Photography has become big business. From pricey ad campaigns by the leading camera manufacturers to get consumers to buy their wares, to the latest Vanity Fair/ Miley Cyrus debacle (does anyone actually believe that moralistic Graydon Carter’s motive was to exhibit Annie Leibovitz’s “artistic vision” – it wouldn’t have anything to do with luring consumers to the endcaps, would it?), manufacturers, media, and even photographers themselves can use (and sometimes abuse) photography to line their wallets.

Of course, that’s what business is all about, and no one faults anyone for trying to make a living. But for those toiling behind the lens, the effect of an artfully composed image often means so much more than a few thousand greenbacks, whether it’s an historic photograph of a natural artifact, or a photographic exhibit in a region of the world that is known more for suppressing the arts than promoting them.

Just ask the unknown photographer who captured what may be the world’s oldest photograph, as recently publicized in the U.K.’s Evening Post and the New York Times, among other newspapers of note. No sultry tween celebrities caught in compromising positions, or even a compelling photojournalistic shot in war-torn Fallujah – the possibly-200-year-old photo (once attributed to Henry Fox Talbot, but now cited as the possible creation of Thomas Wedgwood, 30 years earlier than Talbot’s photographic experiments) portrays a simple leaf, placed on light-sensitive paper and exposed in the sunlight.

Of course, even the discovery of such a momentous piece of photographic history can’t escape the money issue. A section of the Evening Post article is devoted to interviewing a Sotheby’s expert to determine how much the leaf photo went for in 1984, and how much it’s worth today if it is indeed the oldest photo (sky’s the limit, according to the auction guru). However, as historian Dr. Larry Schaaf explains, “”In the end, what is certain is perhaps the only factor that really matters in a work of art. This image of a leaf is extraordinary. It arrests our attention as much today as it has done for at least a century and a half, and just possibly for more than two centuries.”

In other news, the First International Photography Biennial of the Islamic World opened yesterday at Tehran’s Saba Art and Cultural Institute. The theme of the 150-photo Iranian exhibit (featuring photographers from 40 countries) is “The Muslim Family,” designed to showcase experiences and spiritual and cultural identity in the Muslim world. In our increasingly ethnocentric world, if photography ever had the opportunity to break down regional barriers and show the innards of a culture that may often be misunderstood, this is a start. Perhaps progress is indeed being made….

Kodak is da bomb.

If you had asked me a year ago if I would ever utter that sentence, my answer would likely have been a befuddled, “Um—no.”

I mean, let’s be honest: Things were looking a little bleak awhile back for the Rochester behemoth. Not only did digital throw a wrench into the gameplan for the company’s legendary film brand, but it called into question Kodak’s entire stature. The company had suddenly become a dinosaur in a digital technology landscape, a silver-halide throwback that was now forced to compete against a slew of shiny new gizmos and gadgets.

The company tried to compete, but it was initially an awkward sight to see—kind of like a favorite uncle who insists on sporting a Speedo long after he should have settled into his Land’s End swim trunks. Digital cameras were introduced, photo sharing debuted à la the Kodak Gallery—but it still seemed a Herculean task to break free of its comfy-old-couch reputation.

But things (and times) have changed. First, a hilarious Kodak ad made the rounds on YouTube. Kodak had a sense of humor, and they were finally showing it off.

Being the reality-TV addict that I am (some people drink—I drink and watch trashy TV), I was pleasantly surprised to next see the Big K featured on this season’s The Celebrity Apprentice. Contestants had to hawk Kodak’s mobile printing solution, the Easyshare all-in-one printer, to passersby, translating to supergenius TV promotion for the brand (though I would still love to know how Kodak execs felt when Gene Simmons told them they don’t know their own brand as well as he does). Kodak even devoted a mini-site to its 15 minutes of reality-TV fame.

Now the Rochester photo titan has fully entered the social-networking scene by naming Jennifer Cisney, a longtime employee, as its Chief Blogger. Cisney will provide oversight for Kodak’s two blogs, A Thousand Words, a blog featuring personal stories by employees, and A Thousand Nerds, talking about technology and innovation.

This is an important development in a couple of ways. First, Kodak is now speaking the language of the next generation of photographers. By entering the social-networking arena, the company can ensure that photography becomes the shared, global phenomenon that it’s meant to be, not just a random smattering of pixels trapped in the black hole of a memory card.

Second, Chief Blogger Cisney (which could serve as a really cool rap name if she wanted to upload an original hip-hop MP3 to accompany her posts) will, according to the company’s official release, “serve as the company’s eye and ears online, listening to customer feedback and sharing ideas and tips related to Kodak’s products and services.” Big Brother-esque? Who cares? If it helps me take better pictures and hooks me up with the best Kodak product to help me do so in the process, that’s all right by me.

Kodak also took this forward-thinking step with the right person in mind—Jenny Cisney is a well-regarded blogger and loyal Kodak employee (one of the comments on the Thousand Words blog regarding her appointment exclaimed, “Jenny as the new chief blogger, [how] great is that! We now will have to start calling her CB! She’s hip, cool…and dynamite—notice they both come in small packages! She’s all those things but more importantly, she’s all Kodak!”

