My phone of two years, a Samsung Galaxy S5 had the charging port go bad. After dealing with the insurance company that sent me an S6 that was crap (in my opinion), I decided to go back to Apple and ordered the iphone 7+. I missed the easier to use Apple user interface as I found everything with the Samsung to require twice or more the steps to accomplish the same thing. Don't need the extra monthly expense, especially since I am not a phone person, but a necessity these days.
On the way home from dropping the boys off downstate with their grandmother, I was giving thought to the variables behind the maintenance of the artistic effort in photography, in particular, those variables responsible for a continued and long term work in the production of images. My now deceased photographic mentor, Fred Picker, who stated repeatedly that he shot daily x 365 often said that if he got 6 negatives that he considered to be stellar from the lot-it was a good year. While I am not as difficult to please as Fred was, I would agree that of the total number of exposures I produce in a year, less than 10% are in my hall of fame
So if our payoff is so miniscule in the long run, why in the world do we continue to hike miles in dismal weather, snow, rain, cold, heat, etc. in search of yet more images? I believe the answer lies in my learning of behavioral psychology as an undergraduate at Western Michigan University back in the early 70's. The premise of operant conditioning as espoused by B.F. Skinner, is that behavior is a function of its consequences. Positive consequences (positive reinforcers) strengthen bahaviors that they follow and punishment decreases the strength of behavior it follows. Intermittent reinforcement produces the strongest rates of responding in both the lab with animals and in human life. As such, getting a reward every so often keeps response rates high and resistant to extinction. Responses that are rewarded each time they occur are subject to satiation and response rates fall to nothing. The old nice guys finish last phenomena (personal experience with that) is a prime example, Gambling and dysfunctional relationships are two examples of intermittent reinforcement that produces high rates of responding, even when the ultimate consequences for the organism are negative.
This phenomena when involving the ongoing effort to produce art is clear. We go out and shoot five rolls of film, 65 digital exposures, etc, and but a few are deemed exceptional or keepers. More often none at all until the next effort. If every effort produced the same emotional response, we would become satiated and the photographic effort would extinquish.
I think this is much of the reason that I returned to film from digital. With digital, unless it is an incredibly poor shot, I find that every image has very similar and canned characteristics. You can always pick out a digital image from a film counterpart as there is a certain look to film that digital cannot capture.
While I have uses for my digital equipment (videography, work with Neutral Density Filters, preparing items for sale on Ebay, etc, it is no longer a part of my professional repertoire in the larger scope.
“close some doors today. not because of pride, incapacity or arrogance, but simply because they lead you nowhere”