Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,866   Posts: 1,583,202   Online: 856
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28
  1. #1
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    3,668
    Images
    344

    Film v digital image statistics

    Are there any statistics about numbers of still images taken each year? I just wondered at what stage/year in the development of digital photography, the quantity of images made worldwide surpassed those made on film since film became available and how that relationship of film/digital ratio number now stacks up as we move into the future.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  2. #2
    Muihlinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Olías del Rey, Toledo
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    291
    IMHO taken means nothing, probably most mean nothing even for the taker. Relevant is what matters, and that number appears to be decreasing with media overload.
    Luis Miguel Castañeda Navas
    http://imaginarymagnitude.net/

  3. #3
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,192
    Images
    6

    I think you're correct

    Quote Originally Posted by Muihlinn View Post
    IMHO taken means nothing, probably most mean nothing even for the taker. Relevant is what matters, and that number appears to be decreasing with media overload.
    I think comparing numbers of film vs digital statistics is not relevant. Used to be. Analog photography has become a fine art process. It's almost like comparing how many SD cards are used versus how many sheets of watercolor paper is consumed.
    "Photography, like surfing, is an infinite process, a constantly evolving exploration of life."
    Aaron Chang

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    California desert
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    947

    Digography

    I just made up a new word, digography, to denote images made on here-today-gone-tomorrow digital media. Digital is ephemeral. I have traditional photo prints in my possession that are over 100 years old. So I can't get all worked up about how many of these soon-to-be-gone images are snapped. It is like counting firefly flashes.

  5. #5
    ROL
    ROL is offline
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    794
    Might as well include the number of frames in video as stills also, since that's the way my copy of Final Cut Pro X sees it. Redunculous. Maybe a tally of actual prints made one way or another, might have a chance of being more relevant, to some people.


    On a related note, does anyone have statistics on the number of useful, versus absurd, thread starts by Cliveh?

  6. #6
    analoguey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    934
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    Are there any statistics about numbers of still images taken each year? I just wondered at what stage/year in the development of digital photography, the quantity of images made worldwide surpassed those made on film since film became available and how that relationship of film/digital ratio number now stacks up as we move into the future.

    That would need to take into account when Middle Classes in Asian countries became a significant % age of the population, how much that weighed on affordability + when did the smartphone or the cameraphone become widely available. (and what weightage to give to each)

    Not a very easy comparison by simple nos.

  7. #7
    Dr Croubie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rAdelaide
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,539
    Images
    2
    I could take, as a sample, the number of shots hanging on my wall made by my dslrs, as a total fraction of number of shots I've taken in total with digital means, compared to the money that I've spent on dslr equipment, then I could compare that to the number of prints on my wall, either wet-printed or scan/inkjet, divide by the number of total frames I've shot on film, compared to the money I've spent on film bodies, film, lab processing or chemicals, take into account my computer, 27" monitor, inkjet printer and ink that serves double-duty sometimes for both dslr shots and e6 scans, and the end result might tell you something about why I'm less further ahead on my mortgage than 2 years ago, drive my mum's old car that I can't afford to fix, and had baked beans, frozen spinach and rice in the microwave for dinner last night.
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.

    f/64 and be there.

  8. #8
    ambaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Missouri, US
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    569
    Do numbers really matter? Last I looked, quantity and quality do not have a cause and effect relationship.

    We can all argue finer points of each genre, but it is much like the pixel peeping digi crowd.

    No, a memory card will likely not last 100 years. If it did, the equipment to read it likely will not.

    However, with modern error correction software, a fifteenth generation copy will have all the detail and hues of the first. Can even the best reproduction film do that? No.

    But rather than banging on a topic that has no place here, and taking cheap shots at each other. How about we grab some film and go take pictures?

  9. #9
    darkosaric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,057
    Images
    4
    Number of mobile phones in the world is around same number as number of people in the world:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._phones_in_use

    Lets say every second has a digital camera, and people have for sure 1000 or more photos in phone - so only in phones:

    3,400,000,000,000

    But number of photos on paper (prints) from digital source - this is another thing - I think less than 0,0000000001% of that junk is going on the paper.

    But as already stated - this means nothing

  10. #10
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,820
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    Are there any statistics about numbers of still images taken each year? I just wondered at what stage/year in the development of digital photography, the quantity of images made worldwide surpassed those made on film since film became available and how that relationship of film/digital ratio number now stacks up as we move into the future.
    I had the same question an got it answered by google. the numbers are in the billions
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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