Future of photography?

[DavidT]

I notice that many of us myself included are not spring chickens. One of the local photo clubs that I have participated a couple of times with over the last couple of years I find that I am the youngest person (I am 47) that is a member. Most are retired with a few of us still working but they are in their late 50's. I am not sure but do schools still have photography programs? I wonder in another 20-40 years as technology advances and all of us dinosaurs who grew up on film are gone will there still be a photography community like we have here?

I wonder if there is more our generation should be doing to pass down the love of photography to a younger generation growing up with smart phones and social media?

 

[bleirer]

I notice that many of us myself included are not spring chickens. One of the local photo clubs that I have participated a couple of times with over the last couple of years I find that I am the youngest person (I am 47) that is a member. Most are retired with a few of us still working but they are in their late 50's. I am not sure but do schools still have photography programs? I wonder in another 20-40 years as technology advances and all of us dinosaurs who grew up on film are gone will there still be a photography community like we have here?

I wonder if there is more our generation should be doing to pass down the love of photography to a younger generation growing up with smart phones and social media?

Take a western road trip in early August anywhere near Sturgis. It's the old people that can afford the decked out Harleys. When I was a kid interested in photography I was still in the minority. It was an expensive hobby and most kids were not like me spending on photo chemicals and bulk film loaders and saving for a better enlarger. Still photography is and will be strong, stronger than ever with everyone carrying a camera in their pocket.

 

[EricBowles]

This is relatively common across all camera groups. I do see a lot of professionals who are younger, but it's the start of a career or a gig for them. In relative terms, there are not many pros compared to all the amateur photographers. It's even more the case for wildlife and nature compared to wedding, portrait, and baby photography.

There are several things driving the age of photographers. It takes disposable income and time to be able to afford a camera, possibly a camera club, and the time to spend on photography. Add to that the economics associated with travel for wildlife photography, and the market gets quite limited.

There are many younger people taking photos and video with phones over cameras. Part of that is that they own a smart phone that is quite capable, so it's essentially free as far as gear is concerned.

One thing I have seen is entry to the enthusiast market seems to be strong in the mid to late 40's and older. That's a point where income is up, kids are in college, and time is increasingly available.

NANPA has made several pushes to attract young nature photographers. Even giving away membership for free and deep discounts on activities are not sufficient to create a significant number of members. Renewals are much lower than other demographic groups. I don't think the economics make sense to bother with the effort, and the resources are much better spent on age 45 and older segments.

 

[Ductape]

My youngest son managed to take one or two photo classes in college. Didn't get the joy of sniffing all those chemicals, but I think he has a good concept of his camera and adobe products.

 

[DavidT]

I bought my first camera at 12 with my own money. My dad took pictures now and than and that was the original attraction. Than I got into high school and joined the yearbook staff for all 4 years. That is when the bug really took hold. Fast forward to 47 and I like others have the disposable income and the toys are much nicer but I doubt I would have ever gotten into photography if I waited till 40's. That is why I wonder if the youth of the world is taking up this hobby or if the smart phone and social media has changed their view of photography, no longer an art just a quick means of communication.

 

[Woodyg3]

I remember when Kodak Instamatics came out in the '60s and serious photographers were worried that it was the end of real photography, and that "snap shots" would be all that anyone took in the future.

I think there are many young people who are still interested in real photography, but let's face the fact that it is not a cheap endeavor, and it does take time. Many younger folks are busy with new careers, family, education, etc. and don't have much time or extra income. I know I didn't do a great deal of photography in my 30s and 40s.

 

[Ductape]

The smart phone features make it easy for anyone with a phone to take fun shots. With this simplicity comes a lot of cell phone photo's, but does not necessarily develop a passion. Like you, I got my first camera at 12, some sort of 110 instamatic, it was what was affordable, a hassle for a 12 year old to acquire and develop the film. I would have been much better off with an old phone.

From all those cell phone picture takers, I have no doubt some will develop a passion for photography and desire more than their phone may offer. I I am sure some will develop a way to even get paid for their efforts. There is no going back though. There are now a gazillion photo's taken every day. A shot has to be pretty unique to stand out.

