The survey result is 'nearly four in ten travellers (39%) say they have visited a tourist site mainly to take a photo or record a video.'

You, I believe, are making a different observation, which is that taking a photo or recording a film has long been a component of many tourist trips. Which is of course true.

I'll add that likely more people would have done so had film and film development been a lot cheaper. We certainly did trips in the 1980s where we took no camera, or if we did, only a few pictures or perhaps a single roll.

▲

rhdunn 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Digital cameras have existed before phones had the capability and have been around for a long time (at least 20 years). They made it a lot easier to take photos as you can take hundreds/thousands of photos and download them when you get home.

When visiting places on holiday, I've taken my camera with me for the purpose of taking photos. I've also seen people with more expensive cameras (mainly larger lenses) camped out near puffins, on boat trips, etc. with the intention of getting a decent wildlife photo.

	▲	eesmith 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, photo safaris have been a thing since at least the 1960s, when it was all film cameras, and the term "shutterbugs" used since at least the 1940s. Indeed, now that you bring it up, I think a good interpretation of this survey is that more people now are doing photo safaris than they did some decades ago, where "safari" takes on a broader meaning tied to popular culture trends. It think it's like how many people go to the Louvre for the sole purpose of seeing (and photographing) the Mona Lisa, or (more distantly) the standard itinerary of the Grand Tour, both done because that's what everyone else (that they care about) thinks is the right or cool thing to do.