On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 1:51 PM, mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> From: "John Celio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: 2008/07/26 Sat PM 04:14:31 GMT >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: OT: Interesting PMA numbers >> >> > In 2000, US consumers made 29.9 billion prints from film, and 500,000 >> > prints from digital >> > sources. In 2007, consumers made 8.9 billion prints from film, and 16.3 >> > prints from digital. >> > 2008 projects to be 5.8 billion film prints, 16.3 digital prints. >> > In 2007, 35% of digital prints were made at home, that number is projected >> > to fall to 31% in >> > 2008. >> >> This last part does not surprise me. Consumers are hopefully waking up to >> the cost-vs-convenience factor of printing at home, plus the potential >> technical and quality issues that come with trying to be your own >> photofinisher. For the sake of photolabs everywhere, I hope the >> print-at-home number continues to drop. > > Er, but the numbers show that there are now ~6_billion_ fewer prints being > commercially made per year in the US. I suspect the fall is even more > dramatic in the UK. It's been at least five years since I noted the > preponderance of "Please print _something_" adverts on UK television.
I think Facebook, Livejournal and MySpace have put a nail in the general printing market and it's going to tail off to much smaller numbers. Why print your crappy vacation photos when you can share them will all your friends, properly annotated, on Facebook? It's pretty much what every non-serious shutterbug I know does. Prints are for grandmas and serious shooters. -Adam -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
