What will happen when the digital imaging wave dies

J

jfretless

Established
Local time
3:30 PM
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
113
View My Gallery
I can't ask this question on other forums as I believe that most of the participants of those forums would fall in to this category and would be bias in their opinions.

It seems to me that the current "wave" of digital imaging is very similar to when Kodak introduced the Brownie. ...pretty much bringing photography to the masses. Not sure of the timeline, but I sure that after a while, the number of photographs taken by the masses dropped. ...leaving a certain percentage of people that continued on with photography.

There are always forum posts about somebody who had no or very little knowledge about photography jumping with fists full of money in digital photography. ...spending thousands of dollars of equipment, thinking that will buy them great photographs.

I can only think that in a few, ten years, the amount of images produced, uploaded, shared will be less than now. I also think that a good percentage of the images created today will cease to exist ten years from now. Some where along the lines of.... "news today, fish wrap tomorrow." People snap pictures to tell the latest story and very few of them put enough value in those images to make sure those images last past the next camera upgrade, computer hard drive crash, flash card format or online image hosting company goes out of business.

At least with film, the negative were lost in the box for years until someone found them. I don't think that we be the case now, digital is too fragile.

What do you think?

John
 
Believe what you want, but digital is here to stay and will only become more dominant - I'm not saying I like this outlook, but I'm trying to be realistic. Have you looked at people's cameras lately? How many film cameras do you see around? How many younger people do you see with film cameras? We are in the minority and considered dinosaurs.
 
Things like radio and TV will disappear before taking and sharing digital pictures go away. The only fad part of it that I can discern is the fetishizing of big, heavy, DSLRs. Eventually this will fade as people get tired of lugging all that hardware around and getting -- for 95+ percent of them -- pictures that are no better than their kids take with their iPhones.

Most people take pictures to record information and memorialize something. They are not really interested in a photo that can stand on its own. That's why cheap point and shoots, in whatever form they have taken, have always been so popular. Start talking to non-photographers about aperture, f-stops, and all that and count the number of eyes that glaze over.

The really important thing about the ubiquity of digital is that it will expose more and more people to photographer and some of those people will go on to become serious picture takers.
 
When I learned to drive, a few cars and all trucks had a 'crash gear box' (remember them? ) - changing or shifting was an art of timing and engine revs., then 'synchromesh' made it simple! -they are still around!.
 
Social networking has given the average person an outlet to share their party/family snaps with the world, and that is making digital photography more than just 'photography' - it has moved to a completely different realm of documenting events and showcasing to friends. There will always be people genuinely interested in the art/science of photography, but this current 'wave' has more to do with the rise of social media.
 
Digital is here to stay. Analog will be niche but still viable.

I think about starting out on piano with Bastien method, learning on an upright in our family room, then a Baldwin baby grand. Then with MIDI, keyboards and playing in bands in school, sometimes a Hammond electric, but more often than not my Nord Electro. Luckiy there was Greek Othodox church nearby that had a Steinway in the basement that I can use - which I could spend hours, just playing chords, it's very therapeutic to duck in an loose an afternoon. I think there is somewhat of a parallel. There is room for both. It's cheaper, easier,more mainstream, and more convenient to produce a digital instrument at this poin. But there will always be room in the market, and a preference for a well crafted analog instrument.
 
An interesting and not very easy question to answer. I think the novelty of snapping everything in site fostered by cellphone cameras and cheap digital P&S's will fade. But with everyone having a cellphone with a camera and the ease of snapping the shot, I'm not sure it will go very far away.

I think it is more likely that photographers like us will disappear eventually...not just "us" as in film photographers but also the serious digital photographers. We are the hobby end of the "fad."

Those folks with cellphones and P&S cameras are appliance users. They have a cellphone, it's got a camera, push a button, take a photo, push another button, send it to a friends (or a thousand friends) phone. Why not? Requires no thought of effort. So those folks are going to keep shooting.
 
ItsReallyDarren said:
Is this the makings for a new game? Like I spy?

"Spot the pro"? Who's got two bodies with red or gold rings attached to them, battery pack for all the pictures taken, flashes attached to the body, fong dongs attached to said flash, and for the finale a tamrack backpack with the logo removed (to be discreet)
Click to expand...

that's pretty funny actually. fong dong equals "i am not a pro" pus "i'm losing abut 2 full stops of output and going through batteries like the wind to compensate. but it sure looks cool".

there are different groups out there... like fred hinted at. the multiple body, lenses with hoods taped on and company names written all over it, lowe pro gloves (believe it or not i see more and more of these), some kind of pass with their photo and PRESS written across the top, and and a 300 f2.8 hanging over the shoulder crowd and if you pay close attention you will see the point and shoot/single body and single focal length folks about on occasion. they usually look like tourists and sport weird gear. a 'blad swc, a grd or a super beat leica. those are the "proz" you want to "knowz". and they won't be in a pack on the other side of the street sporting monopods.

group 1 likes gear. gear talk, big gear, long gear, gloves with the gear name written on it, many pieces of gear and heavy gear. the heavier the better. they travel in packs. one bloke picks a vantage spot, extends the monopod and sooner than later the pack joins.

the other group likes beer.

what was the original post? something about digital being "fragile"?
 
Much of the lifeblood has long been drained from mainstream journalism world (PJ especially), so I don't pay it much mind.