Of course, I hope for her sake Cisney takes the time to read the New York Times article I came across yesterday about “death by blogging.” Two prominent technology bloggers actually allegedly “blogged till they dropped,” with some attributing their deaths to constant stress and deadlines of an “around-the-clock Internet economy.” Somehow I doubt Kodak’s C.B. will forgo all her basic human needs to talk all things photography, but let this serve as fair warning.

The company finally gets it, showing that you really can teach an old dog new tricks—and meaning that Kodak could very well steal Best in Show.

As a born-and-bred New Yorker, I love going to local festivals. I can’t wait to gorge on the sausage-and-pepper heroes and zeppoles at the annual San Gennaro festival, suck down a few lagers at the Brooklyn Brewery bash, or throw back some littlenecks at the yearly Oyster Festival here on Long Island.

Yes, I admit – most of the festivals I get excited about involve food, drink, or, ideally, both. But there’s a new fest about to debut in the tri-state area that’s got me rethinking my reliance on fattening fare to have a good time. The New York Photo Festival (www.newyorkphotofestival.com) is coming to the Dumbo section of Brooklyn May 14–18, and it’s being touted by festival organizers as the “first international photo festival in the United States.”

I’m not sure how accurate that statement is—there’s an internationally billed festival in San Antonio that’s been in full swing for a few years now (www.safotofestival.com), and there may be others that a quick Google search could turn up. But I really don’t care, because a) they’re probably not of this scope, and b) I don’t have plans to head off to Texas or anywhere else in the country anytime soon—this inaugural fest is right here on my home turf, and I’m excited to see what talent is exhibited from around the world.

The promo they’ve got circulating on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRPAq_-AN1M) is pretty cool, showcasing some of square footage where the artists’ work will be on display. And they’ve got some well-known names associated with the event, including the four main curators overlooking the photography pavilions: Magnum photographer Martin Parr, New York Times magazine picture editor Kathy Ryan, Lesley A. Martin of the Aperture Foundation, and Tiny Vices’ Tim Barber.
At any rate, with nearly 100,000 visitors anticipated, I guess I’d better get my tickets now. I’m not too worried about the crowds, though—if I can handle San Gennaro’s 1-million-plus attendees, I can elbow my way to the front to catch a glimpse of the Microsoft-sponsored New York Photo Awards at the festival.

I was shopping for holiday gifts in Target in early December when I wandered by the TV section. After gawking for a few minutes and contemplating whether I could scrape together enough cash for a 1080i plasma to replace my “outdated” 702p LCD model, I caught a glimpse of the nearby camera bar. I was in the market for a new digital camera to replace the 2MP model that sat dormant on my dresser (yes, I know, embarrassing for an editor on a photography publication, but what can I say – I had two kids since I bought that dinosaur and now barely have time to eat, let alone go shopping for electronics). So I did a little window shopping, planning on making the actual purchase at a later date at a local photo retailer in my hometown.

What caught my attention, however, was not one of the cute pink compact digicams or even one of the more advanced zooms. Front and center was a gleaming Nikon D40, displayed majestically as if it were holding court over the paltry point-and-shoots. With the accompanying zoom lens that came with the package, the total asking price came to just a hair under $700.

What was interesting was not the fact that the D40 was making a Target appearance (DSLRs have had some sort of presence at big-box retail for a while). It was the camera’s positioning on the camera bar that made the most impression with me – it was obvious that Target was giving top billing to a camera that previously seemed out of most enthusiasts’ reach.

I looked around at the people milling about, wondering, “Will these cranky-looking people who are fighting over Pirates of the Caribbean DVDs and iPod nanos really be checking out the D40 over the other more consumery compacts?” Sure enough, within five minutes, at least four people were expertly handling the D40, heading to that display first before the other cameras that were within reach.

Welcome to the brave new world of digital camera shopping, and I do mean brave in the strictest sense: Consumers are now on their second (or third) generation of digital camera, are no longer intimidated by the basics (even my mom can pontificate about megapixels and LCD screens), and are ready to take their picture-taking to the next level: the DSLR. Of course, savvy marketing helps influence buyer’s browsing decisions — who can resist a sleek-looking package, or a premium position on the store shelf (there’s a reason Skippy and Jif are on eye level at the supermarket, and not Joe Schmo’s Peanut Butter Explosion). But there’s more to it than intelligent placement that has caught the attention of this new generation of DSLR buyer.

Canon just released its 12.2MP EOS Rebel Xsi camera in advance of PMA, touting it as “redefining the gateway prowess and pro-ness of the DSLR category.” With an improved autofocus sensor, advanced Live View function, and enhanced 14-bit A/D conversion, the Rebel Xsi promises to lure in even more users who have finally gotten comfortable behind the viewfinder and can finally afford to take that leap of faith and functionality. The Canon joins a couple of other new DSLRs set to debut at the show, all dangled out to consumers for under a grand.

Ease of use, professional-looking results, and a price points that won’t force you to deplete your kid’s 529. The category has been redefined, and the momentum is only growing. In the end, is it the camera manufacturers driving this consumer/DSLR trend by conducting super-effective marketing campaigns and lowering prices just enough to nab its new demographic, or is it simply a matter of supply meeting demand?

Does it really matter?