This rather enthusiastic article goes on about the great technological advances in digital cameras this year.

How digital cameras are getting more responsive, like conventional cameras are today. How sensors and with them image quality improves, again like film today. How storage capacity gets bigger, how image stabilisation will be part of any camera and more and more.

But has anyone thought about what will happen when digital has caught up with conventional? A camera cannot take a picture faster than you press the button, neither does it make sense to capture more than the eye can see, which incidentally is what film does today adequately, aesthetics aside. What else apart from optics can be improved after that? To be able to take 10.000 images before having to empty the storage space instead of just a roll of film with 36? To take 24 frames per second?

We’re getting close to the point where a camera is a camera is a camera. And a camera will always just be a special device to capture an image. The resource requirements for that purpose are finite and it is hard to see any further possible advance once all those requirements are met.

In the computer world we get faster processors and bigger hard drives all the time. But the computer, unlike a camera, is a general purpose device. More resource-intensive applications for computers keep appearing, but once say video editing, hard disk recording and 3D modelling are taken care of – which besides are applications that 90% of users will never use – there will be very little reason for bigger and better machines. Just like with digital cameras very soon.

That is not to say that one should stick to film or whatever. The overall advantages of the digital workflow are far too significant and it would be silly to ignore them. However as far just advancing digital camera technology is concerned, the time will come where you won’t need better. Because you’ll already have it.

My attempt of a PhotoRant, with friendly regards to the Botzilla Journal.