Cell phones and photography

[Sirius Glass]

No Comment

 

[removed-user-1]

Reminds me of this: http://thecomicstrips.com/store/add.php?iid=109459.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thanks I needed that.

 

[benjiboy]

I'm very glad to be retired and out of the photographic retail trade after more than 20 years because camera stores must be really suffering these day worldwide there have been tens of thousands of photographic stores who have closed because the man in the street with his smart phone can't see any need to own a camera digital or otherwise, and it's coming to a state of affairs when only pro photographers will own proper cameras.

 

[frank]

My iPhone is the only digital camera I have, need, or want.

 

[shutterlight]

I'm very glad to be retired and out of the photographic retail trade after more than 20 years because camera stores must be really suffering these day worldwide there have been tens of thousands of photographic stores who have closed because the man in the street with his smart phone can't see any need to own a camera digital or otherwise, and it's coming to a state of affairs when only pro photographers will own proper cameras.

As it probably should be. Most people don't need more than a phone. At the moment, I look at phone cameras as being similar to autoexposure 35mm cameras in the 1970s and 1980s. A lot of families had those, and countless pictures were made on them.

 

[Darkroom317]

As it probably should be. Most people don't need more than a phone. At the moment, I look at phone cameras as being similar to autoexposure 35mm cameras in the 1970s and 1980s. A lot of families had those, and countless pictures were made on them.

I see them more like instamatics. I work at a museum doing darkroom work reproducing old photographs. My predecessor did a lecture during an exhibit of his favorite images that came through the darkroom. He mentioned how he could see the "progress" of photographs of loved ones, transitioning from studio portraits, well exposed and carefully composed to instamatic snapshots, blurry and poorly composed. Cellphones often have this aesthetic. As some one who is in their mid 20s it never ceases to amazeme the amount of awful blurry underexposed images that my friends post of "important events."

 

[wiltw]

I'm very glad to be retired and out of the photographic retail trade after more than 20 years because camera stores must be really suffering these day worldwide there have been tens of thousands of photographic stores who have closed because the man in the street with his smart phone can't see any need to own a camera digital or otherwise, and it's coming to a state of affairs when only pro photographers will own proper cameras.

Our oldest (adult, approaching 40) daughter once saw a NEED for a better P&S due to the shortcomings of her smartphone's camera, and expressed that need to us. We bought her one for Xmas a few years ago, since she was a struggling new divorcee. She dropped it in the sand, so we underwrote the cost of replacing it to the tune of 50% of the replacement camera price, two Xmas ago. In the past year, in spite of the fact that there have been numerous occasions/celebrations/family gatherings at which to use her P&S, I have only seen her shoot with her smartphone, since she never bothers to bring the P&S. Go figure, why did we bother to buy 1.5 cameras for her?!

 

[removed account4]

I'm very glad to be retired and out of the photographic retail trade after more than 20 years because camera stores must be really suffering these day worldwide there have been tens of thousands of photographic stores who have closed because the man in the street with his smart phone can't see any need to own a camera digital or otherwise, and it's coming to a state of affairs when only pro photographers will own proper cameras.

hi Ben
but I don't necessarily think it is the digital camera that killed the photography retail store
but the ease of getting, film, chemicals paper, and cameras for way-less through an online
( formerly catalogue ) retailer.
I don't know maybe 13-15 years ago I went to a local shop to make sure I had a reliable source for tmy 4x5 film...
I went to the store ..., they had an agfa sign, they allegedly were a toyo dealer ...
they didn't know what agfa was, they ( not even the manager ) knew what toyo was ... butI found a box of
tmy.
it was a few years past the exp date, and covered in dust. I wiped the dust off th film and looked at the price.
$100/box of 100 sheets ...
I asked the manager if the price was still valid, it was past date .. he took the film and said yup that is the price.
needless to say, I went home and ordered the same film, in-date/fresh from b&h, DELIVEED for $65.

I think some stores over the years became greedy, and clueless, and that might be another reason they
went under, not just the numeric revolution.

 

[benjiboy]

I didn't write John that "digital cameras killed the photography retail stores" it didn't because they went over to selling digital cameras, my point was that that smart phones are killing them, and people using them as places to have equipment demonstrated before buying it on line from companies who don't have to pay huge down town rents and taxes or knowledgeable staff, they just need a warehouse and pickers and packers.
It was more the greed and unscrupulous behaviour of the public who picked the store staff's brains and subsequently bought the grey imports or on line at the cheapest possible price that were the most self seeking and venal contributed the most to bricks and mortar stores demise.
I had an illuminated sign on my store with the companies name on it in large letters and the company logo that also said Konica films on it although we didn't sell them, that was because Konica paid for the sign

 

[Tamara]

As I commented when someone posted that cartoon on my FB timeline this morning, "A smartphone records photons perfectly adequately for most people's wants and needs. So did Disc cameras and 110 Instamatics. "

Smartphones have definitely gutted the P&S market. The local Super Target has reduced its camera inventory by probably 3/4ths over the last remodel. Soon there will be almost nothing between DSLRs/system cameras and smartphones, except oddities like GoPros or waterproof/ruggedized P&S cameras.

