Interesting Article About the Future of Digital

[cbass]

Here is an interesting article about the future of digital cameras. Many intriguing advances are being made (e.g., liquid lens technology, hydrogen fuel cell batteries) so this information may be useful to those of us who have dipped our toes into the digital waters.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/02/technology/circuits/02pogue.html

Presented solely for your enjoyment. PLEASE, let's all keep our wits about us and not turn this into a "film-is-dead" thread.

Have a pleasant day.

 

[RML]

Film is un-alive! Long live digits! Or sumfin'....

Sorry. Couldn't resist. 😛

 

[Iyidin_Kyeimo]

Some of Nikon's CoolPix models already contain face-recognition software, a feature that supposedly assists focus by scanning the scene for human facial features. And Canon is working on even more sophisticated recognition software. One, called Blink Shot, would prevent the camera from taking the picture when your subject's eyes are closed. A companion feature, called Smile Shot, waits to fire until your subject manages a grin.

Oh my goodness, forget the death of film, what about the death of the photographer?? Soon there will be nothing more to do than walk around with a camera hung round your neck, it will look for the best pictures, take them and publish them to a website... and appearing under pictures in the popular photography press we will have things like "picture credit: Canon's smart photo-taker 3.54".. :bang:


On another, related note. I was reading in "Physics World" the other day about the possibility of creating a perfect lens. I won't go into details because I'm sure people won't be interested (and I don't fully understand, either 😛 ) but basically, a thin metal film with periodic holes drilled through not only allows 100% transmission, but also has a regative refractive index, thereby allowing lenses to be made whose resolution is not limited by the wavelength of light! Not sure how practical they will be for camera use, but an interesting posibility all the same.

 

[ch1]

Just saw this and was about to post - see it's already been done.

I wonder what the camera sales statistic would be if you included re-sales of used film cameras (a'la eBay)?

 

[cbass]

My interest was piqued by the liquid lens technology. I first read about something like that in the Frank Herbert novel Dune in which Paul Atrietes uses fluid-lensed binoculars in the deserts of Arrakis.

Could electrically charged fluid technology be used to create ultra-fast super-wide angle lenses (say 12mm f/1.4) for an existing camera? Holy smoke, the possibilities are staggering. You might be able to have a complete kit in one lens.

 

[marknyc]

I saw this too. At the risk of taking a film vs. digital turn, what's the latest of achive potential of digital files. A couple of years ago I read a couple of pieces about how digital files don't have a long shelf life as the media in which they live, such as a CD or DVD, will start to fail after 10, 20, 30 years. Is that true? I ask in part because I just pulled out some old slides and negs from 20 years ago, kept in far from optimal conditions (i.e., shoved in a drawer) and they are all as good as new.

Makes you wonder, what state are all the various baby pics being taken now with digital going to be like in 30 years? Don't really see this discussed much now (but maybe I'm just not looking hard enough).

-- Mark

 

[taffer]

Oh my goodness, forget the death of film, what about the death of the photographer?? Soon there will be nothing more to do than walk around with a camera hung round your neck, it will look for the best pictures, take them and publish them to a website... and appearing under pictures in the popular photography press we will have things like "picture credit: Canon's smart photo-taker 3.54".. :bang:


On another, related note. I was reading in "Physics World" the other day about the possibility of creating a perfect lens. I won't go into details because I'm sure people won't be interested (and I don't fully understand, either 😛 ) but basically, a thin metal film with periodic holes drilled through not only allows 100% transmission, but also has a regative refractive index, thereby allowing lenses to be made whose resolution is not limited by the wavelength of light! Not sure how practical they will be for camera use, but an interesting posibility all the same.

The photographer is already dead, Kodak killed him/her long ago, remember ? 'You just press the button, we do the rest' 😉

There's a series of books from a Spanish sci-fi / historical writer, mentioning a hypothetic travel back in time involving two USAF officers using high-tech gizmos, one of them was a pin-point hidden camera that used gas (the real one) lenses which changed focal lenght by modifying their inner density.

Still sci-fi, I hope, imagine the trouble to clean lenses made of gas ! 😛

 

[cbass]

The photographer is already dead, Kodak killed him/her long ago, remember ? 'You just press the button, we do the rest' 😉

Along those lines, sometimes I think that if cameras were like casino games then digital P&S would be slot machines and RFs would be poker tables.

 

[HansDerHase]

Hm. Reading that article made me sad and angry. 😡

Now that the megapixel race seems to be over (finally) I was hoping to see something in the line of what Mike Jonhston is hoping for in ‘DMD’: The Digital Camera I’d Like to Own.

But then - I'm a relict from the past and a minority as well. :bang:

Citizen journalists are the future. :bang: :bang:

 

[airds]

Pixel race

Pixel race

I've heard Mr. Westfall's crowd have a 23Mpixel EOS-1Ds Mark II & EOS-1D Mark II N single replacement waiting to be announced .......

