The problem is if all the informing from the past overwhelms the informing from the present

And snapshots from old family albums have a habit of looking good because they are more than snapshots: people took more time making them than they do now, people wore better clothes than they do now, people didn't necessarily know what was expected of them in front of the camera and if they did, they performed their task with more dignity, conviction and self-belief than they do now.

Instead they reinvented themselves, and the market.

Bruce Livingston, recently retired from Getty images started Istockphoto by putting some of his images on it and trading them with others. Surprised by its popularity, he decided to charge, not really to make money, but to pay for his hosting bills. He thus invented microstock.  Another ” failed” photographer, Jon Oringer, started Shutterstock with 30,000 of his own images, mostly because he couldn’t get accepted in a traditional stock agency.

The only way photography can be saved is to stop promoting this “salon photography “

I see great work from pro photographers who could actually use the money to achieve great work. What is wrong with you ? is this the kind of photography you really want to promote ? Henri Cartier Bresson must be having a tsunami in his grave as I can assure you, that was NOT the reason he created Magnum. Not for that kind of nombrilistic, uber self-absorded, hyper refflective intello photography.