 

[removed account4]

ahh

i get it ben ..
and thanks for the info on the sign
i thought it was strange having a sign and not even knowing
who the company was whose logo was on the sign ..

your comment explains a lot
john

 

[Sirius Glass]

Digital photography seriously damaged film photography.
Cell phones seriously damaged digital and film photography.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Another thread discussing d*****l in any way?!?! Take it to DPUG where no one will discuss it.

 

[Tamara]

Digital photography seriously damaged film photography.
Cell phones seriously damaged digital and film photography.

I'd have that on a bumper sticker.

 

[benjiboy]

ahh

i get it ben ..
and thanks for the info on the sign
i thought it was strange having a sign and not even knowing
who the company was whose logo was on the sign ..

your comment explains a lot

john

We did sell Konica cameras John, and I am aware that Konishuru is one of the oldest names in photography. A customer I recall who once came in and asked me for Konica film also couldn't understand why it said it on the sign in foot high letters outside my shop when I told him we didn't stock it, " then why does it say Konica Film on the sign outside ?" he asked," because they paid for the sign, and if you give me a three thousand pounds you can have your name on it instead if you wish " I replied.

 

[Prest_400]

Digital photography seriously damaged film photography.
Cell phones seriously damaged digital and film photography.

I don't think that it does the damage, for film, in the degree that the first digital wave did back a decade ago.

My phone now fulfills the role of P&S and camcorder (they really nailed the stabilizer in this last iPhone iteration) and I use film otherwise.
I think of it as a instamatic+polaroid+mail.

 

[shutterlight]

I see them more like instamatics. I work at a museum doing darkroom work reproducing old photographs. My predecessor did a lecture during an exhibit of his favorite images that came through the darkroom. He mentioned how he could see the "progress" of photographs of loved ones, transitioning from studio portraits, well exposed and carefully composed to instamatic snapshots, blurry and poorly composed. Cellphones often have this aesthetic. As some one who is in their mid 20s it never ceases to amazeme the amount of awful blurry underexposed images that my friends post of "important events."

My own sampling is heavily skewed, because much of my Instagram feed is made up of people from my university photo and art community (and others from around the country in similar communities). In short, most people I follow know how to make a picture, even with "just" a phone.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The smartphone's main attraction for photography is instant distribution. The fact that you always have it with you is more a function of its communications ability than its quality as a camera, which isn't even so bad these days under reasonably good lighting conditions, and if you want it, you can edit fairly easily right on the phone. It surprises me that the makers of dedicated digicams don't offer more in the way of in-camera editing and communications, or they might replace cellphones for the photographically inclined. After all, who makes phone calls anymore?

How is this relevant to APUG? There's a medium for images out there. We just need to use it for the sake of promoting analogue photography.

Film photography can happen pretty quickly, but involves a commitment to a certain amount of personal infrastructure to make it happen. Think of news photographers from the Speed Graphic era souping negs in hot Dektol, enlarging them wet, and developing the prints in the same chemistry and sending them to press. I've done it occasionally, hybrid style--rushed home, processed film in deep tanks, dried the negs and scanned them and posted images on facebook within a few hours of the exposure--but our lives aren't arranged that way much of the time. So we grab something on the cellphone, process it digitally and post when we have a few moments waiting for something else.

I wouldn't give up on analogue for immediate communication, though. Maybe we should just try to do it more often. The results are way cooler than Instagram.

 

[Tamara]

I'll admit that the devastation of the P&S market makes me sad. I have a little cigarette-pack-sized Nikon Coolpix S6500 I carry with me literally everywhere specifically for getting quick snaps for my blog and suchlike, and even a mid-level P&S with an honest optical zoom can do things that cell phone cameras just physically can't. If current trends continue, I don't see that market segment really remaining viable.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

As it probably should be. Most people don't need more than a phone. At the moment, I look at phone cameras as being similar to autoexposure 35mm cameras in the 1970s and 1980s. A lot of families had those, and countless pictures were made on them.

A long time ago, a writer for one of the American photo magazines said that photo enthusiasts and pros should be grateful for all the low-end point-and-shoot cameras out there that people buy and use - because it is their enormous widespread use that's funding the development of better film and cameras.

Phone camera usage probably doesn't even help the digital photo industry very much.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Point and Shoot: Just like crappy box camera photographs financed Kodak research for decades, so will crappy digital cameras finance camera and film companies today.

 

[benjiboy]

Point and Shoot: Just like crappy box camera photographs financed Kodak research for decades, so will crappy digital cameras finance camera and film companies today.

Don't hold you're breath Steve

 

[hoffy]

Here's the thing - Putting artistic merit aside, a photo taken by a smartphone is 9 time out of 10 going to be of better inherent quality then those taken with 110 film instamatics. They handle different light conditions relatively well and they auto focus.

That being said, I still see plenty of potato quality crap being posted on social media. I wonder if people realise that out of the 2 cameras that are on their smart phone, the one with the best specs faces away from the screen.......

 

[Sirius Glass]

Don't hold you're breath Steve

I did not say that there would be as much money generated this time around. One difference is that digital does not generate money for processing the way film did.