Ironically, in the digital age, everybody (of a certain age, it appears) want to look "important" with their camera, if not exactly like a pro. Their kids? They'll chuckle at the sight and sneak a snarky snap of them with their phone, and have it uploaded before anyone's the wiser. (Then completely forget about it within a week and a half.) And, it's the phones that are going to wipe the floor, not merely regarding still digital cameras (that seems to be happening already), but camcorders as well. Reporters are going to have to find other stuff to fill those fashionable shoulder bags...

Phones-as-all-in-one-media-device only interest me academically as a social phenomenon; like social networking, they has their interesting points, but have about as much connection to my day to day life (never mind my photography) as my now-digitally-kneecapped Sony Trinitron has to tonight's episode of Family Guy. If you concern yourself too much with what "everybody else" is doing, you wind up misplacing your personal compass. Doesn't sound like much fun to me!


- Barrett
 
sepiareverb said:
But will anyone lament the passing of the Compact Flash Card like we do Kodachrome?
Click to expand...
No. They'll simply gripe about these kids with their "wafer-size" media devices and how silly/wimpy they all look...not like the days when a real dude strode about with 1D and a zoom with a hood that could reach the floor...😉


- Barrett
 
In 2012 Canadian terrorists will bring America to its knees via an Electro-Magnetic Pulse bomb detonated during the Presidential Debate between Barack Obama and Sarah Palin. The bomb will shut down everything electrical, and wipe clean every hard drive. Billions upon billions of digital photos will be lost.

Children's birthday parties. Gone.
That funny picture you took of yourself in the bathroom mirror. Gone.
Dozens of drunken snaps your teenaged daughter took when she acquired a fake ID and snuck into a night club. Gone.
The photos of you taken mid-yawn that your mother tagged you in on Facebook. Gone.

This disaster will spark a renaissance in film photography. However there will be many restrictions in taking photographs thanks to America's new Canadian overlords.
 
The wave will not be going away. The same type of individuals who throw money at expensive digital gear expecting to buy great photographs were and are still with us in the film photography world. What has changed? Only a very tiny portion of film images were ever destined to be important and it is the same with digital. What is different? Personally I enjoy trying to get a good shot and to have a visual record of my travels/family. I care little if they outlast me as I am sure virtually nobody will have an interest in them. I think that is the case for most people and the photos they take. Again nothing has changed, just substitute digital for film. To think other wise is just film snobbery.
 
Darkhorse said:
In 2012 Canadian terrorists will bring America to its knees via an Electro-Magnetic Pulse bomb detonated during the Presidential Debate between Barack Obama and Sarah Palin. The bomb will shut down everything electrical, and wipe clean every hard drive. Billions upon billions of digital photos will be lost.

Children's birthday parties. Gone.
That funny picture you took of yourself in the bathroom mirror. Gone.
Dozens of drunken snaps your teenaged daughter took when she acquired a fake ID and snuck into a night club. Gone.
The photos of you taken mid-yawn that your mother tagged you in on Facebook. Gone.

This disaster will spark a renaissance in film photography. However there will be many restrictions in taking photographs thanks to America's new Canadian overlords.
Click to expand...

Who leaked our plans?!?!
 
Darkhorse said:
In 2012 Canadian terrorists will bring America to its knees via an Electro-Magnetic Pulse bomb detonated during the Presidential Debate between Barack Obama and Sarah Palin. The bomb will shut down everything electrical, and wipe clean every hard drive. Billions upon billions of digital photos will be lost.

Children's birthday parties. Gone.
That funny picture you took of yourself in the bathroom mirror. Gone.
Dozens of drunken snaps your teenaged daughter took when she acquired a fake ID and snuck into a night club. Gone.
The photos of you taken mid-yawn that your mother tagged you in on Facebook. Gone.

This disaster will spark a renaissance in film photography. However there will be many restrictions in taking photographs thanks to America's new Canadian overlords.
Click to expand...

unless of course you print.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kübler-Ross_model

1) Denial
2) Anger
3) Bargaining
4) Depression
5) Acceptance

I would say you're in Stage 1 at the moment. Some here have gone on to Stage 4 and Stage 5 with regard to the death of film, as seen in the Fuji and Kodak 'film death' notices recently posted.

Digital photography is not a fad, and it's not going away.

The comparison to the popular movements towards amateur photography, made possible by roll film and Kodak Brownie cameras ("You push the button, we do the rest") is somewhat valid, but you have to take it to the extreme. Roll-film put the quietus on dry plate photography for all intents and purposes. Yes, it still existed - dry plates were made for the popular market until the 1930's, and were still made until very recently for some medical applications, as I understand it. But the market for dry plates and pro photography was essentially destroyed because flexible-base film was a game-changer.

Digital likewise has put the quietus on film. Yes, it still exists, and you can buy it in a variety of formats. But in a very short period of time, it will be no more. Digital may lose popularity in terms of the sales trends (by the by, various organizations have predicted the 'flattening of the sales curve' for nearly five years now and been wrong every time) and the global recession has indeed resulted in a cut in digital point-and-shoot models (dSLR camera sales continue to climb, amazingly), but digital was a game-changer just like flexible-base film was a game-changer. There is no going back. Even if there is a massive flattening of the sales curve, what will happen is that fewer companies will make fewer models, and release new models less often, and weaker companies will drop out. But it won't mean film comes back again.

The film manufacturing plants that are being shut down are being knocked down, repurposed, and otherwise disposed of. They do not sit idle, waiting for the death-knell of fickle fate to dispose of digital so that the film plants can come roaring back to life again.

It is time for you to move on to the next stage of grief and get over it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom