One thing of interest in the recent Photo.Net comments on Erwin Put's recent article on "photography is dead" was the comment by Trevor Hare: "To stand out as a 'great' takes a lot more today than it ever did in such a crowded field" (.. of so many photographers and more easy to use digital photography). I think Trevor has a really good point. It is not so much that digital is displacing film Leica photography, because this section of photography will probably exist for a long time albeit at increasing cost to the user, but the great expansion of photography has made it difficult to rise above the present quality of results and the greater number of shooters who possess a certain ability and experience. Will the standards of Leica photography (or photography with any high quality instrument other than Leica) be raised? This should be hoped for. A scientist or research engineer working in a specific field must go beyond the thinking that preceded him and resulted in past advances. He has to push the envelope. Why not the same in photography? Perhaps the greater abundance now of successful (if not memorable) images will push the bar higher for creative photography. Look-alike photos in so many photo magazines are representative only of a static state in photography and not of advancement. My own experience with digital (and I continue also to shoot film in my older Leicas and even work with the smell of the B&W darkroom) is that it provides valuable immediate feedback on the image-in-the-making, thus allowing improvements to such things as composition (equilibrium of masses, of colour, of clair-obscure, etc.), lighting, exposure, and angle, that benefit further downstream attempts. If it takes a lot more to make a great photograph or great photographer, so much the better for the photographic creator (and not just "duplicator"). Leica photography, and all photography, are hardly dead, simply because the recording media has changed.