Changes...

The biggest change has to be image processing. No more bumbling around in the dark or red-lights and the smell of hypo and stained fingers.

What changed the most in my eyes are the lenses, sharpness and perceived depth. Modern lenses are built on high resolution in mind and lost the charm of the older lenses, which were build with less elements. The need for faster autofocus, image stabilisation and performance over different focal lengths changed microcontrast, richness of texture and perceived sharpness forever.

One of the most used features on Photoshop and Lightroom users would be Blur and Grain. We are longing somehow for the charm of the older images. 

Sensor technology, dynamic range, mirrorless, camera size/weight, wifi tether connectivity, app control, focus tracking, cine dual purpose ability, battery lights, affordability, and quality/resolving power/speed/weight of lenses on budget, software. Otherwise all much the same ;)

I have just gone mirrorless, and while I could have continued using my old SD cards I took the opportunity to upgrade the memory cards to the max - I now have a CFexpress card.

This gives two specific changes, certainly compared to the SD cards but even more strikingly against film:

1. Storage: 1/2 TB is the same size as the SSD in my desktop (which still isn't struggling at all), is 16 times the size of the SD cards I used to rely on, and will hold something like 20,000 frames.  That's 500 rolls of film.  In far less bulk, not prone to X-ray damage when travelling, can be reused, and easily backed up even while travelling.
   Or almost 24 hours of video!
2. Speed: 1750 MB/s
   Other components in the system permitting, that will transfer 70 pictures per second.

My computing days go back to teletypes and punched tape.  It never ceases to amuse me to imagine what I would have thought then if someone had predicted what we'd have now, in terms of computing power, photographic capabilities, and how interconnected we've all become.

Immediacy.

Even in the small time I've been shooting, the expectation of fully formed ideas and results can be astonishing. I even feel that with booking people in certain ways.

how photography is perceived and valued (or not)…

That comment strikes a chord with me. I'm afraid the medium was massively de-valued by the "digital revolution"; to the point where today "AI" threatens near extinction.

The days are long gone when anyone believed "the camera never lies".

The prospects of ever seeing your work in meaningful print (by "meaningful" I mean in a non-self published book or mainstream print magazine) are now close to zero unless you have some very useful friends.

There are still niches (e.g. babies and weddings) where the thick-skinned can earn a crust or two. But people have never been less inclined to pay a professional photographer to shoot something for them - "everyone's a photographer" now.

I've been following the war in Ukraine fairly closely and have noted the paucity of powerful still images coming back from the lines - today's reportage is remarkable, but all video-based.

It's had its day as far as I'm concerned, now purely a hobby.

I've no doubt some will cry "rubbish" and point to all the opportunities for web-based publication and sales - well, good luck to you; it has no meaning for me.

The greatest change has been the capabilities of the mobile phone enabling anybody to take a decent image/video and in the majority of cases better than a traditional (digital) camera, removing the need for a photographer in many general situations.

The massive change for me is in the processing.

"Wet" developing and printing, particularly colour was for me a total pain in the neck. The ability to sit and take my time and not be subjected to unpleasant chemicals and associated smells, that I can now enjoy with digital has totally transformed the pleasure I get from photography,

A smaller bonus is with small lightweight cameras where you see the end photograph on the back of the camera.

Joy....bliss.

KernowPhoto said

The biggest change has to be image processing. No more bumbling around in the dark or red-lights and the smell of hypo and stained fingers.

For sure... But many of the principles we used when making prints remain the same only now we have a digital darkroom, right... I still have all my old kit... Keep staring at it thinking it will will me into buying some film... hahaha...

Theta Aeterna said

What changed the most in my eyes are the lenses, sharpness and perceived depth. Modern lenses are built on high resolution in mind and lost the charm of the older lenses, which were build with less elements. The need for faster autofocus, image stabilisation and performance over different focal lengths changed microcontrast, richness of texture and perceived sharpness forever.

One of the most used features on Photoshop and Lightroom users would be Blur and Grain. We are longing somehow for the charm of the older images. 

