From 1826 or so, photography has been blessed with an ever increasing set of wondrous machines to produce better and better pictures. By the 1990's the 'long winded thought out plan' or 'benefit of experience' image allowed professionals and amateurs to create beautiful work and they did. At that time photography evolution changed course, probably forever, when suddenly anybody could own a digital camera.
This has resulted in a deluge of daily uploads to the internet of pictures which might be best called 'snaps'. The occurence of an image created as a piece of art has paled into insignificance. News is full of smartphone pictures, adverts and even feature films are made using smartphones. Worldwide the still and moving image has been cheapened to the point where it doesn't matter that the smartphone can add bunny ears at the poke of a finger.
I am aware that the smartphone is capable of outstanding picture quality, high resolution, almost perfect colour management and in some cases even focus point swappping. It takes a photographer to produce a better image.
Amateur photography clubs, so popular in the after WWII years are struggling to retain and/or find members. The website www.dpreview.com regularly has slide shows of the entries by winners and runners-up in international competitions. Too many of these images are banal. Too many are taken with a smartphone. Sometimes there isn't one picture in 15 or 20 that is really special. Just occesionally an image looks like art.
It is rather sad that technology has bred a whole new photographic scene - dominated by celebrity, influencers and smartphone owners.
'Proper' photographers seem to be a tiny minority.
Resolution is low to reduce the interest in copying - if you would like a high-res copy of any image just contact me.