Hmm - I think it's all interesting, and I enjoyed your blog. However, your thesis does seem to hinge around the notion that people buy new kit because they think that it will allow them to make better images. . .. . . . . .
That's not why I buy new kit, I know it won't make any difference to the artistic quality of my images, and I suspect that's true of lots of people around here.
Personally, I buy new kit because I like experimenting with it, and because I like the 'thingness' of it all. Just occasionally I might buy something because it will allow me to take pictures in situations where I couldn't otherwise (like a long macro lens for bugs, or a camera with better high ISO for poor light). But I don't think I've ever even considered that it might improve my art.
On the other hand, a look at the quality of amateur work available on the internet today, compared to 5 or 6 years ago would suggest to me that, quite to the contrary, the advent and development of digital equipment has dramatically improved the average artistic quality of images.
No Jono, that isn't the "thesis" of the blog thinking ... just the direction it took in response to the admittedly expected discussion here. It doesn't matter what the motivation may be for the heavy shift to technology that occupies so much time, and saps so much energy. ... it is the seemingly unequal emphasis on that technology compared to realizing ones creative vision and what that vision may be ... or more importantly ...
could be.
However, I don't agree that "stuff" can't make a difference in one's art ... it will IF you have a vision or idea that requires it. I'm just pointing out that one "should" proceed the other.
As far as the general or average level of photographic work having improved, I agree, and said so in the blog. That was the point to some degree. Specifically, that advancing technology has impacted many photographic endeavors for enthusiasts and pros alike ... industries such as weddings specifically have been impacted a great deal, so has portraiture, and with everyone carrying cell phone camera/video, a portion of photojournalism has been effected. Technology has leveled the playing field as far a relatively competent image making is concerned. Many Pros went out of business because they relied on the mystery of photographic technology and technique, which newer technology de-mystified to a great degree ... in contrast those with a great vision kept going and thrived.
Is it all advancing the art of photography? I'd argue no. I'd say, it is swelling the middle ranks of average, with a few bright spots beyond that. Perhaps the bright sparks are worth it all ... but I'm not sure it is when one realizes all the creative potential and skill hinted at out there ... but seems to be stuck in second gear.
The whole thing hinges on whether one is happy as is ... if so, then it is all a moot point. If "could be" isn't of interest, then there is little more to say. The last line of my blog opinion was ... "So can you." If one doesn't "want" to, oh well. But the point is that you "can".
So, on the other hand, I believe there are many who aren't satisfied with status quo ... have reached a point in their trek where all they are doing is repeating themselves ... but don't know quite how to go about moving forward creatively. There-in lies the rub ... you can get every nano detail of technical data your brain can absorb, even plenty of applications of that technology (lighting forums or how to seminars, or location gatherings for example), but how does one "personally" develop a more meaningful purpose, sharpen their seeing, work from the basis of an idea, learn to be more creatively sensitive? ... in short, take it to the next level.
My pal Irakly teaches this to packed groups of creatively starved photographers all over the world ... many of his students are pretty accomplished photographers or talented enthusiasts who have reach a ceiling. While he is technically adept, that isn't what he teaches, it is how to unlock the potential he sees in so many photographers and sometimes his methods are quite startling. The log jam is quite stubborn and sometimes needs a stick of creative dynamite to bust it loose ... and Lord knows that man is a big stick of dynamite. No one that enters his presence, exits the same.
However, every one, even the more reluctant or skeptical at first, admitted down deep that "could be" was their objective.
-Marc