civilized ku # 135 ~ mindlessly sucking up whatever they spit out
Thursday, December 11, 2008 at 09:35AM 
The color of reflected light • click to embiggenOK, OK. I get it but let me say one thing first - this entry is NOT a knock against Mike Johnston - the hardest working blogger in the photography blog-o-sphere - of The Online Photographer. Mike seems to be doing what is required of him by his audience and, in doing so, he has craved out quite a niche for himself. Good for him. But ...
I have been resisting this topic for quite a while now because:
1. I risk beating a dead horse to death ...
2. I risk just singing to the choir (at least a good part of the choir found here on The Landscapist)...
3. I risk annoying the pig - never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of your time and it really annoys the pig and ...
4. I risk (as previously mentioned) making an unintentional barb aimed at M. Johnston
Nevertheless, here is a continuation of ...
Another reason why I dislike photographers.
Over the past few days on TOP, MJ has made two back-to-back entries - one titled The Canon 5D Mark II: In the House, the other labeled MOCA in Peril (MOCA = The Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles) along with its companion piece Here’s How to Rescue a Museum at the Brink. The first entry was accompanied by numerous comparo pictures of the Canon 5D Mark II and the Nikon D700. The second entry had a picture of the MOCA.
Obviously, the former entry is about gear and the latter is about a "civic cultural treasure" in peril that has become "one of the essential windows on the restless, searching, cosmopolitan creativity of this city's 21st century spirit."
In case you don't know where this is headed, I'll make it plain right now - the number of comments posted on the gear entry, 48. Number of comments on the MOCA entry, 3.
Another outstanding example of the Be quiet, Benson. Show me more, Benson. Show me, show me, subscriber trunk dialing. I must know everything ... philosophy of what it means to be human. Or you could view it as just another attempt to acquire the most fabulous object in the world.
Is there any wonder why camera manufactures are so f**king wrapped up in such a new-model-intro frenzy that seems to have at its heart only the craven desire to dip deep into the pockets of what I would label as the dumb-ass gear-headed suckers?
Does anyone else out there, other than me, think that this frenetic endeavor has reached a level of near insanity? I mean, so many (99.9%) of these "new" camera models (from the simplest P&S to the ultra high-end dslrs) offer little more than minutely incremental "improvements" or, worse yet, "features" so dumb as to be nearly useless - the recently introduced Smile Detection feature as an example. That's right, smile detection, not face detection - which itself is quite frankly about as dumb as it gets.
Sure, sure. The camera manufacturers are just trying to apply modern technology to George Eastman's marketing genius - "You push the button. We do the rest". George knew that the trolls would never be able to tell the difference between the opening of an aperture and that of the dark smelly opening that their heads are buried in. So, in order to sell his product, he had to dumb it down to their level.
I can deal with that marketing objective with no real problem except, of course, for the absurd level to which it has been elevated in today's crass-consumption culture.
And therein lies my core issue. What's going on in the camera market is the exact same thing that has been going on in so many other market segments, the same thing that has driven us to the brink of economic ruin - the blatant desire on the part of the business class to amass as much money as possible within the shortest amount of time as possible by any means possible - no matter the consequence(s).
Without a doubt, the term responsible long-time growth and development has nearly vanished from the lexicon of the business class and, perhaps even more importantly, the consumer class trolls and suckers have bought into the supporting belief - quite literally and figuratively - that they can have it all now by any means possible (easy credit and unsustainable debt) no matter the consequence(s).
The unprecedented mess in which we currently find ourselves is no less than the total unraveling, failure and collapse of both of those premises. And have no doubt about it, there will be a collapse in camera market.
The signs are already there. One obvious sign is plummeting prices as manufacturers and merchants try to unload unsold inventory. Once that is accomplished merchant inventories will stay at very low levels which means that manufacturers will be cutting back in production and so-called "development". There will be consolidation of model lines and, in all probability, the consolidation and liquidation of camera manufacturers as well.
My only regret in all of this is that I will never get to be the Camera Czar who heads up the bailout and restructuring of the camera industry in this country. If for no other reason than the fact that there is no camera industry in this country. A fact which is another sad chapter in the saga of industries invented and founded in this country that no longer exist because we can get it cheaper elsewhere - but don't get me started on that topic.
In any event, while on the one hand I wish to cast no aspersions at Mike Johnston, on the other hand the adage - if you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem - does come to mind. And fanning the flames of desire and consumption is definitely part of the problem. In fact, and IMO, fanning the flames of desire and consumption is the problem that is at the root of it all.
That is why, here on The Landscapist, I am focused on the medium and its possibilities for exploring what it means to be human rather than on, as so many others do (consciously or not), what it takes to be a human consumption machine (photography -wise).
gravitas et nugalis
Featured Comment: Paul Maxim wrote: "The point is, to transition from a "consumer" economy to some more reasonable and rational business model is going to be very, very painful for everyone. Personally, I don't think Americans have the stomach for doing it. I don't think the majority want to give up the lifestyles they're used to, even though it landed them in hopeless debt. Sooner or later, the economy will "come back", and it will still be based on the consumer model. In America, sadly, that's what it means to "be human"."
my response: Without a doubt, unless we (and our children and their children, ad infinitum) want to endlessly repeat the cycle of irrational exuberance boom and horrendously unbearable bust - which in this day and age will come with increasingly rapid frequency - we must transition to a "more reasonable and rational business model". We must figure out how make things (not just money) again as opposed to just consuming the things that someone else makes.
