Fishkin Bros. Camera To Go Out Of Business

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

  1. Jeremy

    me Guest

    Incidentally, I was obscene not profane.
    Willing to be obscene when warranted,
    me, Dec 7, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Jeremy

    Bob Hickey Guest

    Being as a copy of PS costs about the same as a good used Hassy
    or a bad used car, the odds of me buying one are slim to say the least. Why
    would I pay that much and work that hard to get something on a screen that's
    almost as good as what's on paper already? Bob Hickey
    Bob Hickey, Dec 8, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. I agree with all the above, and I intend to purchase a scanner that will do
    a decent job of getting my slides digitized....Perhaps Nikon's new "V" model
    which is 4000 DPI and about $600. But I still think that I will continue to
    shoot slides, because there is something "real" about holding a slide in
    hand that I just don't get with a digital image. Also, the fact that film
    costs a little more is a good thing for me. I already tend to shoot too
    many, "junk" photos, and I fear that digital equipment will just make that
    problem worse.
    William Graham, Dec 8, 2004
  4. Jeremy

    Annika1980 Guest

    Also, the fact that film
    Yeah, but you don't pay for the junk pics with digital.

    delete - delete - oooohhhhh! - delete ....
    Annika1980, Dec 8, 2004
  5. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    I wonder if it's not so much that the quality gap may cause a slowing in the
    market for images, but rather that the notion among the masses is that they
    "can now take great photos"--simply because they believe the hype. Once
    they become avid shooters--however crappy they will most certainly remain at
    it--I think there is often still a tendency for them to prefer shots they
    have taken themselves.

    I know this is true of myself.
    While the fact that I love photography DOES make me truly admire/appreciate
    the great photographic works of others, I am FAR less inclined to actually
    BUY that work. Instead, my tendency is to want to go out and get my own
    shots that are equally pleasing. -And although I may never be as good, it's
    the fact that they are MY shots that makes them competetively
    compelling...for me.

    With everyone and their brother now thinking they are "photographers"...I
    wonder if they won't be similarly lees-prone to pay for photos by others.

    Truth is (in my humble opinion, of course), most people printing their
    high-tech digital snapshots at Wal-Mart, Costco, etc. are still oo-ing
    and -aaahing at the same crappy-snaps they always similarly ooh/aahed at
    with point-n-shoots film cameras.

    I really believe there will always be a significant gap--but not so much
    from a technology gap, rather a
    talent/eye/creativity/patience/persistence/learning/growth/artistic gap.

    After all...Every one of us has access to better quality paint than the
    greats of old had, yet none of us are churning out Mona Lisas. It's the
    same old "pots and pans do not a cook make" thing...

    Mark², Dec 8, 2004
  6. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    Are you in any way associated with education?
    A student?
    A teacher/administrator?

    If so, you can buy Photoshop at tremendous discount.

    I recently bought not just Photoshop...but the entire Adobe Creative Suite
    Premium...a collection of programs that retails for over $1200.00 USD for
    about $329. This was NOT an upgrade. Adobe is very acomodating to anyone
    associated with education.

    Heck...with price breaks like that, it might be worth enrolling in college
    Mark², Dec 8, 2004
  7. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    For me, the whole idea of having someone else print for you is to defeat the
    purpose of digital (in my thinking, anyway).

    When I shot all film, I moved to slides so that I had full control over
    final exposure. I scanned the film and printed it myself for the same
    Now that I'm "mostly" digital, I see it as even greater control, because I
    no longer rely on anyone for even the chemical development of slides. I am
    now in absolute control of my images from start to finish.

    Giving all that back to a printing service would really deflate my incentive
    for digital as a whole. It's all about controlling the image for me.
    Mark², Dec 8, 2004
  8. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    Don't be so freightened...

    I once worked on a building in Haiti, and in order to buy some fairly
    standard-sized screws, you had to go to a counter, tell a clerk what you
    wanted....who would then write it down, hand it to a runner...who would jog
    into a back room and come back to the counter where he would count out (one
    at a time) the screws...He would then right down several notes about them,
    and inform you that these were the only ones they had...

    ....Then you'd name your next item.
    The circus would continue.
    Each time, he ran back to return with ONE item off of our long list!

    We spent OVER AN HOUR and 1/2(!!) filling a list which would have taken us
    about 6 minutes to fill at Home Depot. It was then that we realized the
    towns there simply were not culturally ready for sustained development.

    I had a very similar experience in Puerto Rico...which is a terretory of the
    Builders and home-owners would go nuts if we had to rely on paper and
    pencil, "let me fill your order" type places today.

