I think a couple of factors behind the popularity of digital for 'casual'
photographers are evident in my Dad's experience:
1) The cost of digital pictures is 'zero' until you print them... no
film-buying cost and no processing cost. My parents are of the generation
that doesn't spend money frivolously (it didn't rub off...) and my Mom has
been known to have -two- Christmas's of pictures on the *same roll* of
film... Since my Dad got a digicam he's emailed me pictures a couple of
times that I know he wouldn't have taken had it involved getting out his old
Minolta SRT-101 and carting it about, turning film in for processing, and
picking up the prints...
2) The rise of email as a means of communication, and the sharing of photos
via computer. My Dad is strictly an 'AOL' level computer user, not a
technical user. He keeps a diary/journal on the computer, and derives a
weekly letter from the contents, and now he's starting to attach photos
sometimes. A digital camera saves him needing to scan a photo... he does
have a scanner, but that would be extra steps in addition to getting the
images processed in the first place. With his digicam he's going to dump the
memory card into the computer anyway (to erase and reuse it) so he can
attach a photo easily to any message. He hasn't yet gotten the hang of
resizing them down from 400K yet... but its nice to get the pictures anyway.
His digicam is a simple point-and-shoot, but he's carrying it around to
places where he wouldn't take a traditional film camera, I think the
'instant developing' is a key factor in this, just less hassle involved.
--
Jim Brokaw
OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney...
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|