Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
On Jan 4, 2005, at 4:47 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally, I've made sure I have a way to power all my DSLRs when I can't get batteries for them any more. Kudos to Pentax for the use of a AA-size battery compartment in the *istD, although I'd love to see a proprietary high-capacity LION battery that fits where the batteries go. I got a real surprise to find that my new cordless phone (a Panasonic) takes AAA-sized NiMH batteries. The manual contains a dire warning not to use alkalines... or at least not to put the phone on the charger if you do ;) So there can be a down side to using standard battery sizes. For most gadgets (I mean tools) I prefer being able to charge the battery outside of the unit, so I have the option of having two batteries. My cellphone drives me nuts as its battery level indication is hopeless. Cheers, - Dave (read the manual AFTER setting it up, of course) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
On 2/1/05, frank theriault, discombobulated, unleashed: I remember a convo I had with my then brother-in-law about 25 years ago: I said, Maurice, go VHS. Looks like everyone's going VHS, and not too many are joining Sony with Beta. Maurice said, C'mon frank, Sony's the biggest home video player on the block. I think Beta will be around for a long long time. And it still is! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
On 2/1/05, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: Beta was around for a long time, just more expensive and hard to find after a while... Easy to find! B and H do loads of Beta. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is anyone's brother-in-law ever right? Well, you're a woman and brothers-in-law are all, by definition, men. So no, they aren't ever right. :) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Quoting Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is anyone's brother-in-law ever right? Well, you're a woman and brothers-in-law are all, by definition, men. So no, they aren't ever right. :) Oh -- well. Didn't think of it *that* way. (I was thinking of the context in which I usually hear people quote brothers- in-law.) ERNR married to a man who's frequently right.
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 09:09:58 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ERNR married to a man who's frequently right. If he monitors the PDML, he'll be framing that one! :-) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:05:13 -0500 From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=Windows-1252; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit And, according to our informal count, we sold 74 digital cameras in December and 8 film cameras. Bill Everyone's GOT a film camera already, and the used market is flooded with them. There's little to push people to buy a BETTER film camera now that digital is looking affordable. I agree, though, that film is waning to a niche market. As digital gets cheaper and better it actually makes more economic sense for the PS crowd to be buying digital (as well as the WYSIWYG advantages). As digital becomes competitive on quality and convenience grounds, film will only be used by those seeking its unique look and advantages. Nobody has yet come up with a good replacement for slide film for some uses. BW photography has not died with the advent of color, but it has become a niche thing. One thing that nags the back of my mind is battery power, though. Currently, digital cameras are not cheap enough that people will happily replace their camera in 7 years when you can't get the proprietary LION battery that it came with, and I can't see the companies having any reason to sell batteries for older cameras instead of selling newer cameras. You can get batteries for most older film cameras (they only took a couple of kinds), even the oddballs like the spotmatic, and of course most real cameras don't need batteries anyway. Personally, I've made sure I have a way to power all my DSLRs when I can't get batteries for them any more. Kudos to Pentax for the use of a AA-size battery compartment in the *istD, although I'd love to see a proprietary high-capacity LION battery that fits where the batteries go. DJE
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
One thing that nags the back of my mind is battery power, though. Currently, digital cameras are not cheap enough that people will happily replace their camera in 7 years when you can't get the proprietary LION battery that it came with, and I can't see the companies having any reason to sell batteries for older cameras instead of selling newer cameras. You can get batteries for most older film cameras (they only took a couple of kinds), even the oddballs like the spotmatic, and of course most real cameras don't need batteries anyway. AFAIK, none of the digital PS cameras we sell at Wally World require a proprietary battery. Most use AA's with the exception of Samsung, who offers a rechargeable CR-V3 as an option Personally, I've made sure I have a way to power all my DSLRs when I can't get batteries for them any more. Kudos to Pentax for the use of a AA-size battery compartment in the *istD, although I'd love to see a proprietary high-capacity LION battery that fits where the batteries go. I use the Ray-O-Vac 15 minute rechargeble 2000mah AA's in my istD and have been very pleased with the results. Bill
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
We get many customers asking about the Kodak docking printer. When I explain to them that the cost is twice what we charge for prints, they usually decide against it. I agree though, that when the cost of paper and ink is competitive with our kiosk, they will sell like hotcakes. Bill And there's worse news (for labs) on the horizon: One of Kodak's sensible (for the consumer) innovations with digital is the docking printer, to which you simply attach your camera and select the shots you want for 4 x 6 prints. Kodak has just basically made it an open system which any other manufacturer can use with no royalties or licensing costs. Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Konica-Minolta and a couple of others have already signed up. (Canon is conspicuous by their absence. Sony hasn't signed on but it's typical for them to go it alone as with their memory stick.) At the moment I think it's still cheaper to go to a photo shop rather than print your own with one of these but that'll change when volume goes up... -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
