I ask back: In the past, could not everyone be a photographer? I don´t think that the rising of digital photography is the date of the access of the mass into photography. Analog photo does not mean real complication, or? The jump into the practicable photography for everyone was much earlier than at the point, where digital P. became standard. There are people, who are interested in technology with the focus on future and progress and improvement. And these people work with the complexity of things and invest a lot of time in it. And there are people who are looking into the past and are interested in past inventions. I try not to lose in technical things. Photography is so much and a photographer can define himself on so many things. My rather questions are: what is a photographer. What has a photographer to achieve and how long and how intensive. Who is
a photographer and who is a picture maker and who is an artist and what means what? Even before digital photography was affordable for everyone.
I wish I would stop finding things that would have been useful for writing my dissertation months after I handed it in.