Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,840   Posts: 1,582,607   Online: 1049
      
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,011

    Changes in the marketplace: how low can it go?

    In the recent publicity about our local Kodak factory turning up its toes (Melbourne), much was made of the penetration of digital cameras among the public. In the various statistics, it seems that the cameras built into mobile phones have been included, in order to boost the numbers.

    When I look through our family's collection of pictures, the quality is a function of the historical period. The nineteenth century sepia toned photos are very sharp and show no noticeable fading. Black and white from the 1930s are small but reasonably sharp. Kodachrome taken on Dad's Praktica (50mm Zeiss Tessar/2.8) in the 1950s are still vivid and sharp. Colour prints from that era generally faded. Later snaps were taken on the Instamatic (not very sharp and the prints were done at the fast-turnaround booths etc and are faded). Someone had a 110 camera at some time but there are very few prints, so I suppose that was below the acceptable limit for its day.

    Now are they implying that a picture taken on a phone is acceptable? They have their uses, such as transmitting a photo of yourself on a beach in Mexico to your colleagues at work, or identifying a spare part, but Really! I'm lost for words.

  2. #2
    jim kirk jr.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    743
    Images
    2
    I'm thinking that in a few years we'll see photos of phones with cameras(to remember them ) because once people start dropping them in the sand(or Jaws gets a hold of them-who wants to see a photo where this is going?)they'll quikly be forgotten.They sell binoculars with them too but I can't imagine the quality of a photo from one being good at all.
    "An object never performs the same function as its name or its image"-Rene Magritte

    "An image of a dog does not bite"-William James applied to photography

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by jim kirk jr.
    I'm thinking that in a few years we'll see photos of phones with cameras(to remember them ) because once people start dropping them in the sand(or Jaws gets a hold of them-who wants to see a photo where this is going?)they'll quikly be forgotten.They sell binoculars with them too but I can't imagine the quality of a photo from one being good at all.
    The quality of the pictures on the phone is limited by the current gen 2 or gen 3 infrastructure of the cell phone network. At some point the bandwidth will improve and picture quality will become more than acceptable to the average disposible camera using comsumer.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    701
    We live in a world filled with people that are in a constant rush, can't wait for anything, need instant gratification.

    I find it oddly funny that people will comment on how I need to slow my walking pace and take time to enjoy just walking - all the while they are the ones rushing through everything else in life. They can't wait to see an actual photo print, they simply must have it now, they must share it immediately, they must have an instant reaction. Why? It doesn't change anything if you see the photo today or a week from today. The photo will remain the same. The sentiment felt when viewing it will be the same no matter when it's seen. No one knows how much time has passed until you tell them. Whatever you missed seeing has been missed no matter how quickly you are able to view a photo. Viewing a photo only moments or hours after it occurs doesn't change that you weren't there.

    I guess I'm feeling ranty tonight.

  5. #5
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,483
    Images
    20
    We have to carry so much crap in our wallets these days--various ID cards, driver's license, credit cards, health insurance cards, public transit cards, library, photocopier, frequent-flyer this and membership that, business cards, other people's business cards, cash heaven forbid, and the like. I can't imagine fitting any prints in there.

    How low? Can the cell phone be that much worse than the disk camera?

    The box Brownie with the meniscus lens was a pretty low standard in its day--not much different from an instamatic, but the film was a lot bigger.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  6. #6
    Max
    Max is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    97
    Can the cell phone be that much worse than the disk camera?
    If they're all like the ones I looked at (just to kill some time while I was waiting for service) - YES.

  7. #7
    L Gebhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NH - Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,723
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    18
    I am generally one of those who is in a rush to see his his photos. I didn't like to week or turn around time for E6 4x5 or the week for mailorder 120 processing so I bought a Jobo. Now I can have my slides in about an hour.

    Since this is APUG maybe I shouldn't admit this, but I do own a digital camera or two, but not because of the speed. They are great for some things. My little Sony has an underwater housing that makes it fun to capture video and images at the beach. It also takes up alot less space than my camcorder and compact 35mm camera. It also makes a great 5x7 snapshot. This is important if I just want to enjoy the day, and maybe take a shot or two to remember the place. Cell phone cameras will serve this purpose nicely when the resolution and memory increase.

  8. #8
    Fintan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ireland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,793
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by L Gebhardt
    Cell phone cameras will serve this purpose nicely when the resolution and memory increase.
    I agree and sharp have just announced a 2 megapixel camera for cell phones. This is really going to make camera stores regret pushing digital point and shoots because people will be buying their "cameras" in cell phone shops.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Århus, Denmark
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,102
    Images
    16
    I think a lot of people here would be happy when someone is making a Large Format Phone Booth....sort of the analog answer to the mobile camera phone.

  10. #10
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Fintan
    I agree and sharp have just announced a 2 megapixel camera for cell phones. This is really going to make camera stores regret pushing digital point and shoots because people will be buying their "cameras" in cell phone shops.
    I think it is sony that is selling in Japan a 3.2 megapixel cell phone camera. Won't be long before that one hits other markets.
    Non Digital Diva



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin