Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/05/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It is interesting to consider how much of this electronic information will be lost to time compared to traditional prints. When my grandfather died we found hundreds of photos in some shoe boxes all from the 1940's and 1950's, mostly family images taken with an old brownie box. He wasn't a photographer nor did he take many pictures but apparently was fastidious about preserving what he had which consisted of a shoe box on a shelf in the hall closet. A couple thoughts cross my mind, first how much of the total number of images actually taken is represented in the box? What was lost? How will the percentage lost in such an example from the past where the medium was print compare to future loss in the electronic format? I agree that the number of images being created today by non-professional has increased dramatically and that the cross over of those images into a physical form is very low. Quite different from the previous generations experience. I wonder how ordinary people are going to preserve all these images? Will my grand kids inherit a shoe box full of DVD's? Will they work? I would imagine that the preservation to loss ratio will not significantly change because in most cases there will be a desire to preserve these images. The difficulty may be that the success also depends on a somewhat capricious technology which may prove to thwart individual determination via complexity and cost. The print making process isn't dead it just isn't easy for average consumers to navigate the technology available to make prints. As the savvy young folks get into the photo market I think print making will rise as long as the infrastructure exists. It probably is a mistake for Kodak to think they are wrong in their initial assessment because of the generational lag in the use of technology. Baby Boomers are trickling in but dying off, gen X'ers haven't the market share to make a difference, but the up and coming generation will change all that and will likely have a deeper understand about the important differences between print media and electronic media. At 09:24 AM 5/3/2007, you wrote: >On May 2, 2007, at 10:13 PM, Jeffrey wrote: > >>>On Tuesday I drove to "Lakeside Camera", one of the larger >>>photographic supply stores in the metropolitan area. They no longer >>>stock darkroom supplies. >>> >>>The ship appears to be pulling away from the dock..... >>>-- > > >I attended a family reunion in a suburb of Rochester last weekend. A >niece asked me if I would like to look to look at pictures of her new >baby. What could I do but agree? She pulled her digital camera out of >her purse and treated me to a couple of dozen pictures displayed on >the 2.5" LCD screen. No prints, just screen images. She saves the >images directly to her computer and if she wants to see them >enlarged, connects the laptop to her 42" plasma TV. > >Ironically, her husband is a Kodak executive. Later that evening, he >told me that Kodak's research showed that more pictures are being >taken than ever before but 95% of them are never actualized in hard >copy form. He admitted that this was another one of Kodak's wrong >guesses about the future of photography. Kodak hoped to compensate >for reduced film sales by increased sales of photofinishing paper and >supplies and do-it-yourself kiosks in drugstores and supermarkets. > >I felt really out of place with my Leica IIIf hanging around my neck. > >Larry Z > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information Chris Saganich, Sr. Physicist Weill Medical College of Cornell University New York Presbyterian Hospital chs2018@med.cornell.edu Ph. 212.746.6964 Fax. 212.746.4800 Office A-0049