Thom Hogan on declining camera sales

[jjj]

Interesting article that serendipitously appeared in a feed of mine, sort of relevant to the topic:

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/feb/03/instagram-generation-amateur-photographers-art-plagiarism

Jonathan Jones is simply a contentious troll that The Guardian use as clickbait it would seem. His ignorance is evident from the outset in that he talk about plagiarism, when it was actually potential copyright infringement.
It was however just an excuse for him to sneer at and decry photography. Again.

[jjj]

If you like GPS, more power to you.  If your camera does not have it, you can carry a GPS unit around with you and insert geo-tagging after the fact, synchronizing your GPS breadcrumb with your images via time.  In other words, GPS might be useful, but it is not necessary to have built-in to the camera (forensic or other validation-specific tasks or applications notwithstanding).

Same could be said about lightmeters.  
Separating geotagging from the picture taking process means more work at end of day faffing around with ways to match data. That's even if you remembered to turn GPS on, had room for it in your pocket or remembered to take a shot with your phone at each location to get a very imprecise and variable location to then match to one's fancy camera.
Built in GPS saves an awful lot of hassle if you use geotagging. I'd like to use it all the time, but due it not being built in to my cameras I rarely do.

[jjj]

A picture of oneself on holiday is not necessarily vain, or even 2 or 3 or 4 pictures of oneself. However, the selfie stick is designed to facilitate only taking photos of oneself. Many tourists nowadays walk around with their iPhone continuously attached to such a stick. Most of the photos they take, and the impression I get is that sometimes it might be all of the photos they take, seem to be of themselves. Rarely do I see someone photographing just the place they've traveled to visit.
There seems to be a general ethos among the majority of people taking photos nowadays, that any place worth visiting is not worth photographing unless the scene includes themselves, sometimes obscuring the most interesting part of the scene.

Plus ça change. That's always been the case with snapshots. Nothing has changed other than the tool to do it. People used to ask strangers to take a pic for them, heck I've done that for folks on numerous occasions
BTW have you examined all the photos that people take to actually know that all the pics are of themselves? The reality being there'll be lots of snapshots pics that are not containing the photographer as well as some selfies and why even worry about what others are photographing?

[Hans Kruse]

Well, in the spirit of less-is-more, I refrained from elaborating

Anyone who belongs to the less-is-more tribe, intuitively understand the arguments for, without the need to enumerate them. Besides, Kirk did offer some reasoning, rather eloquently, I and wholeheartedly agreed before posting my "slogan."

However, if you insist...

I believe that people should have the freedom of choice. So, if some find it useful (and I am not just talking about GPS), so be it, let them have it, but let me have my choice as well:

1. Either the same model as the crowd wants, but stripped down to bare essentials, i.e., no GPS, no damn video, no "creative" modes, no "art" filters, no direct-print button (oh, the horror of horrors), not Super Bowl light show in the viewfinder. The simpler it is, the less I have to think about it instead of what's in front of it. I would be even willing to pay a small premium for it, the likes of what Nikon charges to remove its OLP filter in 800e.

2. Or, as a minimum, let me remove all the unused menu items myself, so that I do not have to wade through the clutter of multi-level menus every time I need to adjust something

The ignoring argument: I can't ignore something that is permanently in front of me and clutters the dials or menus. Imagine that crowd wants to have a bobbing head permanently attached to new car's dashboard... would you be able to ignore it? I can't just ignore something on the menus that forces me to use the skip button repeatedly to get to the one I want. A plethora of menu options makes it more difficult to remember where are those that matter to me the most. Yes, I am aware of the "My Menu" option on many camera models, but they are typically limited to 5-6 options.

The cost argument: I am frankly impressed by your pretzel-twisted logical spinning, in which extra features do not result in extra cost, but in a cheaper product. What!?

The battery argument: GPS drains it, period. You say just switch the battery... during my amateur years, I never had the need for extra batteries. They are expensive, they need to be recharged, packed, etc., i.e., one more thing to worry about. I bought one when I started shooting professionally. And even then, switching it is not as simple as it seems. Certain camera models require to take them off tripod to do so. And it might happen just when I do not have those extra few minutes to fiddle with it. So, anything that reduces battery drain is welcome in my book.

Now, there are certain features that are not traditionally photographic that I do welcome: wi-fi and/or Bluetooth connectivity with my phone. Phones are  always with us, and they have much better maps and GPS functions than cameras anyway. Or, if you really go into a deep wilderness, a separate GPS is much more useful and potentially life-saving. Connecting with a phone also allows for remote shooting.

Modern cameras are more like jumbo-jet cockpits: millions of blinking lights, instruments, needles, buttons, levers, handles, etc. It seems to me that some photographers confuse fiddling with it with photography.

