Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: barryfitzgerald on October 15, 2013, 12:42:24 pm
-
And probably will be for the near future.
My thinking is...
1: Over-saturation in the market...too many products, lots of makers you are dividing the pie up among many players.
2: Current global economic situation, not news to most of use but how the camera industry expected to not get impacted by this is a mystery. People have less disposable income and are buying less be it cameras or any other products.
3: "Upgrade fever has fizzled out" Years ago people seemed to get really pumped up with new products, now the improvements seem much less dramatic in most ways.
4: "Good enough" related to upgrade fever. Years past people complained about not enough resolution, DR not so great. Now we've lots of resolution and better DR. Why bother upgrading with each new model?
I would add:
Lazy compact makers who simply tried to sell people the same product over and over again with the same tiny sensor bad IQ, with a few more pixels each new model, and a bigger zoom range. No wonder folks who bought a smart phone with a half decent camera just stopped buying compacts.
And on another point. I bought another Victorinox Swiss army knife the other month and I bought the exact same model in 1994. Guess what is doesn't cost any more now than it did back then nearly 20 years ago!
I also found an old Minolta lens price chart from the 80's, wow lens prices sure went up a lot. I wonder how much longer the industry can continue in it's current form.
Thoughts?
-
Interesting 200 views almost and no comments?
I assume we're ok with 4/5 year updates down the road for bodies and a few less makers...
-
Perhaps we view forum posts in the hope of finding something interesting and sometimes we personally don't find them interesting :-)
-
It seems that the newest generation of photographers isn't into specs the way the middle aged shooters are. The editorial and advertising markets are looking for the newest cool looks including hipstamatic iphone shots. The majority of people competing in the entry level ranks are happy with entry level DSLRS and kit lenses. All of which probably produce images on par with the best gear from the film days or even early 5MP digital days. And I'm not sure the industry is in decline compared to the 60's and 70's. In those days a camera body was good for ten years or more and lenses lasted forever with an occasional cleaning. I'd love to know the numbers of how many bodies they sold then compared to now.
Now video is bit different story. Those cameras are growing in demand and haven't reached the point of a commodity yet.
-
I assume we're ok with 4/5 year updates down the road for bodies and a few less makers...
Yes, fine with that. I'd be happy to pay more for kit that holds it's value better and continues to be upgraded where possible via firmware, even if those firmware upgrades are chargeable.
I like what's happened this month at Fuji, where they've released a significant firmware upgrade for a discontinued camera, hurrah to Fuji for that and it raises my respect for them and they didn't charge for it.
Why Canon don't offer something similar to the Magic Lantern project baffles me. I'm not going to upgrade my 5Dii for a very long time, but would be happy to pay Canon for an 'official' firmware that offers the features of ML.
-
I would add:
Lazy compact makers who simply tried to sell people the same product over and over again with the same tiny sensor bad IQ, with a few more pixels each new model, and a bigger zoom range. No wonder folks who bought a smart phone with a half decent camera just stopped buying compacts.
I wouldn't put it all on the camera makers. That's what people want. Next time you are at a birthday party, look around. Everyone is using their phone. I don't think that is because camera makers were lazy. I think it is because for most people, their phone is now good enough to forgo hauling another tool that only does photos and video. When they go into the closet and see the dust-covered 4-year old digital camera, they think about upgrading for a second, but then ask, "Why?"
Dave
-
It's normal product life cycle. The current camera quality relative to needs show the products are in the mature stage.
-
OP, good points. Cell phone also kills sales of cams.
-
Aloha,
Maybe all the guys like me that were shooting film have finished chasing the IQ improvements as they transitioned to/through early digital to finally get a system they feel offers them equal/better IQ than what they were using in film. Now we are just shooting again. Not buying, Thank god! Its been a very expensive journey
-
Talking to people it seems to be a good time to acquire second hand stuff, with new models out so frequently used prices have tanked on lots of still capable bodies.
Yes it can be an expensive journey, but only if you let it. Depending on what mount you are buying for there are lots of s/h lenses, Tamron/Sigma/Tokina etc in the mix
It need not cost a fortune for the more prudent buyer.
I've no problems with the decline of the industry if it means better prices, more considered and sensible updates rather than minor re-hashes.
We might see new sensor technology, but I can't see too many other areas where the industry can mature or market (we've plenty of resolution too)
-
The general desire has been about the ability to document rather than photography.
