Sooner or later some new technology is invented and becomes available to the masses, usually being either easier, quicker, cleaner, more efficient, cheaper than what we had before. And while I love the fact that I don’t have to learn typesetting or screen printing to be able to print 100 copies of a text document, each of these technological advances pushes up the baseline and definition of commodities in our society.

If I were to decide to start a business servicing the demand for coping text files (let’s call them books) in fourteenth century Germany, it would have been a lucrative business employing 10 people to copy books by hand, because most people were illiterate and such work was mainly done in monasteries by the few who could read and write.

But after Gutenberg invented the printing press, my business would suffer immensely, because the cost (yes, we are assuming fair wages in the dark ages, but still) of work was diminished with his invention and people who worked setting the types didn’t necessarily need to understand the symbols they were placing on the press, merely be precise in positioning them correctly.

In today’s society, where almost every week some new technology makes all AI aficionados scream at the heavens in fear of a robot apocalypse, the process of technological obsoletion has been shortened well beyond our capabilities as a culture to adopt (these things do take time — we are still arguing about AC vs. DC power). But where does this leave us creatives?

While we have bio-art, 3D rendered object and VR on the one side, many are still using pigment and base to paint their works on linen and cotton canvases. In photography you still have artists today, who are creating their images with large format cameras on wet-collodion; not because it would be as quick or convenient as digital photography, but because these one off photographs are unlike any lab prints or images we see on our computer screens today.

The depth of the photographs, that such large cameras can produce because of the particular optics used, is incomparable to any other medium; the depictions of people are vivid, almost alive and they pop-out like the live images in the world of Harry Potter. So in the time the majority makes thousands of images with their DSLR and phone cameras, these artists make maybe 5, but because of the quality and scarcity of their product, they can stay in business much easier than most of us digital photographers.

So while wet-collodion is an old technique and VR is brand new, both share a very important trait, they are both scarce. Neither have a lot of artists working in the medium and both are remarkable because of it (and because of the plain amazingness of what they can offer as a creative tool).

So my point is this, while there have never been more creatives living on our planet as there are today, while the market has never been as saturated as it is today, rather than do what everybody else does, we should focus on particularities. Not because of a higher possibility of success, but because we can actually afford to make exactly the thing we like to do. Be it the news, most complicated thing nobody really understands (like Crypto-kitties in 2017) or that old thing nobody wants to do anymore because it is either too hard or takes too long. If the pet rock was a 1 million dollar business, we can be sure that there is a market for all of us. We just need to focus our attention towards finding (or even creating) it, and to never really be on time with what everybody else does. A bit early or really late, for me that’s the best time to be at work.