Digital is a blanket term. Think of the root word: DIGIT. It's still all based on binary computing. At his point, it's all virtual, or synthetic, if you will. There's not much more that can replace something that's already an intangible. From a 'physical form' perspective, I think technological advancement has reached a saturation point. All that's really there are sequences of virtual 1's and 0's. There is no need to replace them. Maybe they can change the strands to 2's and 3's, but it's unnecessary.
I think the next phase will just be improvements to how data is collected, write speeds, and how that data is transfered from one console (camera body) to another console (computer, software, storage, output, etc.).
I think digital, and all that entails, from a sensor and CF card combination replacing film stocks, is here to stay. With the exception of 'digital' integration, all the other variables, glass for lenses, hardware for tripods, components for flash systems haven't changed, save for improvements in materials used.
Well ... every technology eventually gets replaced. 20 years back, if I'd asked "Film killed painting. What will kill film?" I may have gotten similar answers. Maybe we lack the imagination to see what's coming. I couldn't even imagine life in 2012 just ten years back.
What if they figure out how to capture images as the brain sees them? It'll still be digital, I guess.
saaketham wrote:
What if they figure out how to capture images as the brain sees them? It'll still be digital, I guess.
Precisely my point. I think the improvements will be to workflow, or more accurate representation of what we see as Humans. But, I think 'digital' is how it will be captured and displayed.
saaketham wrote:
"Film killed painting.
This is actually a GREAT point! However, you have to back up even further, about 100 years! Film actually helped give birth to 20th Century painting. In conjunction with Impressionism, which already had artists reevaluating representation on canvas, the lifelike reproduction of a camera's capabilities had artists seriously questioning why 'realism' was still so relevant when a camera could do it faster and easier.
The art world was liberated when it could finally move away from old conventions and internally look for inspiration. Say hello to Modernism, and so many great innovations because of it.
You have to consider that for centuries, art, as we know it, was commissioned by the most powerful entities in the world: religious institutions that desired lifelike paintings for narrative and celebratory reasons.
Imagine having the ability to visually convey yourself, but having to adhere to a certain 'standard'? It's personally suppressive, you can't grow as an artist. Finally having the ability to draw from your own inspiration, reactions, feeling and emotions, and letting the brush in your hand capture all of that in a new form is quite refreshing.
Also, remember that a lot of America's great 20th Century painters were German refugees, and a lot of their work, visually, was capturing that turmoil in their brush strokes. They also heavily drew form ancient African art, which is very utilitarian in its design. It would eventually evolve into the New York School of Painting movement, and ultimately, abstract expressionism.
That lead to viewers responding in a very interesting way: seeing forms and shapes for what they were (or weren't), and thinking about objects and spaces in very simplified forms. This would eventually lead to Minimalism, and why we all 'love' sixties design and decor. It was also a huge inspiration for one of our greatest architects, Frank Lloyd Wright. His greatest achievement was recognizing the qualities and beauty in nature, and building around and into that natural state, resulting in optically beautiful homes.
That's just one example, but these small instances all play a role in where we are today, including our digital lifestyles.
Maybe I'm too simple a soul. But, if someone has to explain a work of art to me, I am not interested. It should appeal to me. I shouldn't try to understand it because it appeals to the painter.
Imagine a writer writing a book and then explaining why it is a good book. Would he/she go too far? No. Now, there may be some readers of similar wavelength as hers, who may understand and appreciate the book. Some people force themselves to read Atlas Shrugged and other famous works just because some friend told him it's awesome. And it sometimes comes to a point where the reader is trying hard to like the book, but not enjoying it, just because he considers liking Atlas Shrugged is the only way to go. I have a crazy friend on FB who quotes Ayn Rand every single day on his FB wall. I've hidden him now.
I'm not telling you to like it, just sharing some historical context so you understand the role it's played in our culture. Like the work or not, it did play a major role in how we grew culturally.
In order to replace digital photography you need to replace digital recording and media first.
So, now analogue recording has been replaced by digital, what will replace digital. Hard for me to come up with an answer to that.
Not saying it wont happen, its just that its like trying to imagine a new primary colour.
A while back, film users could also not comprehend something replacing film, except better film, faster film, etc. We all lack imagination. As someone is supposed to have famously said "I didnt ask customers what they want, because if I had, they'd have said 'a faster horse'".
Digital is still very young in terms of media. I think it opened up a world of possibilities and we haven't tapped the full potential yet.
The photography devices will have to churn first. Cell phones are taking share from P&S. ILC's are trying to make a niche. DSLRs will be here for at least a while.
There is also the Lytro which is opening up another possibility, although I see it's application to be somewhat different from the photography that is being done by the people on this forum.
12/21/12, the end of the Mayan calendar, when a monster electo-magnetic pulse may be emitted that will turn all of the 0's to 1's (or vice-versa) and wipe out anything that has a magnetic base is about the only instance where digital photography is in jeopardy.
Should that happen, we would have bigger issues to worry about. What happens when a calendar ends? It just starts over. This could be as big as the Milennium Bug. Do I think this is going to happen? NO!!!
There's a semi-famous story, perhaps apocryphal, about the head of the US Patent Office in the late 1800s saying that the Office should be closed because, he concluded, "everything that could be invented, had been invented".
I hope that won't happen with digital. But I see your point.
Do I think this is going to happen? NO!!!