Today there are more handy tools to do that, the majority has never been much interested in the cameras, there just was no alternative.
Things are simply back to normal, only those who are interested in photography will get cameras.
-
DSLR are not dead... yet. They can incorporate multilayer 24x36mm sensors... mirrorless cameras cannot... so easly. This is the next "jump" or turning point.
This article is in Spanish (sorry):
http://www.dslrmagazine.com/digital/tecnicas-de-fotografia-digital/sistemas-improvisados-y-sepelios-precipitados.html
-
Let's see:
Smartphones:
I don't get it. People with cameras in their phones buy the phones for communication not because of the camera. It is mandatory. Like video in still cameras. Now, if I buy a still camera. it comes with video. Nowadays I shoot videos now and then but in reality I couldn't care less. I still have to buy me a nice dslr every 3 years that costs the same a nice used car. Also steady renewing my lens line in order to keep apace with technology.
Competition:
Still don't get it. It is true there are more players now but some are gone too. Every single store in the world has a plethora digital cameras. Supermarkets used to sell negative color film only. Now they sell gear and cards. Same with stationary stores, home improvement stores, etc., etc., you name them. If everybody sells cameras now, it is because a lot more people buy cameras now than before, despite smartphones. The world economy exploded in recent years. India and China are now gigantic consumer powerhouses. This is like having 2 more USA's. in 20 years. Latin america is a lot more sound than 20 years ago, the same with many countries in Asia. In my limited perception, I'd swear that everybody involved manufacturing cameras should be successful at selling them by container load.
Photographers and many other creative careers are struggling because the competition from "civilians", that's true. But manufacturers all over should be having a life in the horns of abundance.
Percolating ground coffee used to be a humble part of the food service in stores. Now, it is a multimillionaire business. Why is the camera industry in decline? Gimme a break!
If they are, it must be because they're doing a few things very wrongly. Greed must be backfiring!
Eduardo
-
People with cameras in their phones buy the phones for communication not because of the camera.
You don't get it ;-)
People use the cameras in their phones for communication (and taking notes); people use photos and video for communication (and taking notes).
-
DSLR's were never really mass market products, but price cuts made them very affordable.
I honestly don't see much impact on cameras like this from smart phones.
Compacts yes..have smart phone with decent ish camera why bother?
Compact makers need to respond by offering much lager sensors and IQ that is significantly better than phone cameras, I'm not talking £50 cameras now but people need a reason to spend on a compact, this is one. They've been riding the wave for years offering very little in the way of innovation and tiny sensors with poor image quality.
For people with a serious interest in photography, smart phones are not a solution.
The other reason is people have no real reason to keep upgrading their compact. Unless you lose it, or break it would you buy a new one every year? I suspect not. Market over saturation.
In some ways this is a good thing, camera makers will have to get off their a$$ and do something rather than sitting around with tedious re-hashed models year after year.
As for the other cameras, DSLR's and ILC's etc I suspect we know that the market is going down and the glory days are indeed over.
-
Smartphones:
I don't get it. People with cameras in their phones buy the phones for communication not because of the camera.
Nope people buy a computer with a camera that can also make phone calls.
[and what Issac said]
-
Perhaps if someone incorporated web browsing, GPS, and video into a still camera… Oh wait, we already have cell phones and they include the option of making phone calls!
-
The "camera" industry is in decline or stagnant because, as many others have pointed out, the newest (and largest number) of photographers are preoccupied with the image, its meaning and its immediacy.
We are mistakenly identifying old style SLRs and DSLRs as the stalwarts of photography. They do take photographs of very high quality but that is of interest to the old line enthusiast and not the young people using the VERY good cameras that are in their phones.
I would compare old style cameras to a good letter written on fine stationery with beautiful language carefully folded and sealed in a monogrammed envelope. It would then be posted at the corner mailbox and delivered (if you lived long enough ago) to your friend across town later that day. Today, email (or texting) achieves the objective in an instant with nary a thought given to the device that enables it. In both cases the objective is to communicate. The older ones among us bemoan the loss of the paper/ language/ process while the younger ones marvel at the labor expended and expertise required to to get a simple idea transmitted non-verbally.
Kirk Tuck had a great blog post recently about the generational differences here:
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-graying-of-traditional-photography.html
With his thoughts about the industry here:
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2013/08/has-bubble-burst-is-that-why-camera.html
-
Thanks, I'd seen that October blog post but not the one from August (http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2013/08/has-bubble-burst-is-that-why-camera.html).
This --
If you think about it the hobby of photography from the dawn of digital to now really had very little to do with the desire of most people to make wonderful images. ... When the 24 megapixel sensors got rolled out into a $600 Nikon body the curtain was pulled open and we could see that performance was now on sale at Target prices and everyone was free to share the same basic benefits no matter what their tenure in the technical trenches. And when everyone is special....no one is.
-- but also this from a comment (http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-graying-of-traditional-photography.html?showComment=1383097984098#c746810578841493996) to the October post --
The phrase that describes the most important segment of the DSLR community is: “soccer mom”. ... The three reasons parents buy high end cameras is telephoto reach, low light capability, and the ability to quickly focus on their children when they are jumping a hurdle or scoring a goal.
-
Recently Canon redesigned their super tele line. While the designs were improved in many ways, the price increased significantly, and they remain very cumbersome to carry into the field and are difficult or impossible to handhold.
IMO what is needed is a professional version of the 7D. This may come to fruition if Canon ever releases the 5DMKII. The 1.6 crop factor is a big advantage when photographing birds or other wildlife. In addition they need a new line of super teles designed for the smaller sensor. This alone cuts back a lot on the weight and cost of the lenses. Second, they need to make 400, 500, 600 mm lenses with f/5.6 max apertures, which would reduce the weight further. The result would be 500 and 600mm lenses which would be far more portable than the current dinosaurs.
-
As an interesting counter point to the decline of the consumer/prosumer camera industry...
Medium format the last several years is up-up-up.
It's a VERY small part of the overall world camera industry, but perhaps enlightens some of these conversations.
-
Hi,
The problem for the camera industry is saturation. Once cameras are good enough there is little reason to buy a new one, unless you have a feature you want badly.
Clearly, there is a push from more and more capable phone cameras. There are opportunities in todays markets, like making smaller cameras. I guess many photographers may want to downsize. Small systems like the Sony A7 make a lot of sense, specially if optics are also kept small. Reducing aperture may be a good idea, but quality should not be compromised.
Best regards
Erik
Thanks, I'd seen that October blog post but not the one from August (http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2013/08/has-bubble-burst-is-that-why-camera.html).
This --
-- but also this from a comment (http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-graying-of-traditional-photography.html?showComment=1383097984098#c746810578841493996) to the October post --
-
Hi Doug,
You should know the state of MFD ;-)
A question, the growth you see, where does it come from?
New users (like me)?
Existing customer base upgrading?
New markets (like repro and aerieal)?
Do you see shifts between different makes? Like HB owners shifting to Phase?
Best regards
Erik
As an interesting counter point to the decline of the consumer/prosumer camera industry...
Medium format the last several years is up-up-up.
It's a VERY small part of the overall world camera industry, but perhaps enlightens some of these conversations.
-
More bad news for camera makers...
http://news.yahoo.com/canon-cuts-profit-outlook-camera-slump-drags-062539163--finance.html
http://money.cnn.com/2013/11/01/investing/sony-earnings/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Slightly older news aka Nikon
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/cameras/news/nikon-cuts-full-year-profit-target-as-camera-sales-slump-403018
I wonder if they have a plan in all of this? Probably not ::)
-
Aloha,
Maybe all the guys like me that were shooting film have finished chasing the IQ improvements as they transitioned to/through early digital to finally get a system they feel offers them equal/better IQ than what they were using in film. Now we are just shooting again. Not buying, Thank god! Its been a very expensive journey
Amen.
-
I ran across this interesting article..
http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2013/08/has-bubble-burst-is-that-why-camera.html
-
I ran across this interesting article...
Already mentioned (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=83160.msg676309#msg676309) in this discussion thread, twice.
-
AFAIC
In the context of DSLRs, I am perfectly happy with my setup (5DMKII and 6-7 L lenses). It's 5 years old. Sure I could gain a bit of resolution, a stop or so of dynamic range by upgrading the body, but I have stopped caring. While I did upgrade systematically from the D30 to the MKII and followed the same path for my backup body, it's been at least three years I haven't even looked at the new releases. You'd stick a gun to my head and I'd be unable to name any recent release except for the 5D MKIII (not enough of an improvement) or the D800 (wrong line of lenses for me).
