The future of photography

[skieur]

The future of photography is diversification. Anyone can shoot a snapshot with a iphone but only a few successful pros can shoot digital productions which mix stills, video, sound, and animation. Even fewer can edit video as well as stills in high quality and present as well as create productions. If you can do this then you have the capability of "owning" a niche market.

 

[table1349]

Yes, Buckster. Thank you.

But I'm not talking about shooting film now.

Well you should be... now is when the digital camera revolution is happening. All those people buying digital cameras and/or using cell phones are making decisions in comparison to the cost of film right now. They aren't making purchasing decisions compared to the cost of film 37 years ago...

And right now, today, the cost of shooting digital per image is at least 10x cheaper than film, even with the software etc. added to both sides of the fraction, and that's talking about DSLRs.

For cell phone images that aren't post edited, it is literally free, because many cell companies don't even sell non-smart-camera-phones anymore as an option. You MUST buy a camera phone if you buy a phone, so it doesn't represent any additional cost. And the storage is not extra, either, and most people upload to instagram or facebook, which already acts as a cloud backup for your images, using a data plan (or a usb cable) that come with their phones.

10x cheaper is damn cheap. Free is free.
Again, I link you to the following graph I made:
View attachment 48304

How do you explain that trend without admitting that digital is VASTLY cheaper to the point of being (or literally being) free, compared to film?

Let's look at some of the things the graph does not have. It does not have population variation in it. What is the change in percentage of the population from the film days to now. Nor did you factor in the population shift of those that have gone from survival to the ability to afford more than the most basic of needs.

You also fail to take into account the social aspects of photography and the world in general. Today's generation is a throw away society. Not so in the past. My F's and F2's have all had work done on them over the years and they still serve me well as do my medium and large format equipment. Craftsmanship is not valued as it once was. This forum is a great example of that with it's numerous threads in regards to what should my next camera or body be. It is easy to increase sales when the value of the product is diminished.

 

[Gavjenks]

Let's look at some of the things the graph does not have. It does not have population variation in it. What is the change in percentage of the population from the film days to now.

Fair enough. Population about doubled over that entire timeline, which is only a smidgeon of the change in camera sales trend. Also, pattern-wise, it in no way lines up with the sudden spike of digital.

Nor did you factor in the population shift of those that have gone from survival to the ability to afford more than the most basic of needs.

Doesn't matter? The whole point is that cameras became more available. Sure, that might be one reason why they're more available, but doesn't change that they are.

You also fail to take into account the social aspects of photography and the world in general. Today's generation is a throw away society. Not so in the past. My F's and F2's have all had work done on them over the years and they still serve me well as do my medium and large format equipment. Craftsmanship is not valued as it once was. This forum is a great example of that with it's numerous threads in regards to what should my next camera or body be. It is easy to increase sales when the value of the product is diminished.

Okay, but this is only relevant insofar as the same people might be buying many cameras. Yet there are over 100x more cameras being sold per year now than there were mid 20th century. Bring that down to 50x due to population change (your first point)

Have you bought 50 cameras?

If not, then there are more cameras in the hands of more people than before (relative to population!). I, for example own two DSLRs, have bought two cell phones in the past with cameras in them, and have bought one point and shoot a long time ago. 5 cameras... and that's a guy who hangs out on the photo forum.com.

But let's be really conservative and hold that number 5 for everyone who owns ANY camera. Would still give us an absolute minimum, lowball number of 10 times as many camera OWNERS per population than there was before. Which will hugely affect the culture and business.