But not locally, which is were most people look. Cotty wrote: On 2/1/05, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: Beta was around for a long time, just more expensive and hard to find after a while... Easy to find! B and H do loads of Beta. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
On 3/1/05, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: But not locally, which is were most people look. I'm plucking your string, Alling. Betamax disappeared but Betacam (which actually uses the same type of cassette as Betamax) is still going strong ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Quoting Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 09:09:58 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ERNR married to a man who's frequently right. If he monitors the PDML, he'll be framing that one! :-) TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ He doesn't monitor the PDML. So I printed it for him. ;-) ERNR
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:05:13 -0500 From: Bill Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=Windows-1252; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit And, according to our informal count, we sold 74 digital cameras in December and 8 film cameras. Bill Everyone's GOT a film camera already, and the used market is flooded with them. There's little to push people to buy a BETTER film camera now that digital is looking affordable. One thing that nags the back of my mind is battery power, though. Currently, digital cameras are not cheap enough that people will happily replace their camera in 7 years when you can't get the proprietary LION battery that it came with, and I can't see the companies having any reason to sell batteries for older cameras instead of selling newer cameras. You can get batteries for most older film cameras (they only took a couple of kinds), even the oddballs like the spotmatic, and of course most real cameras don't need batteries anyway. Personally, I've made sure I have a way to power all my DSLRs when I can't get batteries for them any more. Kudos to Pentax for the use of a AA-size battery compartment in the *istD, although I'd love to see a proprietary high-capacity LION battery that fits where the batteries go. Kudos to Pentax indeed. Also, to Olympus -- the bottom-of-the-line PS we gave my mother for Christmas a couple of years ago also uses AA batteries (rechargeables accepted, and with a pretty long life per charge.) I note also that the bottom-of-the-line Optio (Optio 30, I think?) takes AAs as well. ERNR
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Does that mean that my horded supply is now worth something, to the people who haven't changed over? Cotty wrote: On 3/1/05, Peter J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: But not locally, which is were most people look. I'm plucking your string, Alling. Betamax disappeared but Betacam (which actually uses the same type of cassette as Betamax) is still going strong ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
As does the 43WR - AAs or CRV3. Nick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] I note also that the bottom-of-the-line Optio (Optio 30, I think?) takes AAs as well. ERNR
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 Is anyone's brother-in-law ever right? Mine has a really annoying ability to be right pretty much all of the time. William Robb
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So far, we are down 40% from last year on film processing. Last year, we were down about 15% from the year before. This is the all important Christmas rush, which normally is a very hectic and profitable time. I think that's about what we're seeing. We do a considerable amount of printing from digital but that's not going to help for long. Digital print kiosks are popping up all over. A large portion of our film processing is from single-use cameras (throw aways) :( With 2-megapixel digicams already under $100.00 and 3-megapixels soon to hit that price point, I can see the writing on the wall. I saw a 2-megapixel digicam advertised for $49.00 recently. And there's worse news (for labs) on the horizon: One of Kodak's sensible (for the consumer) innovations with digital is the docking printer, to which you simply attach your camera and select the shots you want for 4 x 6 prints. Kodak has just basically made it an open system which any other manufacturer can use with no royalties or licensing costs. Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Konica-Minolta and a couple of others have already signed up. (Canon is conspicuous by their absence. Sony hasn't signed on but it's typical for them to go it alone as with their memory stick.) At the moment I think it's still cheaper to go to a photo shop rather than print your own with one of these but that'll change when volume goes up... -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 17:59:53 -0500, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Sony hasn't signed on but it's typical for them to go it alone as with their memory stick.) snip I remember a convo I had with my then brother-in-law about 25 years ago: I said, Maurice, go VHS. Looks like everyone's going VHS, and not too many are joining Sony with Beta. Maurice said, C'mon frank, Sony's the biggest home video player on the block. I think Beta will be around for a long long time. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