 

[Dan291]

I notice that many of us myself included are not spring chickens. One of the local photo clubs that I have participated a couple of times with over the last couple of years I find that I am the youngest person (I am 47) that is a member. Most are retired with a few of us still working but they are in their late 50's. I am not sure but do schools still have photography programs? I wonder in another 20-40 years as technology advances and all of us dinosaurs who grew up on film are gone will there still be a photography community like we have here?

I wonder if there is more our generation should be doing to pass down the love of photography to a younger generation growing up with smart phones and social media?

You made me curious. At 19 (ahem… 1972), I was enrolled in a split major of Photography (BFA) and Graphic Design. Years and changes in major (BS Biological Science… unused in eventual career) later, my college still teaches photography. The umbrella College of Fine Arts is now Communications and Marketing. My old department, Cinema and Photography, is now Photography and Video. The available classes look more contemporary also.

 

[RichF]

50's .. most of our camera club members are on social security

As Eric says, you need time and money. you have neither of these when you have kids at home

 

[DavidT]

I remember when Kodak Instamatics came out in the '60s and serious photographers were worried that it was the end of real photography, and that "snap shots" would be all that anyone took in the future.

I think there are many young people who are still interested in real photography, but let's face the fact that it is not a cheap endeavor, and it does take time. Many younger folks are busy with new careers, family, education, etc. and don't have much time or extra income. I know I didn't do a great deal of photography in my 30s and 40s.

I agree however we all had the same things when we were younger yet we had cameras, lenses, film, printing. In reality all things considered photography is much cheaper in the digital world.

 

[abc123brian]

It is honestly something I have thought about too. I am a little younger than you and have noticed the same. I helped my friend’s teenage son learn photography last year, but he couldn’t afford anything to go along with his hand me down D3100 and kit lens. With the prices of just about any camera now, it takes a somewhat serious investment to get into photography. A decent point and shoot camera is close to $1000 as are entry level cameras such as the Z50. I think without the more entry level market, less people are going to get into the hobby. I occasionally see some “younger” people that are somewhat serious into photography, but many of my photography friends tend to be older.

 

[DavidT]

It is honestly something I have thought about too. I am a little younger than you and have noticed the same. I helped my friend’s teenage son learn photography last year, but he couldn’t afford anything to go along with his hand me down D3100 and kit lens. With the prices of just about any camera now, it takes a somewhat serious investment to get into photography. A decent point and shoot camera is close to $1000 as are entry level cameras such as the Z50. I think without the more entry level market, less people are going to get into the hobby. I occasionally see some “younger” people that are somewhat serious into photography, but many of my photography friends tend to be older.

No reason to buy new. Used cameras are a bargain for someone wanting to start out. My sister in law bought a Nikon D7100 and a couple of lenses this year from KEH for less than $800. I started with a Minolta X370 and a kit lens and cheap zoom. I had probably $600 all in with a flash, in todays money lets say that is $1K. But I had to feed it film and processing, printing. I guess the way I look at it is someone starting out has no reason to buy the newest latest gear. A 10 year old camera will take perfectly fine pictures. I just bought a few film cameras last week and couldn't believe how cheap they are!

 

[Abinoone]

As someone once said, the times they are a changin'! Unless you're a pro, it's hard for any reasonable person to justify plunking down many thousands of bucks for a hobby, unless they have means and time on their hands, as many of you have noted already. Coupled with that is the fact that smartphones - a de rigueur nowadays, and themselves expensive - are incredibly capable, and satisfy most people's need for sharing images, which is mostly on the Internet.

Where I see younger people coming to serious photography is often from another field they're passionate about or involved in professionally - wildlife biology, zoology, environmental science, anthropology, graphic design, etc. In these instances, it seems a natural segue to want to take better photographs of their subjects. I suspect this was true of many of us on BCG - it certainly was for me (I was a professional archaeologist/anthropologist first, photography nut second. Now that I'm retired, I'm a full time photo nut).

There are a few folks out there trying to bring the next generation(s) into the field - Suzi Eszterhas comes to mind with Girls Who Click - but I doubt these efforts are making a very big dent in recruiting people. But, what the hell do I know? I'm just a geezer with an opinion!

 

[GrandNagus50]

Apple is trying to sell its newest top of the line iPhone by pitching in ads that you can "make a Hollywood movie" with its video capabilities. Some young people do fairly sophisticated things with video for TikTok and other social media outlets. On the other hand, my own kids and their friends seem to settle for what still pictures they can take with their phones and they pooh-pooh the notion that a "real camera" will allow them to do more. "I don't want to lug a camera around," etc.

