The Price of Photography
Isn’t it funny that your $300 digital camera needs a $1500 accessory to be properly used? People used to buy a film camera, take photos with it, and take negatives to the printer. A simple process that involves one simple device. Now you have to own a computer if you want to enjoy digital photography.
I wonder how this is reflected in consumer photography trends. There must be a whole contingent of people out there who don’t own a computer or would have no idea how to use one. Do those people still take photos? Are they using film cameras? Do that have someone to manage their digital photos for them? Has photography shifted to younger demographic as a result?
This entry was posted on Monday, February 18th, 2008 at 8:53 pm and is filed under ilovephotos. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
on February 19, 2008 at 7:23 am Jake wrote:
Wow, it’s embarassing to say this, but I’ve never really considered that. Talk about the digital divide.
It stands to reason that you have digital photography on the brain, but thanks for making such a thought-provoking post.
on May 7, 2008 at 2:54 pm Greg wrote:
There are a lot of people who don’t know how to use a computer for digital pictures and don’t want to know. Stores like CVS and Walgreens market to these people and make it easy to drop off a memory stick or pop-it into an in-store kiosk and just get every picture on the disk printed.
A surprisingly large number of digital photos never make it to a computer. Digital retail printing is climbing some insane amount from what I remember reading.