To accomplish this will require a herculean effort (from everyone, top to bottom) to engage in new ways of thinking and living. Americans may not have the "stomach" for it but, in fact, they may have little choice in as much as most of the "lifestyles they're used to" may be literally taken away from them as they "transition" from boom to bust in the form of foreclosures, bankruptcies, and job loss.
There will be "pain" - some real, some imagined - involved in the transition. However, call me crazy, I would like to think that, with the right leadership in government and the business class, a variety of programs and initiatives might be forthcoming that could ease the way.
My biggest worry, whenever I think about "the right leadership in government and the business class", is the dulcet strains of the Everly Bothers' song, Dream, playing softly in the background of my mind:
Drea-ea-ea-ea-eam, dream, dream, dream
Drea-ea-ea-ea-eam, dream, dream, dream
I hope I don't turn out to be Cathy's Clown - or is that Barrack's Clown?
gravitas et nugalis
Featured Comment: Charlie wrote: "You do seem to have it out for TOP and the "gear posts" Just curious...how many cameras have you purchased in the past 3 years?"
my response: No, I don't "have it out" for TOP or Mike Johnston. However, I am fairly sick of all the gear discussions / comments that seem to prattle on and on and on and on ... ad nauseam to point of inanity. However, the point of this entry was two-fold: to disparage the endless parade of so called "new & improved" cameras, and, the fact that, given a choice to comment on gear or a topic related to the survival of an institution of the Arts, photographers overwhelmingly choose the former.
My new camera count for the past 3 years is; 3 dslrs, 1 high-end P&S, 2 mid-level P&S.
And, sure, sure, I did do some research before I purchased the cameras but .... my research did NOT include reading a sea of totally irrelevant comments on photo forums or sites like TOP about those reviews.
To be honest, I don't put a whole lot of faith in reviews themselves as well simply because, in the digital domain, so many of the results of camera testing are based upon the image qualities obtained by RAW conversion software and those qualities can be all over the map from any given camera depending upon the conversion software used by the reviewer.
So, all I really do when I research a camera is to do a quick google search with the camera make and model, find a few reviews, and skim the conclusions just to get a sense of the camera that I am interested in.
Reader Comments (9)
Mike does tend to draw a lot of gear-heads for his readership.
But the essential thing here is that the gear reviews are relevant to most readers. The fact that MOCA LA ran themselves bankrupt (their problems result from flagrant fiscal incompetence, not other issues) really only affects LA locals as well as the small subset of non-locals who may want to visit MOCA LA someday.
It's got very little relevance to the vast majority of his readers. And thus they didn't comment on it.
Mike has ads on his site and makes money from traffic. He's trying to increase traffic by catering to what draws more readers in. Full frame cameras are all the rage right now and several new ones have been recently released. It's a hot topic. And these are professional bloggers, not hobbyist bloggers.
And by the way, I believe our consumerist culture is on the wane, for a little while anyway. Living on debt has proved to be not such a wise choice.
A lot of topics in one posting! But I liked it, especially the part about the overwhelming gear interest.
I bought a digital camera (LX3) in September, so I'm part of that crowd. On the other hand, my previous camera was five years old, which I have used as a reason for the purchase. (It is still working, so why did I go and buy another?)
But with 17,000 photos already taken with the LX3, it probably will not last five years, though. Is excessive photography also a kind of consumerism?
I am not a great reader of Mike Johnston's blog comments. But I find that some forums are quite amusing and entertaining if followed with some sense of humor. I've always liked non sense and unintentional parody.
The movie was great, thanks (time bandits is another great moral philosophy piece).
And given that we are on movies your post of today, also thanks to a previous statement about Jesuits, reminded me this one.
I think people try to buy gear to make up for a lack of practice. Buy your way ahead - a lot like golf, and equally successful.
I don't disagree with anything you've said here, Mark. The problem (as I'm sure you already know) is that 2/3 of the U.S. economy depends on consumer spending. The ironies in all of that are visible everywhere.
On the one hand, we're told that we should consume less oil so that we'll be less dependent on foreign producers. Well, now we are consuming less. But the "solution" has also become a problem - the decreasing revenues for gasoline are impacting other aspects of the economy. Can layoffs at even Exxon Mobil be far off?
And what of the auto industry? People have simply stopped buying new cars. The era of having a new car in the driveway every two years is probably over. From an environmental standpoint, that's a good thing, I guess. But it's going to cost us millions of jobs. Which means less consumer spending, which means more layoffs in other industries, etc., etc.
The point is, to transition from a "consumer" economy to some more reasonable and rational business model is going to be very, very painful for everyone. Personally, I don't think Americans have the stomach for doing it. I don't think the majority want to give up the lifestyles they're used to, even though it landed them in hopeless debt. Sooner or later, the economy will "come back", and it will still be based on the consumer model. In America, sadly, that's what it means to "be human".
Mark,
You do seem to have it out for TOP and the "gear posts" Just curious...how many cameras have you purchased in the past 3 years?
I was not aware you purchased so many cameras in the last three years. Please cut back, or buy cameras that do not all look alike so i know when to complain.