Does that mean I am fully satisfied? Nope. While this 5 yo hardware capabilities exceed my photographic abilities, in terms of usability, the interface and connectivity feel pre-historic.
I'd gladly upgrade to a 5D MKII bis if it behaved like my smartphone. Autosync with dropbox, gdrive, easy sharing and sync over wifi or mobile data, configurable touchscreen controls, etc... It's not only the picture taking process that is more convenient with the phone, it's all the rest. Why can't I go to a tennis game with my DSLR setup, shoot and then get back home and just sit at my computer to edit, or pick up any tablet around to browse? Well, you get the idea.
I would also welcome controlling flashes on a screen, specifying the exact behavior I want. Call me an idiot, but I am still unable to reliably use my set of Canon flashes in varying situations. Yeah, I know, there is a longish ASCII FAQ about them ;-)
In fact, I feel the DSLR market is stuck in a bygone era in terms of user interfaces, just like the advanced MP3 players were before the iPhone came in.
Edit - fixed a couple of typos
-
In the context of DSLRs, I am perfectly happy with my setup (5DMKII and 6-7 L lenses). It's 5 years old. Sure I could gain a bit of resolution, a stop or so of dynamic range by upgrading the body, but I have stopped caring.
5D to 5DII was a no brainer upgrade, wheras I know people who'd rather a II than a III, as they prefer the look over the minor ergonomic improvements which seemed to be all there was to a lot of people.
I would also welcome controlling flashes on a screen, specifying the exact behaviour I want. Call me an idiot, but I am still unable to reliably use my set of Canon flashes in varying situations. Yeah, I know, there is a longish ASCII FAQ about them ;-)
Yes, yes and yes. I have a 580 mark I and Mark II, both are awful to control and to make it worse it's a different combo of buttons on each to hold and pray something happens.
-
Hi,
I am shooting Sony and I have no problems at all. I don't know if it is me or the camera. Also, I don't have problems with the flash. It may depend on me not using it for two years. I use some studio flash. As I said, I have no experience with Canon, but the DSLRs I had, I had little problems to learn.
I did many upgrades, tough.
Konica-Minolta Dimage 7D to Sony Alpha 100 (Megapixels)
Sony Alpha 100 to Sony Alpha 700 (CMOS sensor)
Sony Alpha 700 to Sony Alpha 900 (Full frame)
Sony Alpha 900 to Sony Alpha 55 SLT (Live View, most important feature!)
Sony Alpha 55 to Sony Alpha 77 SLT (More solid body, more presets, better viewfinder)
Sony Alpha 77 to Sony Alpha 99 SLT (Full frame, better presets)
Hasselblad 555ELD/P45+ (I still don't know what I think)
My friend, he bought lenses for full frame Canon in 2005 and waited for the Canon 5DIII when it arrived. Totally happy, right now.
Another point: I guess that some of my best pictures were taken with the Sony Alpha 700. That camera was good enough. The later developments may increased the technical quality, but they not turned me into a better photographer.
Best regards
Erik
AFAIC
In the context of DSLRs, I am perfectly happy with my setup (5DMKII and 6-7 L lenses). It's 5 years old. Sure I could gain a bit of resolution, a stop or so of dynamic range by upgrading the body, but I have stopped caring. While I did upgrade systematically from the D30 to the MKII and followed the same path for my backup body, it's been at least three years I haven't even looked at the new releases. You'd stick a gun to my head and I'd be unable to name any recent release except for the 5D MKIII (not enough of an improvement) or the D800 (wrong line of lenses for me).
Does that mean I am fully satisfied? Nope. While this 5 yo hardware capabilities exceed my photographic abilities, in terms of usability, the interface and connectivity feel pre-historic.
I'd gladly upgrade to a 5D MKII bis if it behaved like my smartphone. Autosync with dropbox, gdrive, easy sharing and sync over wifi or mobile data, configurable touchscreen controls, etc... It's not only the picture taking process that is more convenient with the phone, it's all the rest. Why can't I go to a tennis game with my DSLR setup, shoot and then get back home and just sit at my computer to edit, or pick up any tablet around to browse? Well, you get the idea.
I would also welcome controlling flashes on a screen, specifying the exact behavior I want. Call me an idiot, but I am still unable to reliably use my set of Canon flashes in varying situations. Yeah, I know, there is a longish ASCII FAQ about them ;-)
In fact, I feel the DSLR market is stuck in a bygone era in terms of user interfaces, just like the advanced MP3 players were before the iPhone came in.
