Having wrestled LOT with what subject matter, what is "Art" and all. there is not much interest for me to do traditional landscape, or similar images due to the sheer volume of these images created to this day. Yes, there are still some to be done, yet IMO the image market is very saturated with images like these. Same applies to so many images made today along the traditional photographic ways. This has been made far worst by the mass volume of digital imaged up-loaded into social media daily.
Or dilution of what was once were not as easily available to most.
Commercial images like advertising, weddings, portrait sittings and such have essentially a captures audience as the image maker is "hired or commissioned" to produce images to meet the expectations of the fund_er.
This brings back the previous question-discussion of what is "Art" and their value to Humanity as a whole?
As for Value of property-real estate driving out art, there is much truth in this. The South of Market in San Francisco was once a very thriving artist community due to low cost housing, real estate and such. It was possible to rent an un-used warehouse or similar old building then put in several artist as their studio and living space. Today, the market value of those once low cost locations have gone up in remarkable ways driving out Artist in the process.
Bernice
Bookmarks