jeff_rivera5 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Steve, Don't patronize people in the developing world. "Ok, you guys can't have digital, you can only have film." You can buy a digital camera for $12 bucks that will make 4x6 prints. Don't you think a none film company might be motivated to sell digital cameras cheap in other markets? It can be much cheaper to put in digital systems in areas lacking infastructure than to install a minilab. I'm not just looking in my own backyard, though that's all I've personally seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grapegeek Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 It's going to be a long time before people in "developing" countries can afford digital... just think of the cost of the computer to hook up to your digital camera... I think most chinese would rather buy a cheap Holga and a roll of film... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_barnett2 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 And has anybody here bemoaning the demise of film tomorrow looked into other 'digital' related areas, like mobile phones. A massive surge is going on around the world in cell phone sales, but the market that launched them, Japan, is now experiencing a downturn in the mobile industry. This is predicted to spread to all the affluent markets soon, and this disillusionment has been the case with the new 3G technology since its inception. Expect a similar turn in the digital photography market once a certain market saturation has been achieved. The digital cameras that are swamping the market and making the headlines are not the Canon 10d's or the Nikon D100's, but the humble point and shoot efforts, sold in vast numbers. But once every household has one it will as usual find its way to the back of the drawer, to be brought out once a year for the holiday, just like any other high selling type of camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_rivera5 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 James, But if camera sales are 1:1 nationwide, that's going to cut film sales. It has to. I know that's not the point you were making, but that is the reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_barnett2 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 "Don't patronize people in the developing world. "Ok, you guys can't have digital, you can only have film." Jeff, you got me beat, I can't see where I said that. But if you need it explaining its to do with practicality and usage. Its not going to happen soon in the 3rd world. Lack of things like education, electricity, and damn it, food. But its a typical attitude from certain quarters isn't it? 'Gee, why don't they all go and take digital photographs instead of ploughing those dusty fields.' So if thats what you are suggesting Jeff I think we can safely say who is doing the patronizing, and it ain't me. Mind you, if the USA paid its UN debts and stopped looking up its own ass things may move somewhat quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
film rules Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Even if Kodak goes under, its assets will likely be sold and/or transfered. The result could be stand-alone black & white film manufacturer, as an example. The bottom line is, even if Kodak goes under, that does not mean that Tri-X or any other Kodak film is necessarily going to go with it. As long as there is a reasonable profit to be made, the product will continue to be sold by someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayne_cornell1 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 This may have already been mentioned but even here in the U.S. it is estimated that more than 90 percent of pictures taken are on film. This will decrease, of course, but a lot of people who buy digital cameras even now fool around with them for a few months, then put them away and shoot with film when they feel the need to take a picture. It's like electronic books. A couple of years ago e-book promoters were predicting the immediate demise of printed books. Today, ebooks remain a non factor in book sales and a lot of ebook readers are on the top shelves of closets. Despite the blustering of the high tech clans, I would bet a wide variety of films will be available through the lifetimes of everyone on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_rivera5 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Steve, If you think I'm going to defend my government on UN debt, your crazy. We are clearly not good neighbors on a lot of issues. And yes I agree with you education, health care, and food are a lot more important. But someone did suggest that the rest of the world will use film to take pictures. I'm saying that if they get to the point of wanting to take pictures, they'd have an easier time starting from scratch with digital. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henricus Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 I am indifferent. I'll use what gives the best performance and I can afford, whether it is digital, film or Daguerotype. Well, maybe not Daguerotype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b1 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Jeff - But, how many of those people are going to have computers, Photoshop- - - or even corner drug store for one-hour pick up and delivery of prints made from digital? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry_ting2 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 I just purchased another digital (Nikon 5700) to replace my obsolete one. And its still a PITA to use compared with my Leica M. Sure it has all the bells and whistles, but the interface is layers upon layers of menu manipulation. Try capturing the "essence of the moment" is quite impossible......and we all call that progress !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingell Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 I've ordered a 10D--Kodak's done for :). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas k. Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Wankers and fondlers get all exercised over the continued availability of film, even though they use precious little of the stuff. Photographers will just keep shooting pictures with whatever equipment works best; and if you consider the way that other digital technologies have gotten exponentially both more capable and cheaper over the past three decades, digital will likely soon be the almost unanimous choice of photographers everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kkjuhy Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Kodak has announced that they will close their lab in the Netherlands. All processing will be done in Belgium (for Luxemburg also). If I remember correctly, they will bring down the current number of labs in Europe from 45 to 20. Reason given is ... digital cameras (I leave it up to you if you want to believe that). My Own Fact is that one of the shops in town that has their photos processed at the Kodak lab in the Netherlands have tremendous trouble getting decent prints from Kodak (as I have found out...) and even getting "the job done as requested" (things like forgetting to deliver a CD and the like). One of the employees at that shop is a member of "my" photo club, so I hear a lot of these complaints from her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_milner2 Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Film will always be available because when Kodak go bust I will buy the formula for Tri-X, set up a small plant in China, and sell over the WWW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david k. Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 Less than 2% of the worlds population own a computer.......film's here for a while yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karim Ghantous Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 I tend to agree with those who believe that the developing world will take up digital. But you still have to have the computer and printer as posters here have pointed out. Whether film or digital is the third world's main media for photography an infrastructure of some kind will need to be set up. Chemicals are passive so you don't need to wire up your house to get your film developed. OTOH computers are cheap - that is, you don't need a super fast computer to be able to view and print and store images. Still, no electricity, no digital images. And you certainly don't need PhotoShop for goodness sakes, anymore than you need a Canon 1200mm f/5.6. ;-) As far as viewing and basic correction goes, the software for that is free anyway. The problem for serious photographers is that digital compacts are great toys but poor cameras; and DSLRs are still a bit expensive, but the 300D is helping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik_den_hartigh Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 It all depends on market factors. As long as there is demand for film, there will be supply. The thing nobody can predict is how large demand for film will be in one year, in five years, etc. And how large film demand will eventually remain after digital iss fully mature. Some generalizations can be made however. Digital is in the growth stage of its product lifecycle. This means enourmous innovation, fast improvement of products, increasing variety, sharply declining price levels. Eventually every market niche will be filled. If there is enough demand and purchasing power, someday some company will make a digital Leica M. Film on the contrary is in the decline phase of its lifecycle. This means that film becomes a cashcow for the big film companies. A cashcow that has to provide the cash for their investements in digital. This means that the will no longer invest in film. There will be no more innovations (maybe that's a good thing, meaning that your beloved tri-x will remain the same forever), no more development of new films. There will be cost-cutting (e.g., the closing of laboratories) and as quantities produced decline, the prices will also rise. The lifecycle thing is just a law of business economics. As long as we are prepared to pay for film, there will be companies that provide film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsr Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 I think Erik Den Hartigh's argument makes the best sense of all. If we support film by using it, it will continue to exist. What I wonder about is this: How long will Hollywood continue to produce movies on 35mm film? I would like to believe that film for our Leicas will be around as long as movies are shot on 35mm. Is the technology for big screen digital movies ready to roll? Is the world prepared to convert all its theaters? I know nothing of this and have neither read nor heard anything on that subject. Who can tell us?? William Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now