Fishkin Bros. Camera To Go Out Of Business

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Jeremy, Dec 3, 2004.

  1. Jeremy

    McLeod Guest

    And if every consumer can do as good a job as the professional then
    they should be replaced. Simple as that. If I can't do a better job
    than Uncle Charley that's my fault.
     
    McLeod, Dec 6, 2004
    #61
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jeremy

    Skip M Guest

    You got that right! One of the most common laments I hear is that Uncle
    Charley did their wedding photography, and the pictures sucked. But I also
    hear a lot of people grousing about their wedding photographer to whom they
    paid a couple of thousand or more, and the pictures sucked. Everyone who
    owns a camera thinks they're a photographer, and technically, they're right.
    It's up to the pros to keep coming up with images that the rank and file
    can't.
     
    Skip M, Dec 7, 2004
    #62
    1. Advertisements

  3. Jeremy

    Annika1980 Guest

    From: John McWilliams
    That would be the 400 f/5.6L.
     
    Annika1980, Dec 7, 2004
    #63
  4. Jeremy

    Skip M Guest

    The way to adapt is to become that digital artist. That's already coming,
    digital cameras and programs like Photoshop Elements make what was once
    difficult available and easy for the amateur.
    But the photographer/digital artist who knows how and when to use film,
    whether roll, sheet or Polaroid, will still be a little ahead of the curve,
    as will the photographer who knows how to integrate film, digital and
    nontraditional image sources and techniques.
     
    Skip M, Dec 7, 2004
    #64
  5. Jeremy

    Bob Hickey Guest

    Believe me, I would love to adapt to digital. I've had 5 scanners so far &
    countless programs. 100% success. Every keeper goes into the digital crapper
    as soon as I get tired of banging my head against the wall. Subset of
    skills? The first subset of skills is the whole picture. The thing says
    512 colors; how come I can't get two right: B&W. OTOH, It's free. Except
    for this stack of keyboards that I've pulverized on and around the delete
    key. Bob Hickey
     
    Bob Hickey, Dec 7, 2004
    #65
  6. Jeremy

    Bob Hickey Guest

    It's been my limited wedding experience, a few years, that that
    what people say; but , what they'll buy, is the SOS.
    Bob Hickey
     
    Bob Hickey, Dec 7, 2004
    #66
  7. With the 1.4 extender... a filter and a 3 lb. lens hood.....

    J.
     
    John McWilliams, Dec 7, 2004
    #67
  8. Jeremy

    Matt White Guest

    I can't. IMO the average consumer is the one most likely to loose a
    Absolutely! After all, your average point'n'shoot user has lots of properly
    labelled and dated albums of every last print, negative and slide they've
    ever shot over the past few decades and never, ever loses track of anything
    at all!

    Twit.

    - Matt
     
    Matt White, Dec 7, 2004
    #68
  9. Perhaps not, but I just can't imagine my great grandkids rummaging around in
    the attic and finding a bunch of CD's with some old photographs on them
    taken by their great granddad........
     
    William Graham, Dec 7, 2004
    #69
  10. Jeremy

    me Guest

    **** you
     
    me, Dec 7, 2004
    #70
  11. Jeremy

    me Guest

    Yes it is. If film goes camera stores won't be far behind.
    Film, buy now or fall forever!
    me
     
    me, Dec 7, 2004
    #71
  12. Jeremy

    Skip M Guest

    Good, mature response. Sheeesh, you couldn't think of anything else to say?
     
    Skip M, Dec 7, 2004
    #72
  13. Jeremy

    Jeremy Guest

    You are correct, and I myself have expressed the same sentiments. But
    things have been changing. People are becoming more aware of long-term
    storage issues, and more of us are taking better care to label CDs, make
    Index Prints, and catalog the contents in various other ways.

    There is no doubt that some percentage of those digital images will be lost.
    But that is countered by the fact that more images are being shot now than
    ever before with film. Two factors come to mind:

    1: More consumers are buying digital cameras than ever bought film cameras.
    The sales figures are staggering.

    2: Those that own digital cameras are less likely to feel restricted in the
    number of images shot, because there are no concerns about buying film.

