More Rochester news about Kodak

[lns]

Yes.

From my limited market sample of 24 parents on a kid soccer team (not counting myself), ranging from one avid photo enthusiast to several "phone to facebook" picture takers and mostly digital P&S owners, the P&S owners are mostly disappointed with their inability to conveniently get a quality photograph from their digital unit that they can show to someone. They don't see digital as easier - they see it as a pain. I know, because they always ask me where I get film for my cameras because they don't know where to get film any longer for their cameras.

The one photo enthusiast lady bought a high quality inkjet, so she's all set.

You are so right. Our friends and neighbors all have digital cameras, though most hate them, and most can't get a decent print. But everyone likes the convenience. That said, many, many folks are just using their cellphones anyway, instead of a complicated digital p&s. The cellphone is the true heir of the film p&s. As well as the videocamera.

But the people I know at least aren't going back to film. A digital camera is something you just have. It's the latest and greatest. Especially now it's in cellphones, which you can update fairly cheaply every two years.

I do think we're moving into a post-print culture. I think people don't see the need for 4x6 prints anymore. Digital cameras make getting a set of 4x6 prints very difficult. But people have discovered they like what digital cameras make easy, which is photos on the computer and on Facebook.

I do think a smart marketer could make film and prints seem hip, and could play up how easy they are compared to digital. It just doesn't appear that any of the film companies have either that motivation or that savvy. Maybe the Lomo types can save us after all.

-Laura

[M.A.Longmore]

I do think a smart marketer could make film and prints seem hip, and could play up how easy they are compared to digital. It just doesn't appear that any of the film companies have either that motivation or that savvy. Maybe the Lomo types can save us after all. -Laura

.
I Am Waiting Patiently For Kodak To Realize That !
.

[jglass]

You are so right. Digital cameras make getting a set of 4x6 prints very difficult. -Laura

Yes, I agree. Even with "high end" inkjet printers, it's very difficult and brutally expensive. There's a discussion on this at The Online Photographer here, with folks who are very experienced in this sort of thing bemoaning the difficulty of printing in digital.

I'm fortunate to have a pro lab that does nice printing, although it takes a long time to get an RA-4 optical print from them on color.

I appreciate this discussion.

[MaximusM3]

You are so right. Our friends and neighbors all have digital cameras, though most hate them, and most can't get a decent print. But everyone likes the convenience. That said, many, many folks are just using their cellphones anyway, instead of a complicated digital p&s. The cellphone is the true heir of the film p&s. As well as the videocamera.

But the people I know at least aren't going back to film. A digital camera is something you just have. It's the latest and greatest. Especially now it's in cellphones, which you can update fairly cheaply every two years.

I do think we're moving into a post-print culture. I think people don't see the need for 4x6 prints anymore. Digital cameras make getting a set of 4x6 prints very difficult. But people have discovered they like what digital cameras make easy, which is photos on the computer and on Facebook.

I do think a smart marketer could make film and prints seem hip, and could play up how easy they are compared to digital. It just doesn't appear that any of the film companies have either that motivation or that savvy. Maybe the Lomo types can save us after all.

-Laura

Laura,

I think this is at the core problem, even though it may have little impact on Kodak's bottom line. The truth is that very few digital shooters ever print their images, and have no clue (nor care probably) about what a good quality print looks like. This is the age of looking at an image on computers, iPhones, iPads and that's the reality. Printing inkjet in color is a bitch. Calibration of monitor (and you need a GREAT monitor to do it properly) and printers is a royal pain, ink is expensive, etc etc. Black & white for the serious photographer is even more of a joke, since the only viable option is Piezography at the high end and, again, not as easy as it looks, with clogged nozzles, price of inks, need of the right papers, drivers, profiles, etc. Going back to film is not the answer either because, let's face it, the masses are not going back to bringing film to labs that don't exist or jump in darkrooms to do it themselves. The only options are crappy inkjets at home or crappy inkjets from Walmart/Costco, etc. Either way, again, nobody can tell the difference anymore and an image is just as easy shared via email/Facebook/Flickr, where it hits the end of the road, and that is the sad reality of it.

There is no company that I can tell interested in making film and prints hip because there is no money in it. There is a nifty app for iPhones called "hypstamatic" with an option to buy prints directly from them within the app. I have never used that option but it seems very easy and painless. I bet very few people, if any, have ever ordered prints that way.

Best,

Max

[Tim Gray]

That's the thing about prints for the regular person. You HAD to get them in the past to see your pictures. You usually didn't come to realize the value of them until long after you had them made. Now, you view the picture instantly, get your satisfaction, and then for the most part forget them. There's no rediscovering them years later when cleaning out a desk drawer or the closet.

[MaximusM3]

That's the thing about prints for the regular person. You HAD to get them in the past to see your pictures. You usually didn't come to realize the value of them until long after you had them made. Now, you view the picture instantly, get your satisfaction, and then for the most part forget them. There's no rediscovering them years later when cleaning out a desk drawer or the closet.

Bingo. One day, these people will realize that they have no memories. Hard drives crash, computers get thrown away, file handling may change, ...and your 10,000 images from 50 different digital cameras...gone.

[Dave in Kansas]

Tim,

There is a lot of truth in what you said about not realizing the value of pictures until long after you take them. It's interesting how many pictures I find that were made in the past and I never thought much about them at the time. As years go by and family members and relatives grow old or depart, these photos become much more valuable to a person. They certainly mean more to me now than they did at the time.

I suspect we in a point of time when kids will grow up to have 8 or 10 pictures of themselves that had actually been printed. In some ways it similar to 80 years ago when people didn't have many pictures. Those of us who were brought up in the 50's - 80's generally have a fairly large supply of photos, but that won't be the case with the current generation.

Dave

[Tim Gray]

Hopefully it will be different for my kids, if I ever have any. One of my most treasured possessions is the trays and trays of slides my dad took of my brother and I when we were kids. The bulk of those are from 1980-1995. Most of them are Kodachrome too

[Ken Nadvornick]

There is no company that I can tell interested in making film and prints hip because there is no money in it.

Impossible?

Ken

[MaximusM3]

Impossible?

Ken

True, Ken, forgot about Impossible. That's more like a self contained universe though (instant film). Where we have a roll of film, sheets, developing, and printing involved, things get obviously a bit more complicated...and expensive.