Edit - fixed a couple of typos
-
A question, the growth you see, where does it come from?
New users (like me)?
Existing customer base upgrading?
New markets (like repro and aerieal)?
Do you see shifts between different makes? Like HB owners shifting to Phase?
Yes, yes, yes, and yes.
2013 has been a good year.
The product mix has been quite good. IQ260 has been very successful in the architecture/landscape/interior category which had slumped since the P45+ was still the best-thing-going for many years until the IQ260. IQ180/160 refurbs have offered high res with a great interface at a lower price than the cutting-edge pricing of original entry into the market. Refurb [P40+ and DF+] kits have offered flash sync of 1/1600th for fashion/portrait guys that previously couldn't afford it previously and are usually tethering so the so-so LCD isn't a major issue. Lower end backs like the P30+ and P25+ have offered the entry into medium format for many fence-sitters we had been talking to for years that always wanted medium format (e.g. to put on their hassy 500 they love shooting with despite it's lack of features - or often specifically because of it's lack of features).
Overall demand from those wanting to distinguish themselves from competitors (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with this thought process just reporting on it) has driven up a good segment of our commercial business. From our vantage point the recession seems to be in the rear-view mirror (i.e. still present on the mind, but no longer stretched out into the future view) in the high-end and middle-high-end commercial market which we most often serve. And digital backs really don't compete with camera phones or point and shoots so the trends there have no really effected anything.
Also I have to say the number of photographers that have come in that had purchased D800/E (specifically) because they had been waiting, often for many years, for a high-res dSLR, and found it wanting in many other areas (lens selection, quality of wides, color, sync speed, body build quality etc) was tremendous.
And for the first time in a while I'm seeing a surge in demand from the fine-art market among guys who previously only shot 4x5 film. The appropriate curves of film becoming more of a hassle (especially outside of primary markets), age catching up to shooters such that the thought of carrying a 4x5/tripod/film around is motivational, and the cost coming down for the 40-80mp backs which are appropriate 4x5 substitutes. I was on a roof in Harlem with two such shooters this week doing a comparison to their 4x5 camera and it's a very satisfying part of the job as, generally speaking, the fine art guys have tremendous passion and appreciation for the process of creating an image and the gear being used to achieve their vision - that excitement is contagious.
A bit of a bump in Hy6 interest with the intro of the Credo-for-hy6 and the news that Eric Hiss is now US Rep (giving a lot more confidence to US buyers for whom Rollei no longer seems as far away) has been a nice add-on towards the end of the year. We don't expect to sell dozens of these
Other backs also selling alright and adding at the peripheral, but above backs have really been great for us this year.
In my opinion this thread makes a vital mistake of grouping all cameras into the "camera industry". I think the "camera industry" as a whole is doing exceptionally well. It's just that the winners are the high-end (Phase/Leaf/Leica) and low-end (camera phones) and everything in the middle is getting squeezed. Sounds a lot like most things the last several years no?
-
Why the camera industry is in decline?
There might be a clue in the 'For sale' section where used items appear to be hanging around without buyers and so tying up capital that could be invested in new kit. It's the same story on the other sales sites I visit.
-
i have some thoughts on the camera industry. I did a presentation to the Mac User group on Lightroom and Photoshop CC. I asked, holding up my Iphone, "how many of you take photos with something other than this?" Most did not raise their hands. It is the camera phones that are killing the camera business. Go to any local camera store and see what is selling there. A local group returned from a photo trip to Iceland, they took photos with their phones and returned with postcards of the "northern lights."
Just crazy!!!
-
For many phones will replace "compacts" or the need to have one (not all but quite a lot)
Hence the massive decline in that segment
It is up to the industry to give people a reason to look at compacts again, in many ways they were very complacent.
The connection aspect is a major thing for some with camera-phones (ie ability to share media instantly)
There will always be a market for cameras though no question, just a smaller one.
As said I'm not buying the higher end market decline based on camera phones, this market is enthusiast based and a very different type of user.
