No. The ironic thing is that most people who use digital point and shoot cameras still get their pictures printed from a 1-hour photo lab. Just look at how many questions you see here from people asking where to get their digital pictures printed, and are clueless about how to print pictures on their computer at home.
Actually, I think it’s funny. People who use digital point and shoot cameras claim they don’t want to use film anymore, because it costs to get it developed…and yet, they still take their digital pictures to a photo lab to get printed. Isn’t the whole purpose of using a digital camera was that it’s supposed to be faster and more convenient?? So if you still take your digital pictures printed at a 1-hour photo lab, doesn’t that just defeat the whole purpose?
Also for that person who said that “old people” get pictures developed\printed at Walgreens, Walmat, etc…well, I got a news flash for you. It’s not only old people. I’m only 31, and I still use FILM because it’s much better quality than anything you would get from a cheap little P&S digital camera. I use fully manual film cameras (35mm and 120 size) and I am always amazed at the quality pictures I can get, especially with 120 film. The detail is awesome and will blow away any “pics” you get from a digital camera. I’ve been around computers my entire life, and the Internet has been around for most of my life. But I still prefer film because it is much better quality, and usually film cameras (especially manual rangefinder and SLR film cameras) are also much more durable than a little plastic digital camera. I have an 8 megapixel digital camera, but I only use that for snapshots when I’m out with friends. And when I take snapshots with my digital camera, I just print it myself on my computer at home. For REAL photography, I prefer film.
I also develop my own black and white film and pictures…and the incredibly sharp, detailed pictures you can get from a REAL optical print from an enlarger and developed in a darkroom will blow away any digital camera.
Most people who take their digital pictures (on a SD card, CD-R, flash drive, etc) to the digital printing kiosk at Walgreens or Walmart just want the fast and easiest way to get their picutres. They don’t really care about quality and have no real interest in photography.
In fact, I’ve seen a lot of people admit that they only got a camera because of MySpace. So that should tell you the kind of pictures they take…lame snapshots, “kewl pics” for their MySpace page.
So NO, digital cameras did not put the 1-hour photo labs out of business. And since most people are still clueless about how to even print pictures from their computer, they still take their digital snapshots to a photo lab. So if anything, it might have actually given some photo labs more business.
Related posts:
- Can You Take Good Photography With An Aiptek Digital Camera?
- Photography, Digital Photography, Printing Photographs~please Help! Thanks!?
- How Much Longer Must We Endure Digital Photography Hype?
- Where Can I Get Information On Starting A Digital Photography Business From Home?
- Do You See Digital Photography As A Good Thing For The Common Man?
- What Is The Role Of Digital Photography In Today’s Society?
- I Prefer Film Photography Over Digital, Problems?
- What Is The Best Digital Camera To Purchase For A Complete Novice To The World Of Digital Photography?
- Is Film Photography Dead? Will Digital Cameras Replace Slr Film Cameras?
- In Photography, Digital Or Film, And Why?
No. While point-and-click cameras offer affordable alternatives, they are typically used by youth for cataloging events and throwing their night up on facebook – those would have never been prints. And Digital SLR cameras, the pro quality stuff, would have never been pictures that would be developed in a 1-hour Photo Lab.
Old people still flock to photo labs like Walgreens, CVS, and Wal*Mart. And if you need a quick, high-quality 4×6, there’s no easier way. So kids still use it when they want to scrapbook, make a montage, or just have something material to remember something by.
If anything, digital photography has made 1-hour photo even easier and more convenient. Sometimes now, it’s even less than an hour. You bring in your photos a CF, SD, or XD card, and prints can come out in minutes. It cut the developing out of the equation, and made the industry more efficient.
There’s something magical about the glossy. Pixels just can’t replace that.
Comment by gatewayc — June 19, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
Some of them, yes. How many “Mom and Pop” labs are in your area now as compared to 10 years ago? The retailesr who traditionally run minilabs in their stores are hanging in for a while, but the ones who can’t get into digital are mostly already gone. My roll volume has dropped in the past few years to averaging only in the teens and twenties per day most of the year. In 2000, when my lab opened in our small town/rural area, we did about 50-75 rolls of 35mm and APS per day, and 100 during Nov, Dec and Jan. I have not had a 100 roll day in 4 years. Probably over half our film volume now consists of disposacams. We have no commercial film accounts now. All the real estate, companies are digital and don’t require prints. The average roll count for Feb is going to be pretty low. But my lab does aver 25.000 digital prints a month, sometimes many more on three digital printers. My film division is still running an analog Noritsu with a lens and a light bulb, obsolete by today’s standards. Most of the chain stores have gone to a dry lab printer, although the ones who do film still have a film processor. There are not too many silver prints made in consumer labs.
Good C41 color processing is still viable, but getting harder to find.
Comment by Jetsam Rook — June 19, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
Yes, I do think they have.
Let’s face it, instead of getting a roll of film developed, people are being very selective on which prints they get. Many people are not getting prints at all. I probably took 15,000 images last year and printed fewer than 200 prints.
Interesting article on the subject, talking about how it affected Ritz:http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com…
Comment by Ara57 — June 19, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
no… ohhh no…. they doing great… maybe even better than before digital photography era….
Comment by Weird Videos — June 19, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
No. As a film user I see a demand for quality 1 hour processing and printing.
Comment by Chris P — June 19, 2009 @ 4:35 pm
no i don’t think so
Comment by Edwin — June 19, 2009 @ 4:35 pm