Jeff Spirer <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Maybe it's just me, but I'm motivated by photography created with > passion and inspiration. I don't care about the materials or how hard > the artist worked to create the print. Whether it's digital or > analog, took twenty minutes on the computer or a week in the darkroom, > that can't compare to passion and inspiration, which take a lifetime > to develop. That passion and inspiration can't be changed by the > materials, it can only be enhanced by them, whatever they are. I think this is the key point. Well, I'm willing in theory to believe in a coldly calculating artist pandering to my taste *so successfully that I love his work*, but I'm kinda skeptical that it'll happen in reality. The works that actually connect for me seem to have been created with emotional involvement by the artist. One reason digital is in my view a major step forward is that some people with the potential for the passion don't have the potential (or more likely the motivation or the discipline) to conquer the technicalities. Digital makes it much easier, *especially* early in the learning curve. Digital will help people climb up into technical adequacy who wouldn't have made it with film; and some of those people will have inspiration. Some of these people will make their important works in 4x5 film or something, but digital will still have helped get them started when they might have given up starting with film. (Passion, of course, will drive some people to climb the steepest learning curve anyway.) -- David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