frank theriault wrote: On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 17:59:53 -0500, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Sony hasn't signed on but it's typical for them to go it alone as with their memory stick.) snip I remember a convo I had with my then brother-in-law about 25 years ago: I said, Maurice, go VHS. Looks like everyone's going VHS, and not too many are joining Sony with Beta. Maurice said, C'mon frank, Sony's the biggest home video player on the block. I think Beta will be around for a long long time. cheers, frank Beta was around for a long time, just more expensive and hard to find after a while... -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Quoting frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 17:59:53 -0500, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Sony hasn't signed on but it's typical for them to go it alone as with their memory stick.) snip I remember a convo I had with my then brother-in-law about 25 years ago: I said, Maurice, go VHS. Looks like everyone's going VHS, and not too many are joining Sony with Beta. Maurice said, C'mon frank, Sony's the biggest home video player on the block. I think Beta will be around for a long long time. Is anyone's brother-in-law ever right? ERNR (who has no brothers-in-law)
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
- Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 2:29 AM Subject: Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 - Original Message - From: George Sinos Subject: RE: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 snip. The Wal-Mart where I work is online and has been for about 2 months now. We give every customer who uses our in-store kiosk a CD with the software for uploading digital photos. So far we're not getting much response, maybe 1 or 2 orders a week. Many of those we do receive are from files that have been either compressed significantly, or shot at low res and have a lot of artifacts. We get 24 cents a print for up to 50 4x6's, and 20 cents a print for 50 or more. FWIW, during the month of December, we sold 74 digital cameras and 8 film PS. Bill
RE: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Bill - Does your location accept files submitted via the Wal-Mart web site? If so, is this a growing or significant percentage of your printing? There are three places here in town, that offer this service with next day (or even one-hour) pickup. Wal-Mart, Sam's Club and a local family owned camera shop called Rockbrook Camera. Wal-Mart and Rockbrook are about a quarter a print; Sam's is an unbelievable eighteen cents. I can't make 4x6's that cheap. I don't know if it's a big part of their business, but I think it's a great service. I can't help but think it will be a growing part of the business. Last weekend I showed my mother, who just got her first digital camera at 76 years old, how to use the service. She had transferred about a dozen photos, taken Christmas day, to her computer. She ordered single prints of four images and five copies of a fifth image. The total order was 9 prints coming to a bit over $2.00 (US) Had she used her 35mm point and shoot or, more typically for her, a single use camera she would have ordered double prints of the full roll of 24 shots. She probably would have paid about $6 to $10 for that. Add another $7 to $10 if she would have ordered a set of files on a CD. I'm not sure which order is more profitable for the seller. Where does the photo center make it's money these days? Is it sheer volume? Just curious. See you later, gs -- George Sinos e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://georgesoptions.net Photos: http://georgesphotos.net --
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
- Original Message - From: George Sinos Subject: RE: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 Bill - Does your location accept files submitted via the Wal-Mart web site? If so, is this a growing or significant percentage of your printing? We get stuff from the internet, but our lab is not online. Wait times for prints are sometimes significant. There are three places here in town, that offer this service with next day (or even one-hour) pickup. Wal-Mart, Sam's Club and a local family owned camera shop called Rockbrook Camera. Wal-Mart and Rockbrook are about a quarter a print; Sam's is an unbelievable eighteen cents. I can't make 4x6's that cheap. We are a quarter a print, which is somewhat less in your money. I don't know if it's a big part of their business, but I think it's a great service. I can't help but think it will be a growing part of the business. I think we may be having some issues with putting labs online, as it is happening rather slowly. Last weekend I showed my mother, who just got her first digital camera at 76 years old, how to use the service. She had transferred about a dozen photos, taken Christmas day, to her computer. She ordered single prints of four images and five copies of a fifth image. The total order was 9 prints coming to a bit over $2.00 (US) Had she used her 35mm point and shoot or, more typically for her, a single use camera she would have ordered double prints of the full roll of 24 shots. She probably would have paid about $6 to $10 for that. Add another $7 to $10 if she would have ordered a set of files on a CD. I'm not sure which order is more profitable for the seller. Where does the photo center make it's money these days? Is it sheer volume? Volume is good. When prices are very low, volume is needed. Those digital photo labs aren't cheap. William Robb
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
In a message dated 12/29/2004 5:20:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So far, we are down 40% from last year on film processing. Last year, we were down about 15% from the year before. This is the all important Christmas rush, which normally is a very hectic and profitable time. William Robb == Boy, that IS a significant drop. Very telling. Doe aka Marnie
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
according to a few reports, this year will see the sales of about 186m camera phones and about 68m digital cameras of all other types. Herb... - Original Message - From: Andy Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 12:50 AM Subject: RE: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 Yep... Point shoot DCs are much more popular and affordable now... Andy -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 9:18 AM To: Pentax Discuss Subject: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 So far, we are down 40% from last year on film processing. Last year, we were down about 15% from the year before. This is the all important Christmas rush, which normally is a very hectic and profitable time.