 

[dcsang]

I've heard Mr. Westfall's crowd have a 23Mpixel EOS-1Ds Mark II & EOS-1D Mark II N single replacement waiting to be announced .......

That would not surprise me but the question then would be. Will it be full frame or 1.3x crop because the Ds is full frame and the MK II series was 1.3x crop.

Should be interesting - I've heard all sorts of rumours and heresay stating that full frame sensors will not be around much longer.... we'll see..

Dave

 

[DerekF]

I saw this too. At the risk of taking a film vs. digital turn, what's the latest of achive potential of digital files. A couple of years ago I read a couple of pieces about how digital files don't have a long shelf life as the media in which they live, such as a CD or DVD, will start to fail after 10, 20, 30 years. Is that true? I ask in part because I just pulled out some old slides and negs from 20 years ago, kept in far from optimal conditions (i.e., shoved in a drawer) and they are all as good as new.

Makes you wonder, what state are all the various baby pics being taken now with digital going to be like in 30 years? Don't really see this discussed much now (but maybe I'm just not looking hard enough).

-- Mark

The archival life of the storage media itself is only half of the problem. What we consider to be stable file formats today may not be around in 10, 20 or 30 years. Who knows if JPEG or even RAW will still be around in 30 years? Any serious digital photographer will probably not only copy or move his important work to new media every few years (with several redundant backups just in case), but will also take the time to convert those images to newer standards as they emerge. But what about Average Joe Consumer who assumes CDs will last forever.. who knows? From what I've heard, many of them didn't even keep negatives after their pictures returned from the drugstore photofinisher, so maybe this discussion isn't even relevant to them.

 

[ch1]

On that final point, I think remains unclear which final media will find consumer acceptance. While a lot of shops are offering direct to CD transfers from CF and similar cards/sticks - there is also a number of people who still want prints made, either in addition to, or instead of a CD.

I'm remembering Kodak's big ad campaign during the 2004 Olympics with the tag line "Where's the pictures?" trying to convince consumers to still get prints even if they shoot digital. All the Walgreens and similar stores now have DIY print kiosks too.

Guess time will tell how the consumer "goes" regarding storage of digital images.

 

[cpranger]

I wouldn't take this article too seriously. David Pogue writes about gee whiz consumer electronics stuff, he does some entertaining videos -- sometimes quite corny -- that you can get off the NY Times site, but his "shtuck" is writing about the bleeding edge of electronics, not about artistry or professionalism in photography. He has a great following, is fun to read and watch, and is pretty much irrelevant to the focus and interests of those here in this forum, at least as far as I can tell. If he wrote about the joys and wonders of film based photography I'm pretty sure he'd lose his job the next week. Really, the sky isn't falling.

Frank

 

[Paulbe]

Look at this way though---we're 8 percenters! If 92% of camera sales are digital--since we are in the minority---maybe we can get some Federal programs going. Or Frank S and I can hop on our bikes and be 1 percenters...

 

[ch1]

Look at this way though---we're 8 percenters! If 92% of camera sales are digital--since we are in the minority---maybe we can get some Federal programs going. Or Frank S and I can hop on our bikes and be 1 percenters...

And I would hazard to guess that the 8% were primarily higher-end gear. Not too many folks buying film P&S's anymore!

We're evolving into a niche market.....

 

[aad]

I think digital P&S will be not too far behind as better cell phone cameras take over. But everyone still wants a print...

 

[yossarian]

You might also want to check Herbert Keppler's article:

www.photoreporter.com

(trade publication)

 

[Socke]

My interest was piqued by the liquid lens technology. I first read about something like that in the Frank Herbert novel Dune in which Paul Atrietes uses fluid-lensed binoculars in the deserts of Arrakis.

Could electrically charged fluid technology be used to create ultra-fast super-wide angle lenses (say 12mm f/1.4) for an existing camera? Holy smoke, the possibilities are staggering. You might be able to have a complete kit in one lens.

Only if you have enough sandworms producing spice 🙂

 

[Socke]

The archival life of the storage media itself is only half of the problem. What we consider to be stable file formats today may not be around in 10, 20 or 30 years.

The various proprietary RAW formats are a problem, Canons newest software does not support the Canon D30 which is just five years old.

JPEG and TIFF on the other hand are very well documented and every programmer worth his money can build a decoder from scratch. This is not needed since the sources for a lot of image manipulation programs are freely available and you can use one of those.

GIF is some 20 years old now and loads of programs can read it. Even ancient formats like Pict and SCODL from long gone platforms are no problem for todays programs. Hey, I can read C64 tapes and run C64 programs on my PC! Same for ATARI 2600 cartridges.