Has technology today made great photography less impressive?

Good topic.

No.

But it has made decent to good photography less impressive. I never see iPhone shots from a non-photographer where I go "holy shite that's really good". But I do see plenty of phone camera shots that capture a candid much better than the point and shoots of old and that previously would have required some advanced amateur/enthusiast gear to get most of the time.

As for a family photographer, it's hit or miss. So many newborn/family/portrait folks are suburban women with basic DSLRs who do exactly what you say. It's not surprising when you think about the type drawn to that style of work. Unfortunately, many of those photographers would be wrecked by a decent weekender who can put together a good landscape/street/etc. composition. I've seen a lot of embarrassingly bad "pro" wedding/family shoots.

My brother started out in photography and does marketing.

He used to work really hard at getting a good photo. Now he just needs a few shots and does the rest on the computer. He doesn’t stress about the actual photo taking much at all anymore.

quote:

---

The camera doesn't buy itself. The accessories don't buy themselves. The lighting rigs, the customer acquisition, the time they spend actually sorting through all those shots, then some cleaning up with more technology, all that is time and/or money. Then there's profit on top of that. Nobody works for free.

---

This isn’t a complaining about paying thread it was just an example and you proved my point. Basically anyone with the means could go buy the equipment and do the job, not a lot of skill involved anymore.

You chose a bad photographer. There’s no comparison between a phone and a DSLR. An iPhone can take a great picture, and it’s convenient. But, you’d never use it if you need to take a great picture.

this photographer didn’t use an IPhone

Btw this wasn’t supposed to be a rag on the photographer who took my family photos, they came out great and we were super happy with them. It was more of a thread about how much simpler it is to take a great photo now that cameras are so advanced

I looked over old family pictures recently. These were random 80s and 90s pictures. The fact that these were not ultra high resolution made it vintage and really brings back the memories. I wouldn’t want to change them.

quote:

---

sort through the thousands of photos later to find a few epic ones.

---

They basically did the same before digital photography. It's just cheaper and easier today...

quote:

---

Has technology today made people less impressive?

---

Fixed it for you

quote:

---

Basically anyone with the means could go buy the equipment and do the job, not a lot of skill involved anymore.

---

Then go do it.

This is like when people complain about painters who focus on the abstract or sports journalists who spout bad takes.

If you can do the same job better and it's something you desire to do or can replace your current low-paying profession, go do it.

There are so many avenues of discussion here. I just want to say most people have no clue how to distinguish great photography from good amateur photography. Even generic art critics (who haven't studied photography) are clueless.

Most people have no idea that taking a selfie at arm's length makes your face look distorted and bad. But even people who recognize the distortion think that it's because of the wide-angle lens (the real reason is the camera-to-face distance). Because people don't understand photography, their standards are very low. People just want to look good in photos, and they want their scenery photos to be sharp and well-exposed. Digital cameras have made it possible to take more of those shots, but that doesn't make the pictures great, and digital cameras don't improve an amateur's chances of shooting a great wedding album, or any event where you have just one chance to capture a moment.

If study photography a little bit, you will see the world very differently.