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
And, according to our informal count, we sold 74 digital cameras in December and 8 film cameras. Bill - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax Discuss pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 8:17 PM Subject: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 So far, we are down 40% from last year on film processing. Last year, we were down about 15% from the year before. This is the all important Christmas rush, which normally is a very hectic and profitable time. William Robb
RE: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Andy Chang wrote: Yep... Point shoot DCs are much more popular and affordable now... According to the technicians I trust normally for my gear, PS digitals are very profitable for them too. Plenty of repairs required. I will rush to buy one any minute now. Kostas
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
If that's the case I have a nearly perfect condition Kodak DC260 camera I can let you have for $100.00. I think I can scrape together the original box with everything it came with, including a set of the original Kodak photo batteries, never opened, with a couple of years left before they expire. The camera, while it still takes photos as well as ever, expired, (as in being hopelessly outdated), years ago. We have reached the age where consumables can now last longer than the hardware is viable. Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Andy Chang wrote: Yep... Point shoot DCs are much more popular and affordable now... According to the technicians I trust normally for my gear, PS digitals are very profitable for them too. Plenty of repairs required. I will rush to buy one any minute now. Kostas -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Peter J. Alling wrote: Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: According to the technicians I trust normally for my gear, PS digitals are very profitable for them too. Plenty of repairs required. I will rush to buy one any minute now. If that's the case I have a nearly perfect condition Kodak DC260 camera I can let you have for $100.00. Thanks. I was being ironic. I will defer buying one as much as possible. We have reached the age where consumables can now last longer than the hardware is viable. Not quite so, according to my friends quoted above. Kostas
Re: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Peter J. Alling wrote: Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: According to the technicians I trust normally for my gear, PS digitals are very profitable for them too. Plenty of repairs required. I will rush to buy one any minute now. If that's the case I have a nearly perfect condition Kodak DC260 camera I can let you have for $100.00. Thanks. I was being ironic. I will defer buying one as much as possible. So was I. We have reached the age where consumables can now last longer than the hardware is viable. If they aren't having the cameras repaired under warrantee it probably would make more sense to buy new. The DC260 was one of Kodak's Professional offerings, it has an incredible a1.3mp resolution and was introduced with a list price of close to $1600.00 (street about $1100). I think I paid $800.00 after it had been around a year. I haven't bought a digital camera since, and I only use the Kodak for the web, when I absolutely have to. Not quite so, according to my friends quoted above. Kostas -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
RE: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Yep... Point shoot DCs are much more popular and affordable now... Andy -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 9:18 AM To: Pentax Discuss Subject: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 So far, we are down 40% from last year on film processing. Last year, we were down about 15% from the year before. This is the all important Christmas rush, which normally is a very hectic and profitable time. William Robb I believe it. As we only carried digital cameras I don't consider it accurate, but we sold out of almost all of our digital PS cameras this season. I partly blame our buyers for that, but the word was that nobody had much of anything left this year. About twice a week someone would ask me where our film cameras were. The next couple years are going to be critical for labs to figure out how to get customers in to print digital camera images or you'll see a lot of chains dropping the service (IMHO) Butch
RE: Film is Dying, Chapter 3
Yep... Point shoot DCs are much more popular and affordable now... Andy -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 9:18 AM To: Pentax Discuss Subject: Film is Dying, Chapter 3 So far, we are down 40% from last year on film processing. Last year, we were down about 15% from the year before. This is the all important Christmas rush, which normally is a very hectic and profitable time. William Robb