I agree with you about a desire for simplicity in design of UI. I would very much like if camera manufacturers would introduce the possibility to adjust the menus and exclude what you don't need. That would include things you decided not to use like GPS, WiFi, tons of adjustments that you don't need. I do feel it obvious to include features that many would value. I my opinion that includes GPS and WiFi. If I choose not to use it, it should not be in the way.

I geotag all my pictures and I use an app on my iPhone that connects with Dropbox so when I have completed a shoot the tracklog gets uploaded to Dropbox and I can geotag in Lightroom using the tracklog. Quick and easy and works very well. The only thing is to remember to turn it on when I go on a shoot.

I even use geotagged photos together with my preferred navigation app on the iPhone to navigate to the spot I want to go to. I use this for my workshops but I also use for myself. I do remember most spots that I like but not always. I really like to go back to locations I have found previously and take new shots at new angles in light, clouds, fog etc. I have not seen before in that particular location. Others would never go back to a location they have already visited. Fortunately we are different

[Ray]

BTW have you examined all the photos that people take to actually know that all the pics are of themselves?

Of course not. I've got better things to do. If you re-read what I wrote, you should see that I implied that I got the impression that all the photos that some folks take, at least at many of the locations that I visit, are of themselves and/or partners or group.

The reality being there'll be lots of snapshots pics that are not containing the photographer as well as some selfies and why even worry about what others are photographing?

I don't worry about it, but I sometimes get annoyed and frustrated when I visit popular historical sites and find it impossible to photograph an interesting statue or carving, or shoot an interesting perspective of a temple without numerous strangers standing in front of me photographing themselves, with the object of interest in the background.

As you know, I'm a very patient sort of person, and very humble. Sometimes I just sit quietly, hoping there will eventually be a break in the continuous stream of ultra-vain people who insist on standing directly in front of every scene they photograph.

Sometimes I'm lucky and there's a break which is long enough for me to take my shots. Sometimes I just move on without taking any shots.

Sometimes I feel like shouting, "I'm a very important professional photographer who's been assigned the task of photographing this temple. Would you all please move aside for 10 minutes."   

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I really like to go back to locations I have found previously...

Wouldn't that require a separate GPS unit to get you there?

[jjj]

Wouldn't that require a separate GPS unit to get you there?

Have you not heard of maps? There's even a whole module with them in in LR. Also available on paper.
Also phones tend to make separate GPS devices redundant for most people.

[jjj]

As you know, I'm a very patient sort of person, and very humble. Sometimes I just sit quietly, hoping there will eventually be a break in the continuous stream of ultra-vain people who insist on standing directly in front of every scene they photograph.

Taking a photo of yourself in a tourist spot does not necessarily equal vanity. It's usually simply a record that you were there. The fact that somewhere is busy is simply a side effect of it's popularity. In those situations I photograph the people or maybe the dodgy vendors as that's usually far more interesting than some building. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Have you not heard of maps? There's even a whole module with them in in LR.

How would LR Maps get you back to a remote location?

[jjj]

How would LR Maps get you back to a remote location?

Very obviously it wouldn't. Maps which I mentioned in first sentence however would.
Also why assume locations have to be remote? They can be anywhere.

Take for example the photo above, here's a screengrab of where it was taken as shown in LR. Not hard to find.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...Not hard to find...

Nor hard to remember where it is. I assume you can find Eiffel Tower without GPS? Or map, for that matter.

[SZRitter]

How would LR Maps get you back to a remote location?

It would give you an idea of where it was, and generally, you can get yourself back to the spot(ish) with a general idea. If you need the exact spot, then yes, you would need an external GPS. But if I just wanted to remember which trail something was on in Smoky Mountains National Park, then a quick cross reference with the maps and coordinates would do the trick, then off to the trailhead.

Why so combative to all of this?

[jjj]

It would give you an idea of where it was, and generally, you can get yourself back to the spot(ish) with a general idea. If you need the exact spot, then yes, you would need an external GPS. But if I just wanted to remember which trail something was on in Smoky Mountains National Park, then a quick cross reference with the maps and coordinates would do the trick, then off to the trailhead.

Why so combative to all of this?

You just saved me posting much the same thing.

[jjj]

Nor hard to remember where it is. I assume you can find Eiffel Tower without GPS? Or map, for that matter.

Point missed entirely.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...Why so combative to all of this?

So far, I simply asked two questions: 1. Wouldn't it drain battery power? and 2. Wouldn't you need a separate unit anyway? If asking questions is combative, so be it.

I am trying to understand the attraction people have to GPS (in cameras - I highly value them in cars or phones). So far (and in my humble, subjective, selfish, arrogant, opinionated opinion -- there you go, jjj, save you the trouble), I do see some:

1. for people like Hans (i.e., workshop leaders) they might have a rather practical value -- fair enough
2. coolness factor: "Look, mom, how cool this map is, it shows all the places I visited and photographed!" - cute, but not much to do with photography
3. anal-retentive need to have, collect and preserve more and more of everything, whether we really need it or not (of which I am occasionally as guilty as the next guy)

As for maps (paper ones, I assume) you would still need to either manually transfer coordinates from the camera, or keep a separate list with it, in order to cross reference it with the map. Which then can be easier accomplished with a phone or handheld device in the first place.