    I'm the most nostalgic guy I've ever met, but even I can see that we need
    places like Home Depot. Do NOT confuse Home Depot with Wal-Mart, however.
    In Home Depot, it is very easy to find help from people who know what
    they're talking about, and can help you find what you NEED. At Wal-Mart,
    you'll be lucky if you can get help finding an exit from the help they hire
    for a gumball-an-hour.
    Mark², Dec 8, 2004
  9. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    How ironic, then, that I can only see this post from "me" through
    Annika...since I've kill-filed "me" and not Annika. :)

    I've been here for years, and now have VERY few people kill-filed.
    This "me" guy is one of about 5 folks, and it only took about two of his
    posts to land him in the clink.
    Mark², Dec 8, 2004
  10. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    Speleeng dusnt reely cownt hear.
    Mark², Dec 8, 2004
  11. Jeremy

    Mark² Guest

    Still got cheerleaders on the brain, aye?
    Mark², Dec 8, 2004
  12. Jeremy

    Jeremy Guest

    Yep! Excellent observation.
    Jeremy, Dec 8, 2004
  13. Jeremy

    Skip M Guest

    Mark, I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment. The market for
    photography, as a whole, has diminished to the point of near invisibility.
    If you're not shooting for a magazine, it's a tough row to hoe. Even
    weddings and portraits seem to be more and more turned over to the Uncle
    Charleys of the world, especially with the ability to fix all but the most
    egregious of errors in Photoshop or Paintshop. Fewer and fewer people are
    willing to pay for that
    "talent/eye/creativity/patience/persistence/learning/growth/artistic" thing
    you mention. The only silver lining is that, as a status symbol, those with
    money are more willing to pay more for weddings and portraits, but those
    with a moderate amount of money are less so inclined. And collectors only
    buy what the galleries tell them to, and those galleries stick to the
    already well known photographers, to a large degree.
    Skip M, Dec 8, 2004
  14. Jeremy

    me Guest

    I hope you and annika will be very happy together in my killfile.
    me, Dec 8, 2004
  15. Jeremy

    Alan Browne Guest

    PS Elements 2 is free with Minolta (and some other) scanners. The Elements 3
    version can be bought for $99. It is more basic than the full version, but you
    can still doa lot... GIMP 2 is free (Windows).

    Alan Browne, Dec 8, 2004
  16. I work with a local college newspaper, which I'm desperately trying to
    move to digital photography. Why? The atrocious quality of the
    photographs they publish. They have an excellent darkroom, which has
    been unused for years. The current proceedure is to have color 4X6's
    made at the corner drugstore, from whatever point and shoot falls to
    hand. These images are scanned and printed.

    The result is far inferior to what I did in high school decades ago.
    The staff has a vague idea that the pictures "aren't good", but they
    have NO IDEA what's wrong with them or how to fix it. The concepts
    involved just aren't part of their universe.

    The point is, 99% of the people you see CANNOT RECOGNIZE technical
    photograpic quality, let alone artistic quality. Expedience has won
    over expertise - completely.
    Scott Schuckert, Dec 8, 2004
  17. Jeremy

    Jeremy Guest

    Another major factor is that we have become a "do-it-yourself" society.
    Just look at all of the home improvement shows on TV--people are tackling
    projects that they formerly would have assigned to a handyman or craftsman.
    Part of it is that they feel that they can get the job done just as well
    (often they botch it up!) and a major reason is that they want to save

    Photographs are often viewed as commodities. Why pay $5000 to someone who
    says he's a professional, when all you really want are a few wedding candids
    that Uncle Charley can take for free?

    Why go to an expensive photo studio, when you can take the family to Sears
    or Wal-Mart photo studio and get acceptable portraits for $19.95?

    The pressure is on pros to produce a product that is significantly ahead of
    the curve, and an increasing number of consumers are asking themselves if
    they really want to spend a lot of money for a professional product, when
    the current quality available "at the curve" is acceptable?

    I suspect that the small-town photography studios will take it on the chin
    first. As an example, when I was age 7 and received my First Communion, my
    parents took me for the obligatory portrait at the local studio. Now most
    parents are taking their kids to the local Wal-Mart for those pictures--and
    they are no worse than what they would have gotten from the local guy.

    His "bread-and-butter" assignments have all but disappeared, and the
    consumer is none the worse off in the bargain.

    When so many people own prosumer digital cameras, how many weddings will be
    photographed, not by the local wedding photographer, but by friends and
    relatives whose equipment is capable of producing results that are at least
    acceptable to most people?

    It is no longer a case of a pro, with his Hasselblad, versus an amateur,
    with his P&S. It is going to become harder and herder to stay ahead of the
    Jeremy, Dec 8, 2004
  18. Jeremy

    me Guest

    Foghorn Leghorn gives Mark a clue about Bob's interest in buying Photoshop:
    I say, that was a joke SON! YOU DO KNOW what a joke is DON'T YA BOY?
    This humorous post at Mark's expense was provided by:
    me, Dec 9, 2004
  19. Jeremy

    me Guest

    BINGO! Give that man a cupie doll!
    Skip Uncle Charlie, just pass out disposable film cameras. Cheaper, better
    quality, and who knows, there might be a prodigy in the crowd.
    The phrase "you get what you pay for" comes to mind.
    Embarrassing, (if you know what's possible) but acceptable.
    Cheap = good = happy consumer.
    If the camera makes the photographer then I agree.
    An educated consumer knows the difference between price and quality. It's up
    to photographers to help provide that education.
    Film, is for good guys!
    me, Dec 9, 2004
  20. Jeremy

    me Guest

    My posts to this thread are summarized by the following:
    "I'm not trying to predict the future, I'm trying to prevent it."
    Ray Bradbury

    me, Dec 9, 2004
    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.