The Rise of Digital Imaging and the Fall of the Old Camera Industry

I've just finished reading it and going to post it just to find it's already here. I second it, it's very well written and gives some hints on probability of success of new Leica S2 system.
 
It is inevitable that the market will be dominated by Digital. But it is also likely that the market for analogue will still be there for some time, provided Kodak, Fuji, Ilford and the like kept on producing film. The film camera market has shrunk so much that only the good quality fully mechanical cameras are marketable these days. Electronic ones have dropped so much in prices. TLRs seem to be doing very well, so are the Leica Ms. Nikon Fs and F2s are doing much better than the F3s and later models. By analogy, CDs have not pushed the LPs into extinction but the turnables are making a comeback and the most expensive ones seem to be doing well. There is only one reason for this. The LP, even a middle-of-the-road system, can produce better sound than an expensive CD based system can produce. Those who are musicians will appreciate this. The same is true with pictures. Even with the technology of X million gigapexels, the image produced is an imitation of the real thing. The creamy like pictures with good shadow details are still a long way off. So, Moore's law will work, but it will stop at a certain point when saturation is attained. I also think, and hope, that Kodak, Fuji, Ilford and the like will keep on making films as there will still be a market, albeit a small market. But it is still a market where healthy profits could still be made.
 
I'm not sure I agree with you, Windscale, either that lp's are better than CD's or that digital can't best film in terms of quality--really depends on price point of the digital you're talking about. But I'm an optimist about some company still producing film and servicing all of us who love film and film cameras. It may not be Fuji, Kodak, or even Ilford, but a whole new company, and the prices will reflect the niche market, but it will be available.
 
sooner said:
I'm not sure I agree with you, Windscale, either that lp's are better than CD's or that digital can't best film in terms of quality--really depends on price point of the digital you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Sooo, which current expensive digital camera can best a properly exposed 4x5 sheet of Velvia 50? :D
 
While many companies miss technology shifts, the idea that Kodak did is completely incorrect. They were well aware of the threat of a digital image as soon as the first one was produced around 1980. It could be said that they were too worried as they took their eye off film and Fuji made huge inroads throughout the 80s. It would be another 20 years before digital really started affecting their market.

Digital is a different product cycle. The film cameras only had significant developments every decade. Film could be sold for years with little or no modification. Digital cameras have a product life of less than 2 years. It's hard to adapt.

Eight advantages of film can be found here.
 
Very interesting read. I think I know why the pace of change was much faster than can even be explained by Moore's Law. And that is that the electrical engineers were designing dedicated circuits and boards - with very specific tasks - to use less and less battery power while processing more and more pixels. I had one of the original Epson digital cameras and I always kept at least a dozen AA batteries because it literally ate them up. I always feared that if digital cameras could not overcome their 1st generation battery demands, there was no future in them. Well, I should not have worried. It is simply amazing to think of the vast data the current generation of DSLRs is processing at 1/8000 of a second at 10 fps. Even the M8 is processing a lot of RAW information very quickly with very little electrical demand. Without advances in the power efficiencies, the digital camera revolution would have not occured as fast. As it is, and as is stated very eliquently in this article, this revolution took down some sacred cows of the photo industry which in turned provided opportunities for companies that would never make it had they entered into the film camera business.
 
Some people are still doing derragotypes (?spelling); Film is just another medium. No reason why it should not be around even 500 years from now. Some artists use charcoal to draw, others prefer silver halide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom