We're in danger of losing our memories

[artington]

Interesting article

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/20 ... t-heritage" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


- one of the reasons I for one don't give up on film (there are plenty of other reasons too!!)

[Dusty]

I caught that the other day, too. The only problem is they don't seem to know the US govt. There are tapes around that still have all the old stuff archived on it.

Dusty

[artington]

But are tapes any safer than CDs or hard drives? - Digital deterioration may be a bigger problem than negative or print degradation in the long-term. Dry, dark, cool environment can keep analogue hard copy for decades, possibly centuries, we don't know yet. But instances of digital failure after only a few years are well documented and I understood that magnetic tape exchanges information (osmosis) through contact with adjoining tape over long periods (may be wrong on this of course)

[pakodominguez]

photography is about the print, and the best way to keep those prints safe is in a shoe-box

[Javelin]

Now you've done it. Sony's going to introduce the "Sony picture shoe-box" with a memory stick slot to amuse Barry and DRM so grandma has to have a thumbprint reader to look at photo's of her grandkids.

photography is about the print, and the best way to keep those prints safe is in a shoe-box

[Dusty]

photography is about the print, and the best way to keep those prints safe is in a shoe-box

It used to be, but I'm not so sure it is anymore. For pro work, of course, as it's going to be printed in books, mags, newspapers, posters, billboards, etc. However, I see more and more family snapshots - the bread and butter for the film and processing industry for 100+ years - going almost totally digital.

My wife stopped buying throw-away film cameras when I got her P&S and now just loads pics on her portable picture frame to show folks, or e-mails them to friends and family. Yes, she'll pick out a select few to mail off to Grandma, but printing is largely a thing of the past. We've had a HUGE paradigm shift in the photo industry. I've only recently come into the digital film world from film when my pro shop changed lines of work because there were print jobs to develop and print anymore. They tried to make it as a digital printer, but it wasn't working out. The only pro shop still printing film is one of the area's oldest and largest.

While there is no doubt that a great print is an awesome thing, everyday photos are now mostly digital, and stay that way.

Dusty

[pakodominguez]

photography is about the print, and the best way to keep those prints safe is in a shoe-box

It used to be, but I'm not so sure it is anymore. For pro work, of course, as it's going to be printed in books, mags, newspapers, posters, billboards, etc. However, I see more and more family snapshots - the bread and butter for the film and processing industry for 100+ years - going almost totally digital.

No doubt, the "gimmi two 4*6 of each" is over. Part of the marketing around digital cameras is that you don't spend anymore in film -so you can invest that money paying for your new (overpriced) digicam.

My wife stopped buying throw-away film cameras when I got her P&S and now just loads pics on her portable picture frame to show folks, or e-mails them to friends and family. Yes, she'll pick out a select few to mail off to Grandma, but printing is largely a thing of the past. We've had a HUGE paradigm shift in the photo industry. I've only recently come into the digital film world from film when my pro shop changed lines of work because there were print jobs to develop and print anymore. They tried to make it as a digital printer, but it wasn't working out. The only pro shop still printing film is one of the area's oldest and largest.

While there is no doubt that a great print is an awesome thing, everyday photos are now mostly digital, and stay that way.

Dusty

This is "just" the current state of things. Photolabs are closing everywhere -I saw an interview on a French website: they pass from 25 big photolabs (nationalwide) to 4 in 5 years. Here in NYC you have one more issue: real state went to high small labs can't afford the rent: if we are still in Manhattan is because the company owns the building, but we don't know yet what will be happening in the next couple of years, probably moving to Elizabeth, NJ

In other hand, people are doing more big prints, and new products, like coffee-table-like books (http://www.adoramapix.com/photobooks.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) are coming in order to keep the machines running -and people working...

But the "next trend" will be printing. Why? because tomorrow the Apocalypse will be here: your computer's hard drive won't be in the mood for waking up anymore (never had that "tac-tac-tac" sound that makes you feel scared yet?) and all your data, including 5 years or so of memories (read photographs) are gone. And, of course, the CDs you burned 5 years ago gotten a fingerprint back there and now you can't read it either. And that backup you knew you had to do but you didn't, won't give you back even a third of those memories. And the data recovery is just soooooo expensive! Lesson learned: next time you'll make a selection of your best shots, print them and put it on a shoe box...

Regards

[KevinBarrett]

You'll be happy with me, Pako. I sold my photo printer and now do all of my printing at the local photo lab. In fact, I never even used the photo printer since it killed my DVD drive as soon as I installed it. Hint: The Epson R380 is NOT compatible with Windows Vista.

[pakodominguez]

You'll be happy with me, Pako...

Your grand-son/daugther will be happy with you, Kevin -and me too

[Dusty]

But the "next trend" will be printing. Why? because tomorrow the Apocalypse will be here: your computer's hard drive won't be in the mood for waking up anymore (never had that "tac-tac-tac" sound that makes you feel scared yet?) and all your data, including 5 years or so of memories (read photographs) are gone. And, of course, the CDs you burned 5 years ago gotten a fingerprint back there and now you can't read it either. And that backup you knew you had to do but you didn't, won't give you back even a third of those memories. And the data recovery is just soooooo expensive! Lesson learned: next time you'll make a selection of your best shots, print them and put it on a shoe box...

Regards

No it won't be. Because if people have to print, there goes the savings, they're buying cheap paper that is fading or yellowing, and they don't have the quality of scanners to pull back anything like the originals (even when they're just P&S JPEGs) from the prints.

People are getting more savvy to the need for back-ups. Usually only after their first loss, but at least they're getting there. USB drives are getting dirt cheap, as are home NAS units. And places like Carbonite.com advertise like crazy and make it cheap and easy to back up. We also have to consider that some people are so full of themselves that they think everything they do is important, and post every picture they take on flicker or wherever.

Dusty

[artington]

I may be losing the plot here but right now I don't see the point of high resolution lenses and bodies if you're not going to print at a reasonable size. Images on digital photo-frames, apart from being too small, are not going to benefit from hi-res until the screens themselves are a whole lot better and I can't really see people leaving their computers / HD TVs on all day for photo display. That said, I saw a Sony HD VCR squirting single images via an HDMI cable through a 19 inch computer screen at a shop the other day and these were mighty impressive, with dimensionality, but as far as I'm aware it is not yet possible to transfer HD images using cards - you have to link up the camera with an HDMI cable - so hanging such monitors on the wall is a little way off. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this. Me, I still enjoy getting my 5.5 x 7s and 6 x 9s back in the post from the processors. And I also enjoy printing A3+ on the old 1290!

[Dusty]

I definitely want to print high quality prints. I also want to crop without losing the ability to produce quality. large prints. However the typical consumer prints far less than they spread around electronically. They're caught up in the bigger and better race because, like most sheeple out there, they're led around by advertising firms that tell them they're just not 'with it' if they don't have the latest and greatest. That's why we have the housing and credit crises today. People buy things to impress, not to meet their needs.

Dusty

[KevinBarrett]

I want the pictures I take at a customer's wedding to be superior, under scrutiny or not, to the pictures they captured on their P&S cameras. I also want to be able to tell them they can print up to whatever size they can stand. That kinda puts me on the giving and receiving end of all that advertising pressure, doesn't it? Of course I'm not a pro, but I want my kit to at least pay for itself.

[Javelin]

They took a large step in technology to make printing these at home easier but I think they still have a long way to go. Ink is way too expensive for one thing and so it the paper. I can go to a lab and it costs me about the same. printing at home is also a lot more work in terms of upkeep on the printer itself. these things need to be made to work like a toaster not a piece of lab equipment then everyone will start printing again. I know the kiddies in the office here are wowed when they see a picture on screen. but you shoud see their reaction when you hand them a 13" print!. I think the screen viewing is only going to be able to go so far. people still crave having something tangible in their hands it's just so inconveinient right now with current tech.