First, I must profess that I don't find future technology developments to be particularly interesting or important. It's a given that tech will keep moving forward relentlessly, providing more and better gear, with more and better features, and more and better pixels. There will always be new "must-have" models of the tools we use, delivering increased productivity, quality and/or capabilities, in smaller, easier-to-use and more affordable packages. It's less a matter of if and more matter of when any desired tech development will arrive. So I just take it for granted that the state-of-the-art in tools will improve, without being much concerned about the specifics. Truth be told, right now I have all the tools I really need to produce the images I need. I will no doubt embrace new tech as it arrives, but pondering the details in anticipation seems pointless.
There is now much talk among photographers about the importance of video capabilities in our future -- and I have no reason to doubt it. Like most of them I'm also working to expand my video capabilities. Judging from its prevalence on the Internet it's clearly growing in demand for certain markets. But I'm unconvinced that video will soon be a requisite service for others. With regard to my own specialty in architecture and real estate, my subjects are essentially static and motion capture adds little to the presentation experience, at least for common uses. When motion is desired an animated still photo (think Ken Burns) is virtually indistinguishable from a true video pan and is satisfactory for most client needs. Still photography continues to be a very serviceable product in this market, without much pressing demand for true captured video. For my part, in the near term I plan to spend a little time working with true video and somewhat more time with still animation techniques, but the bulk of my development work will remain solidly in the realm of traditional still photography.
One questionable perception about the impact of new DSLR video tools on traditional markets is that still photographers will be at the forefront of all that new work. This may not be altogether accurate. It may be that, as Kirk Tuck speculates, services could move the other way as established video professionals begin offer high-quality stills as part of their packages, thus eroding traditional photography markets even more. The balance will likely settle somewhere in the middle, but it does remind one of the old adage to be careful what you wish for.
For me the more interesting question about the future concerns the overall focus of our work. The interactive nature of the Web is changing our expectations of how visual information is presented, and to what depth. The traditional role of photography for much of the work I do has been mostly about documenting moments or places in time. But I see photography now evolving to be more about story-telling, where a singular great image is less important than a coherent set of images that tell a story or provide a deeper experience of a moment or place. Producing great images will always be an objective, but more as part of a larger body of material that expresses a subject more fully. These may include video, audio, and/or text, but still images can still be at the core of the story, used in creative and interactive ways to flesh-out the overall visual experience, or to present more perceptual detail.
None of this is new, of course. Many photographers, especially in editorial, have been working this way for quite some time. But what I see now is that this is becoming the broader norm for all visual producers. The expectation rather than the exception. The Web provides a means for almost everything to be a richer story and as content consumers we are learning to value that. I've got some interesting ideas about how this might work for architecture and real estate photography and I plan to develop some of these in the coming year.
With the continued decline in traditional editorial work for newspapers and magazines, compounded by the impact of a weakened economy, recent history has not been particularly good for photographers, among many others. But viewed from a different perspective, it may be that we're just seeing a natural transformation the craft. History offers many examples of this kind of evolution. The trick is to embrace the changes and evolve as well. Markets and economies will almost certainly revive again, and when they do we need to be poised with new ways of thinking about what we produce. If we do that, then our perceived value will remain high and our work will continue to be in demand. Now more than ever is a time to adapt and grow.
Best wishes for a prosperous new year.
