Mark Roberts wrote:
mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, as long as they buy the print I'm not picky...
I think this is an area where the photographic industry has dealt
itself a severe, if not mortal, blow. If you give Mr & Mrs Sixpack
(who _do not care_ about quality) a way to look at their pictures for
free, how can you possibly expect them to buy prints?
Well, I was naturally thinking of them buying prints of *my* photos, to
frame and hang on the wall. And they aren't getting *those* for free if
I can help it <g>
But your point is well taken. The industry has been reassuring itself by
saying, essentially, "it's all about the print". In other words, that
they can always sell prints to consumers, even in the digital age. I can
clearly remember when I got my first film scanner: My immediate reaction
was "Yee ha! I don't have to bother getting prints to see my photos any
more!" No more boxes of prints to store!
I suspect a lot of regular consumers (not all of them) feel this way,
too. Having boxes of prints to store is a hassle. Perhaps they'll regret
it years down the road, after a major hard drive crash, but the number
of people I've known with lost negatives and prints over the years makes
me think it's a case of "plus ca change..." Digital doesn't make it
*more* likely that people will lose their precious family photos, it
just means it'll happen in a different way.
Agreed. But it also means that they won't be spending money on film and
p&p. That money will go elsewhere and I don't mean into other parts of
the industry. Sure, they will buy a digital camera. Like the film
cameras they bought, it will be the cheapest one they can find and they
will use it maybe a bit more than the film one. But they won't print
stuff off. They don't need to. The industry has given them a way of
seeing their pics for free and they will grab it with both hands.
