----- Original Message ----- From: "KT Takeshita" Subject: Re: ChDImage about Pentax and PMA
Well, I must say. I really can't argue with Ken's logic. I do hope he is not correct, at least until I want to retire. I think there are a few factors at play here. One is the relative ease with which people can go from digital capture to print. As a photofinisher, that part worries me. What makes me feel confident in the future is inertia. As an industry, we have been teaching generations of people that photography is easy. Drop that memory card off at the lab, and we'll take care of it for you, just like film. Or, you can do it yourself. Some will. I think (I hope) most won't. William Robb > > Hi folks, > > I have no intention to challenge this point (particularly the concern by our > fellow PDMLers :-), and above statement is true to a point. > But the fact of the matter is that the huge tide of bringing the printing > part of the whole equation to the consumers' hands is already moving with > quite a momentum. In the film processing, it involves fairly bothersome > chemical processing and the home dark room is really for the handful of die > hard hobbyist. However, the digital printing is different. A huge consumer > market potential is there to be exploited by the manufacturers. Say, Canon > for example could never touch the film processing biz. Now they can compete > with Fuji or Noritsu etc at the consumer market level. There is no way > these manufacturers will sit and let it pass in front of their eyes. > Printers are becoming cheaper and cheaper all the time. Yes, the > consumables are still relatively expensive, but it will only go down in > price for sure. Ordinary folks who never wish to bother the image > processing like PS manipulation etc (probably the majority of the market) > will simply stick their memory media into the printer directly, make a few > adjustment (contrast etc0 and will get what they were usually getting from > their favourite labs. I would not suggest the demise of the lab for a > minute (they may have to specialize), but the whole tide is actually > manufacturer driven too. When Canon know that they can grab this huge > market rather than letting the consumers go to the digital lab, they will > certainly grab it. Digital tide is not necessarily a "DIY" concept but the > consumerization of the image processing. > I am not an expert and how and when this "consumerization" of the total > imaging would take form, but can understand that it would be the ultimate > destination. Digitization of the image taking without the scanner is making > this consumerization possible. The huge number of acquired digicams have to > go somewhere. Some may be using it for the web page only and some will > print only the portion of the shots they took and the rest might be stored > in their computers or CDs etc. But they will be eventually printed and the > technology is already right there. It is not like the vast majority of the > film processing which has no choice but to go to labs, particularly when it > comes down to colour printing. > > Digicam frenzy is not only because of the instant gratitude etc, but the > awareness by the consumers of the self-printing potential. While the > consumables are expensive, they may adopt to the environment by choosing > what they print. In fact, in one roll of film, how many do you think you > really want to print? You cannot choose it until you see it. > > Cost of home printing will surely come down and soon the equilibrium would > be reached between the cost and the fun/convenience. > > But I am of course no Nostradams :-). > > Cheers, > > Ken > > >
