction I'm going since my lab will now print only from digital files. I'll continue to use film creatively as long as it's available but hybrid workflow can't be dissed as something less than photography as you're defining it.