Combination of a number of factors..very much so
On the other hand the market for camera phones will likely saturate at some point, as it will tablets. You can only sell people the same thing so many times :P
-
i have some thoughts on the camera industry. I did a presentation to the Mac User group on Lightroom and Photoshop CC. I asked, holding up my Iphone, "how many of you take photos with something other than this?" Most did not raise their hands. It is the camera phones that are killing the camera business. Go to any local camera store and see what is selling there. A local group returned from a photo trip to Iceland, they took photos with their phones and returned with postcards of the "northern lights."
Just crazy!!!
If it works for them, why is it crazy?
...
On the other hand the market for camera phones will likely saturate at some point, as it will tablets. You can only sell people the same thing so many times :P
Do you mean cameras with inbuilt GSM or phones that are capable to function as cameras? If it is the latter and in case you haven't noticed, people replace their phones with increasing regularity.
-
With regard to phone replacement, yes some do replace frequently..on the other hand the huge surge in smart phones can't be sustained indefinitely. They will hit a wall where they can't do a lot with the technology, screen sizes can only get so big, resolution again big jumps but we reach the point of "good enough"
Some users will replace a broken phone, some upgrade but it's not sustainable long term.
A similar thing will happen to tablets, screen res has improved, lighter and thinner designs but there is only so much that can be done.
It's actually quite close to the camera market, big surge when the technology was coming onto the market (circa late 90's 2000 odd), technology improved so did resolution/DR, bigger screens, more features.
Now we have a situation where there are not a lot of improvements happening, fairly incremental in many ways. I do expect new sensor technology..but still we have that wonderful thing called "good enough", people I know are upgrading a lot less bodies wise then they used to 6-7 years ago, once you've bought the lenses you need purchases tend to slow down, you might sell the odd one or try a new one.
Market saturation is an issue that can hit any product. PC industry (classic example), TV's (a sore point for some makers who are struggling)
Sometimes a product turns into a multi use one, such as the ipod, they still sell them..but nowhere near the huge numbers they used to. The phones do all that now for many people.
I'm not sure where the camera industry is going to go, it's not going away likely never will. But some makers are going to have to quit the market (there are too many out there), less models, longer updates. I think they will have a big full frame push as one last gasp and it might do fairly well. Already there has been a huge reduction in compact camera models, and makers moving to more enthusiast/premium ones for those who are actually interested in photography.
Will be interesting to see how things pan out over the years. It might actually be good for the consumer as makers are forced to try harder, make more meaningful updates, and probably better prices.
-
In my own case, photography falls into two easy-to-identify zones: serious; trivial.
For the serious, it’s the D700; for the trivial it’s the cellphone.
There is little or no confusion in my mind about which is which. The camera requires/deserves a bit of imaging forethought, whereas the cellphone is the ideal opportunist.
Upgrades? Even the current photo-capable cellphone exists for me only because the batteries in my previous two ‘normal’ cellphones were irreplaceable when they died – or so the Telefonica store told me.
As for upgrading the camera, well, had Nikon not blown the opportunity presented by its latest faux-retro offering, provided instead a machine with a real, manual focussing-dedicated set of screens, with the picture quality levels of my D700, I would have considered it as an alternative/addition to what I have. As it is, where’s the incentive? I don’t need more pixels. I need better ergonomics, especially with the screens because my eyes are not getting any smarter. A nice split-image screen would be cool.
Rob C
-
With regard to phone replacement, yes some do replace frequently..on the other hand the huge surge in smart phones can't be sustained indefinitely. They will hit a wall where they can't do a lot with the technology, screen sizes can only get so big, resolution again big jumps but we reach the point of "good enough"
I think maybe it can - or at least for quite some time.
For every person that has a phone under contract, a renewal of that contract typically means a new phone. That counts as a new phone sale.
Thus the phone industry has delivered a product that is paid off over time and developed a pricing model where people don't often realise this.
So if you imagine that say 20 million phones are sold to Americans over the course of a year with a 2 year contract then in 2 years time, the phone industry is probably going to realise another 20 million sales of new phones as contracts end and people get a new contract with a new phone "for about the same amount of money" per month as they've already been paying for 2 years.
Note that the mobile phone industry doesn't have to sell new phones to a whole swath of people rather just offer them something newer for the same amount of money that they've paid for the last 2 years. Who's going to say no to that?
Personally, I wouldn't want to be selling any electronic function that could reasonably be swallowed up by the mobile phone because there's just no longevity there.
-
It's not only my P&S that sits in the drawer. My Garmin NUVI navigator GPS sits in the car's glove compartment.