Meanwhile, there is a small but real contingent among the young who (in my opinion) fetishize film photography as somehow "more real" and "authentic" than digital. It's kind of like the attraction to vinyl records over digital formats for music. When my younger son was in high school students HAD to take a film photography course before they could take any courses related to digital. I thought this was absurd and I told them so (like they listened, ha!) I think this particular situation was based partially on interdepartmental politics within the school itself, but I can still recall students parroting the line that "film photography is superior," etc.

As for serious nature photography, let's face it, it's largely an avocation of the affluent, and that restricts is to an older age group, pretty much. Of course there are some very talented and productive younger photographers, but as others have noted, it's overwhelmingly us oldsters who can buy the gear, do the travel, spend the time, etc.

 

[bleirer]

You made me curious. At 19 (ahem… 1972), I was enrolled in a split major of Photography (BFA) and Graphic Design. Years and changes in major (BS Biological Science… unused in eventual career) later, my college still teaches photography. The umbrella College of Fine Arts is now Communications and Marketing. My old department, Cinema and Photography, is now Photography and Video. The available classes look more contemporary also.

My first college experience I attended briefly the Cooper school of art here in Cleveland as a 18 year old photography major in 1974. I was not ready for those artsy types and their strange ways and quickly moved on to a traditional college. Still took photography but didn't end up majoring in it.

 

[abc123brian]

No reason to buy new. Used cameras are a bargain for someone wanting to start out. My sister in law bought a Nikon D7100 and a couple of lenses this year from KEH for less than $800. I started with a Minolta X370 and a kit lens and cheap zoom. I had probably $600 all in with a flash, in todays money lets say that is $1K. But I had to feed it film and processing, printing. I guess the way I look at it is someone starting out has no reason to buy the newest latest gear. A 10 year old camera will take perfectly fine pictures. I just bought a few film cameras last week and couldn't believe how cheap they are!

That’s true, but it seems video features are important and many of the DSLR cameras are not very good at it. Also, unless they know someone that can help them understand what it is they need to buy or ensure the used item they are buying is worth the price. There aren’t a lot of camera stores in general anymore and finding ones that have a decent selection of used gear local is even more difficult. This has been my observation anyway.

 

[DavidT]

As someone once said, the times they are a changin'! Unless you're a pro, it's hard for any reasonable person to justify plunking down many thousands of bucks for a hobby, unless they have means and time on their hands, as many of you have noted already. Coupled with that is the fact that smartphones - a de rigueur nowadays, and themselves expensive - are incredibly capable, and satisfy most people's need for sharing images, which is mostly on the Internet.

Where I see younger people coming to serious photography is often from another field they're passionate about or involved in professionally - wildlife biology, zoology, environmental science, anthropology, graphic design, etc. In these instances, it seems a natural segue to want to take better photographs of their subjects. I suspect this was true of many of us on BCG - it certainly was for me (I was a professional archaeologist/anthropologist first, photography nut second. Now that I'm retired, I'm a full time photo nut).

There are a few folks out there trying to bring the next generation(s) into the field - Suzi Eszterhas comes to mind with Girls Who Click - but I doubt these efforts are making a very big dent in recruiting people. But, what the hell do I know? I'm just a geezer with an opinion!

What a fascinating profession! Tell me more. Did you actually go on digs? Work in a museum?

 

[Abinoone]

What a fascinating profession! Tell me more. Did you actually go on digs? Work in a museum?

Oh yeah, lots. I spent a year in Italy directing an Etruscan excavation, then returned home where I ran digs in PA, FL, VA, MA, NY, Ontario, and the Yukon. Loved every moment, then left academics for a 2nd career in IT (go figure). Now onto my 3rd career just goofing off and taking a few animal photos

 

[DavidT]

Oh yeah, lots. I spent a year in Italy directing an Etruscan excavation, then returned home where I ran digs in PA, FL, VA, MA, NY, Ontario, and the Yukon. Loved every moment, then left academics for a 2nd career in IT (go figure). Now onto my 3rd career just goofing off and taking a few animal photos

WOW! What kind of digs? Are you a fan of Exploration Unknown? I love that show! I find it fascinating people have patience to do it, I would be the guy wanting to run an excavator...no patience for detailed work like that lol.