Yes, I hear you... This is a good example of how the way we use (or think of, more importantly) the tools has dictated how the tools are developed... For sure 99% of people don't ever need more than 24Mp or so but, hey, that didn't stop people wanting more, right... So as the increased resolutions revealed the limitations of the older lenses, a new style was developed...

indemnity said

Sensor technology, dynamic range, mirrorless, camera size/weight, wifi tether connectivity, app control, focus tracking, cine dual purpose ability, battery lights, affordability, and quality/resolving power/speed/weight of lenses on budget, software. Otherwise all much the same ;)

Yes, of course, as I mentioned in my OP, the digital technology has come on in leaps and bounds since the early days… The game changer for me was the D3 (2007).. A reliable camera with a decent workflow, a decent battery and with full frame capability that could be used properly/professionally for sports… Mostly because I could rely on it more and, also, I could revert back to thinking like I was shooting an F5, framing wise, instead of thinking about the crop etc… The whole D3/4/5/6 lineage built on that camera… and the Z8 is the modern, mirrorless, interation…

But whilst all these capabilities of the cameras (and sensors) have improved dramatically, that does not change, fundamentally, how we actually use them to make pictures…

I think the more obvious changes over the last few decades, to me, revolve around how photography is now thought of and considered in the wider context, as opposed to how it was 20/30 years ago…

From client-side and consumer-side… for sure… But also by people who were not around back then, who seem to have a different consideration of it and what it means to them… a lot of this is how markets have evolved… and how the uses of photography have evolved…

I guess I was wondering if others saw (or thought) this, also…

The way the industry works and I am not sure its for the better or worse but there seems to be a lot less TFP around these days.

I think when I started out Cameras on phones were very new and not every phone had them, models had no choice but to do TFP shoots to build a portfolio.

Now they can get very good images taken by friends and whilst they may not match the quality of some of the images on PP, they can still have a technically decent portfolio and start charging right away.

Sensual Art said

I have just gone mirrorless, and while I could have continued using my old SD cards I took the opportunity to upgrade the memory cards to the max - I now have a CFexpress card.

This gives two specific changes, certainly compared to the SD cards but even more strikingly against film:

1. Storage: 1/2 TB is the same size as the SSD in my desktop (which still isn't struggling at all), is 16 times the size of the SD cards I used to rely on, and will hold something like 20,000 frames.  That's 500 rolls of film.  In far less bulk, not prone to X-ray damage when travelling, can be reused, and easily backed up even while travelling.
   Or almost 24 hours of video!
2. Speed: 1750 MB/s
   Other components in the system permitting, that will transfer 70 pictures per second.

My computing days go back to teletypes and punched tape.  It never ceases to amuse me to imagine what I would have thought then if someone had predicted what we'd have now, in terms of computing power, photographic capabilities, and how interconnected we've all become.

yes, for sure, that whole side of things has changed a lot... Like I mentioned, my D1 was 2.6MP yet we still managed to run double page spreads from it (for those who remember magazines hahaha)... But you had no room to crop etc and way less latitude so you'd be shooting more in mind of how not to need to crop... Rather like we were a year or so before on transparencies... I notice a far looser attention to some of those things these days...

Afrofilmviewer said

Immediacy.

Even in the small time I've been shooting, the expectation of fully formed ideas and results can be astonishing. I even feel that with booking people in certain ways.

Indeed... and the lifespan of a picture being measured in minutes because, after a while, it is so far down everybody;s feeds that it becomes less relevant...

In my professional career, we saw this creep in when we were starting to transmit from camera to phone and then to somebody instead of coming back in and processing... The football shooters spend more time on the laptop, sometimes, when pitch side.... I envy their ability to multi task.. For me, I did not want (or welcome) the distraction... I wanted to concentrate on my subject and what I wanted to capture...

indemnity said

The greatest change has been the capabilities of the mobile phone enabling anybody to take a decent image/video and in the majority of cases better than a traditional (digital) camera, removing the need for a photographer in many general situations.

I liek that, though... It's like the modern day equivalent of the "instamatic"... with no wait time... so folk then started to snap and share...