Count down to zero?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Scott W, Jul 1, 2005.

  1. Scott W

    Scott W Guest

    I came across this article and the plots took me by surprise, in this
    form it looks like a clock ticking down the finally minutes of film
    cameras life.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/technology/daily/graphics/digitalCameras_121904.html

    I got interesting in just what the data was showing so I plotted it out
    in a number of ways.
    http://www.sewcon.com/photos/loss.gif
    The first of my plots is very telling, it is a more or less straight
    line pointed towards zero sales.
    The second plot shows that on a percentage bases the loss is
    accelerating.
    The last plot if pretty simple, just how many units less are sold each
    year, this is pretty much constant at 3 million less each year.

    I had assumed that the loss would be more of a exponential decay, where
    the percentage loss would be about the same from year to year, so that
    the number loss in terms of the absolute number of units sold would be
    less each year.

    I have to think this drop will slow down soon, otherwise it will reach
    zero before 2008.

    I don't believe these number include disposable cameras, which are
    normally counted as film and not cameras.

    So the question is will the clock keep ticking at the same rate?

    Scott
     
    Scott W, Jul 1, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Scott W

    Jock Guest

    "Scott W" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    |
    | So the question is will the clock keep ticking at the same rate?
    |
    | Scott
    |

    ...only time will tell :)
    Jock
     
    Jock, Jul 1, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Scott W" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I came across this article and the plots took me by surprise, in this
    > form it looks like a clock ticking down the finally minutes of film
    > cameras life.
    >

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/technology/daily/graphics/digitalCameras_121904.html
    >
    > I got interesting in just what the data was showing so I plotted it out
    > in a number of ways.
    > http://www.sewcon.com/photos/loss.gif
    > The first of my plots is very telling, it is a more or less straight
    > line pointed towards zero sales.

    snip
    > So the question is will the clock keep ticking at the same rate?
    >
    > Scott


    Interesting... Well, there's someting about every cloud having a silver
    lining.

    I'm using this period to purchase, s/h and at affordable prices, camera
    bodies which as an amateur I've hankered after for many years. Before
    buying into the EOS AF range and eventually getting an EOS10D, I shot
    Minolta MD exclusively, but fuelled by magazine reviews and readers
    comments, I've always been curious about the near mythical status of the
    Nikon range and the F3, and also the Canon T90. Well I now have a mint F3HP
    with a small range of mint AIS lenses, and have also been able to purchase a
    T90 - again in mint condition.
    The F3 has taught me how good a decent viewfinder can be, whilst the T90
    clearly demonstrates where much of the EOS range ergonomics stem from.
    So, I'd better use my film cameras heavily to keep the E6 labs in
    business...
    --
    M Stewart
    Milton Keynes, UK
    http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm
     
    Malcolm Stewart, Jul 1, 2005
    #3
  4. Scott W

    Paul H. Guest

    "Scott W" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I came across this article and the plots took me by surprise, in this
    > form it looks like a clock ticking down the finally minutes of film
    > cameras life.
    >


    I see the graph more as a depiction of a digital camera Pacman in which film
    cameras are the blue energy dots.

    Seriously, though, the game has been over for some time: for all but the
    most demanding applications, film cameras are already dead. Of course, film
    purists are correct when they say you just can't get the same results from
    even high-end digital that you can get from film and film processing, but
    such a claim is a minor quibble-- digital is more than satisfactory for most
    photo applications.

    In a way, it's like making a decison about purchasing bed linen: On one
    side of the aisle, you have the washable cotton, 300 thread-count digital
    camera sheets and on the other side you have the dry-clean-only, 310
    thread-count, satin film camera sheets. At some point you have to ask
    yourself if you can even feel the 10 thread-per-inch difference and even if
    you *can* feel a slight difference, is the inconvenience and cost of going
    to the dry cleaner every time you have to clean your sheets worth the
    marginal increase in softness and appearance? I don't think so. And
    neither do millions of other photographers who have opted to go digital.

    Now if I can only break the annoying habit of hitching my car to parking
    meter posts, I'll move fully into the 21st century.
     
    Paul H., Jul 1, 2005
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. HTW
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    692
  2. Herb
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    538
  3. thingy
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    340
    dilberts_left_nut
    Oct 10, 2006
  4. mommio2

    Dell laptop wireless zero shuts down

    mommio2, Aug 9, 2009, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,766
    Jack [MVP-Networking]
    Aug 10, 2009
  5. RichA

    Pentax going down for the 10 count?

    RichA, Aug 19, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    549
    Charles
    Aug 20, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page