    Any image is better than no image. And, much as I enjoy continuing to use
    my film gear, I find myself shooting more digital images, taking more risks,
    experimenting more, all because I don't have to worry about running out of
    film, or wasting film on shots that might not be satisfactory. With
    digital, there is no longer any need to be "right" about exposure or
    composition.

    Finally, it appears that there will be services available well into the
    future to read CDs or DVDs and to convert the images to whatever format and
    media are then in use. True, it may require payment of a fee, like the
    current services that will convert 8mm home movies to DVDs, but with so many
    millions of CDs filled with images, it seems implausable that there will be
    no way to read them as time progresses. Admittedly, it's my opinion, but
    any predictions are essentially opinions.

    My point is that we should not dismiss digital imaging as unsatisfactory,
    simply because some percentage of those images will be forever lost due to
    bad cataloging and storage procedures.
     
    Jeremy, Dec 7, 2004
    #73
  14. Jeremy

    Jeremy Guest

    Actually I was directing my comments, not upon you pros, but upon the
    changing attitudes in the minds of consumers. Regardless of how much effort
    and skill you may put into your product, the likelihood is that a greater
    percentage of consumers will be satisfied enough with their own images to
    not want want to spend the money to buy a professionally-produced product.

    The quality gap is narrowing. That tends to reduce your potential universe
    of customers.
     
    Jeremy, Dec 7, 2004
    #74
  15. Jeremy

    Jeremy Guest

    I don't doubt that what you say is true. But the real question is whether
    the consumer will see your product as being worth the substantial cost.
    There is bound to be a shakeout when some professionals can't deliver
    products that are sufficiently superior to warrant being paid for them.

    And, in this increasingly do-it-yourself environment, I predict that a
    greater percentage of potential customers will elect to save their money and
    accept whatever their cameras and photo editing skills can produce.

    When so many people are doing most of their shopping at Wal-Mart (because of
    the high cost of living) buying professionally-produced photos may be viewed
    as an unnecessary frill. The consumer continues to have access to better
    equipment, a wider range of focal lengths, and can do things with PhotoShop
    or PSP that he never had the ability, equipment or skill to do in a wet
    darkroom.

    It won't kill professional photography, but it will almost certainly place
    increasing demands upon pros to stay well ahead of the curve.
     
    Jeremy, Dec 7, 2004
    #75
  16. Jeremy

    me Guest

    I wasn't responding to his arguement I was responding to his insult. You
    think I was too harsh. You're making an asumption about how offensive I
    found his insult. Only the recipient of an insult knows how offended they
    are. IMO I just returned Mr. White's sentiment, no more, no less.
    Why should I? In my first encounter with Mr. White he calls me names. It
    would be foolish to assume that he wants to be reasonable.
    This message is a measured response by,
    me
     
    me, Dec 7, 2004
    #76
  17. Jeremy

    Alan Browne Guest

    Methinks a photoshop evening course at a local college is in order...
     
    Alan Browne, Dec 7, 2004
    #77
  18. Jeremy

    me Guest

    Backing up isn't even on the to do list for the average consumer, the next
    time Windows fails to boot they'll have to format their drive and reinstall
    the OS, good bye photos. Even the most technically challenged consumer knows
    where to get film developed and what a photo album is.
    Dumbing down comes to mind.
    Doesn't provide much incentive to take your time, check your framing, light,
    composition or all those other pesky considerations that make good
    photography, does it?
    "No need to be right about exposure or composition" Are we're talking about
    snapshots or was that a typo?!?
    I don't dismiss it for use by others I just point out the limitations. I
    read countless threads extolling the virtues of digital but only a
    smattering of criticism. Better to wear rose collored glasses when talking
    about digital, facts just make people uncomfortable.
    With digital they're irrevocably lost.
    Film. better that all the rest!
    me
     
    me, Dec 7, 2004
    #78
  19. Jeremy

    Skip M Guest

    While Mr. White's comment did, indeed, call into question your perspicacity,
    it did so without resorting to profanity. Yours, however did. Overly
    harsh, in my opinion, yes. Profane, point of fact, yes.
     
    Skip M, Dec 7, 2004
    #79
  20. Jeremy

    me Guest

    It wasn't his question I objected to. Let's just agree that you and I have
    different ideas about what constitutes personal insults, OK.
    me
     
    me, Dec 7, 2004
    #80
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.