 

[John Woodworth]

My son-in-law (mid 30's) is a Fine Arts graduate from French and the US institutions. He has become a serious (hobbyist) photographer and uses film exclusively. He carries a Rollieflex TWR...A camera I would have killed for 40+ years ago when I was a starving student. He also has a 4 x 5 Linhof Technica.

He likes the slow, deliberate process of these MF and LF cameras. Also, I think that a lot of superb film-oriented equipment is available used, or even give away. In the case of 4 x 5, with care, the quality can be unrivaled (compared to 35mm).

We have a good rivalry going on about analog vs digital. I would never go back but can't argue with the artistic merits of his work.

 

[Patrick M]

I notice that many of us myself included are not spring chickens. One of the local photo clubs that I have participated a couple of times with over the last couple of years I find that I am the youngest person (I am 47) that is a member. Most are retired with a few of us still working but they are in their late 50's. I am not sure but do schools still have photography programs? I wonder in another 20-40 years as technology advances and all of us dinosaurs who grew up on film are gone will there still be a photography community like we have here?

I wonder if there is more our generation should be doing to pass down the love of photography to a younger generation growing up with smart phones and social media?

You’re a spring chicken! I’m an amateur radio (aka ham) operator too, and at 69 I’m the baby of the group I’m a member of!
While ham radio seems a dead hobby, international , as well as domestic, competition remains fierce. Would you be Leif Morse code competitions are incredibly strongly competed!

So if photography seems to be declining through newer technology in phones etc, I think there always be a place for us. I guess the fear is that there won’t be much in the way of new cameras. Hmmmm

 

[DavidT]

My son-in-law (mid 30's) is a Fine Arts graduate from French and the US institutions. He has become a serious (hobbyist) photographer and uses film exclusively. He carries a Rollieflex TWR...A camera I would have killed for 40+ years ago when I was a starving student. He also has a 4 x 5 Linhof Technica.

He likes the slow, deliberate process of these MF and LF cameras. Also, I think that a lot of superb film-oriented equipment is available used, or even give away. In the case of 4 x 5, with care, the quality can be unrivaled (compared to 35mm).

We have a good rivalry going on about analog vs digital. I would never go back but can't argue with the artistic merits of his work.

I just bought 3 film cameras last week. They are the first 3 cameras I owned. I have to admit playing with them brought back a lot of memories and kind of made me want to get some film and play.

 

[Dan291]

My first college experience I attended briefly the Cooper school of art here in Cleveland as a 18 year old photography major in 1974. I was not ready for those artsy types and their strange ways and quickly moved on to a traditional college. Still took photography but didn't end up majoring in it.

I had several good photo instructors, they seemed to have a more historical influence, another couple… well, legends in their own minds. If your photos looked like theirs (or were a scantily clad co-ed) you did well. I wound up leaning more on my graphic arts classes. But, the department DID have a great darkroom. I would have never printed color otherwise.

 

[pnbarne]

There are literally millions of images being added to the web every year. Most of them from phones in the hands of young people who are taking pictures. For them it seems to be more about expressing themselves than capturing a terrific image. There must be 10K pictures of my grandchildren and great grandchildren alone. The difference is that the image captures a moment. Or, maybe it’s a 10 second video clip. I would argue young people are taking vastly more pictures but they are also fleeting looks not designed as any art form and rarely a group effort.

 

[Tiago C]

I notice that many of us myself included are not spring chickens. One of the local photo clubs that I have participated a couple of times with over the last couple of years I find that I am the youngest person (I am 47) that is a member. Most are retired with a few of us still working but they are in their late 50's. I am not sure but do schools still have photography programs? I wonder in another 20-40 years as technology advances and all of us dinosaurs who grew up on film are gone will there still be a photography community like we have here?

I wonder if there is more our generation should be doing to pass down the love of photography to a younger generation growing up with smart phones and social media?

Photography is a relatively expensive hobby and that may significantly limit access to younger people.
Also, I suspect young photographers tend to use nontraditional types of platforms for communication/discussion.
I am 30 years old and possibly one of the youngest in this forum?