From the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, by Ben Rand (sent to me by Barrett)
Kodak believes that as the industry evolves, some photographers will continue to use film, some will prefer digital imaging and some will use both technologies, says Mary Jane Hellyar, president of Kodak's film and photofinishing systems group.
"Many people portray our industry as a winner-take-all battle between digital and film. But it is not that at all," Hellyar will tell reporters at the 82nd annual Photo Marketing Association International convention, which starts Sunday in Orlando, Fla. "By focusing on technologies, you miss the most important element, the end user."
That end user, she says, has a range of needs. For instance, an estimated nine out of 10 professionals use digital cameras — but of that number, Kodak estimates that two-thirds still use film for a portion of their work. Among consumers, Kodak says that half of U.S. households continue to use and process film and single-use cameras.
Read the full article (opens new window)
1 comment:
I have always shot film, and will continue to shoot film until it is just not at all possible any more, and hopefully that isn't in my lifetime.
But, like Craig stated above, all my images originate on filmm, and that's all she wrote for film. Because after that, they are scanned digitally and remain digital for the rest of their existence. I haven't processed a print traditionally from negative in over a handful of years, it's all from a digital file.
Anothewr good point though, is the bloody economics of it all, like the lab guy says in the article, the cost for them to process film will rise and make it unfeasible for them to continue to do so. Which is nothing to those who process their film themselves, but then the ripple effect of it becoming harder and harder to obtain the chemicals and stuff to develop and process film from the makers cutting themeselves from the money pit of a business from lack of demand...
Just hopefully not in my lifetime.
Post a Comment