I am also positing that having more and more to think of and fiddle with in a camera detracts from its basic function, i.e., to be an extension of our vision. What we need is to immerse ourselves in the subject in front of us, not the camera in-between. To that effect, the simpler the tool, the better.

Ultimately, I never denied anyone the right to have whatever bells and whistles they need or even think they need in a camera. I am just pleading for a separate model without it. Whether it is economically feasible or not is a completely different subject. As far as wishes go, I'd like to think I have the same right to wish something, just as somebody else has the right to wish something else (like GPS in camera)

[jjj]

GPS data on an image is simply more EXIF data. Added in camera it is easy, exterior to camera it's a faff.
If you really need more explaination as to why location as part of metadata is useful to many people, then you probably still wouldn't understand the answer.

If you do not need GPS on a camera, then don't use it. It will make no difference to your of camera usage, at all. There are many features on camera superfluous to my needs, but I'm not so arrogant to think Canon, Nikon etc should make a camera with limited functions that won't sell very well just for me and my very specific needs. I ignore features I do not use and it is zero problem their being there. If such things bother you, then that is your very personal problem and unless you get a bespoke camera made, you are unlikely to stop complaining.

[SZRitter]

So far, I simply asked two questions: 1. Wouldn't it drain battery power? and 2. Wouldn't you need a separate unit anyway? If asking questions is combative, so be it.

I am trying to understand the attraction people have to GPS (in cameras - I highly value them in cars or phones). So far (and in my humble, subjective, selfish, arrogant, opinionated opinion -- there you go, jjj, save you the trouble), I do see some:

1. for people like Hans (i.e., workshop leaders) they might have a rather practical value -- fair enough
2. coolness factor: "Look, mom, how cool this map is, it shows all the places I visited and photographed!" - cute, but not much to do with photography
3. anal-retentive need to have, collect and preserve more and more of everything, whether we really need it or not (of which I am occasionally as guilty as the next guy)

As for maps (paper ones, I assume) you would still need to either manually transfer coordinates from the camera, or keep a separate list with it, in order to cross reference it with the map. Which then can be easier accomplished with a phone or handheld device in the first place.

I am also positing that having more and more to think of and fiddle with in a camera detracts from its basic function, i.e., to be an extension of our vision. What we need is to immerse ourselves in the subject in front of us, not the camera in-between. To that effect, the simpler the tool, the better.

Ultimately, I never denied anyone the right to have whatever bells and whistles they need or even think they need in a camera. I am just pleading for a separate model without it. Whether it is economically feasible or not is a completely different subject. As far as wishes go, I'd like to think I have the same right to wish something, just as somebody else has the right to wish something else (like GPS in camera)

Combative may have been too harsh a word, my apologies.

But, to add to your list:
4. People who like to have a record of location so they may revisit it. (although, maybe this falls under your #1?)

As easy as it may seem to dismiss it, when most of your photography happens while randomly wandering around aimlessly (as mine does), you don't always remember where you were.

"Dude, that is an awesome looking Barn, I should stop in the middle of Nebraska, and take a shot of it."
Sometime later: "I'll be passing in the general area of Nebraska, I want to reshoot that barn in different light, now where was it...."

To the point of something to fiddle with, GPS is probably not one of those options you are constantly turning on or off. You'll probably do it once when you set up the camera, and never touch it again. If even that.

As for superfluous features, I can agree to that, for the most part. I regularly take out old film cameras as the controls are simpler and the feel is not something digital has been able to reproduce. That said, I can't say any of the controls on my E-M5 ever got in the way, and many have opened up new ways to shoot. But it is all a matter of perspective, now isn't it?

[jjj]

Combative may have been too harsh a word, my apologies.

Most definitely the right word with Slobodan. He like to provoke people as here....

I am trying to understand the attraction people have to GPS (in cameras - I highly value them in cars or phones). So far (and in my humble, subjective, selfish, arrogant, opinionated opinion -- there you go, jjj, save you the trouble), I do see some:

Less directly nasty than he can be, but still unwarranted.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...You'll probably do it once when you set up the camera, and never touch it again...

Hence my original question: "Does it drain the battery?" (if permanently on). That was really a sincere question and so far I am not sure I heard a definitive answer, though I assume the answer is "yes." If phones are any indication, turing location services on does drain the battery faster, thus I keep it off until I need a map or driving directions.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Most definitely the right word with Slobodan. He like to provoke people as here....
Less directly nasty than he can be, but still unwarranted.

Really!?

You mean like "less directly nasty that you can be" as here:

... Selfishness and a complete lack of empathy combined with a dash of stupidity make up many posts online...

While you are disguising it as a general comment, it was your comment on BJL's question directed to me.