Now where did I put my saddle?
-
I have a Garmin GPS.
There are a lot of industries that are under threat, that's one of them (they fear the built in GPS smartphones for obvious reasons)
The print industry is scared silly now that people read news on-line and actual paper sales have dropped significantly over time.
The way people make, share and produce media has changed.
Though I think we can expect smaller markets for all three.
The question is how much damage smartphones do..and where.
If you have a smart phone with GPS you might not buy a Garmin GPS, but not everyone has a smartphone..and some like a dedicated device for their car.
A lot of people do read news online, but strangely the radio industry seems to be doing ok. Some people still like newspapers. I don't watch terrestrial tv much aka Netflix has to a point made it redundant (for me)
A smart phone is basically a mini pc device with connectivity, it can do things and for some people replace multiple devices.
I did read something from Nokia a few years ago saying they would wipe out DSLR's
Until Nokia produce photographic products that can match the requirements of larger sensor users (be they ILC or DSLR or whatever) I can't see that playing out.
Remember most of the people here have a serious interest in photography, our needs are quite different to average Joe who might use their iphone and nothing else for recording moments.
From what I see the biggest losers are low to mid end compacts where people with decent camera capable phones are unlikely to purchase a separate camera as they have one with them already. The premium compact market seems to be doing ok. All I can see is less lower to mid level compact products out there.
But they could change things if they wanted to. Start shoving much bigger sensors in there and the industry could tempt people with "better quality" at decent prices.
-
If we are talking global photography then it's because a phone camera is good enough for 95% of people 99% of the time.
If we mean enthusiast or pro photographers it could be because even for us, 99% of the time, the current cameras we own meet or exceed our visual and technical skill anyway. My six year old 1DS mk 3 just goes on doing the business time and time again. There is a newer model, but will it really take better pictures? Except for video, the whole camera market is in slow evolution mode - at least as far as image quality is concerned. I did just buy a Ricoh GR (which is great), but haven't bought any other serious camera for three years now - mainly because I don't make enough money anymore to replace equipment that already does the job.
Jim
-
If we are talking global photography then it's because a phone camera is good enough for 95% of people 99% of the time.
If we mean enthusiast or pro photographers it could be because even for us, 99% of the time, the current cameras we own meet or exceed our visual and technical skill anyway. My six year old 1DS mk 3 just goes on doing the business time and time again. There is a newer model, but will it really take better pictures? Except for video, the whole camera market is in slow evolution mode - at least as far as image quality is concerned. I did just buy a Ricoh GR (which is great), but haven't bought any other serious camera for three years now - mainly because I don't make enough money anymore to replace equipment that already does the job.Jim
Refreshingly honest, Jim, and I suspect the same holds for most folks still in the business. I realised I had to drop out years ago or blow what I'd earned in the business just by trying to stay afloat.
There used to be/still is(?) a model agency in Palma; I am no longer sure, because when I tried to get to the website again last week, I was confronted with a notice advising that the page might have been removed, changed etc. etc. It seems odd that any agency would surrender a well-known name and web address - but who knows? Cooter, somewhere within LuLa, has claimed that over 80% of advertising managers are no longer employed, that many previously busy photographers that he knows are now doing the lectures and workshops route instead of professional practice...
I sometimes blame the electronic age, and then I wonder if that's correct; perhaps it's more the marketing realisation that the great unwashed really doesn't care a fig about seeing nice and attractive publicity, never did, and so why spend the money making prize-winning adverts and promotions? Now that I think about it, the only folks I ever heard raving about some magazine shoot or advert were other snappers and models. My wife used to claim repeatedly that she was absolutely not influenced in her shopping habits by adverts; however she sure was when we did fashion shoots, and we often ended up back at the factory buying some of what I'd shot! That exposure to product was really nothing more than the equivalent of going to a real shop.
Anyway, its a grim period for the business in general, though like always, some will do well.
Rob C
-
I sometimes blame the electronic age, and then I wonder if that's correct; perhaps it's more the marketing realisation that the great unwashed really doesn't care a fig about seeing nice and attractive publicity, never did, and so why spend the money making prize-winning adverts and promotions? Now that I think about it, the only folks I ever heard raving about some magazine shoot or advert were other snappers and models. My wife used to claim repeatedly that she was absolutely not influenced in her shopping habits by adverts; however she sure was when we did fashion shoots, and we often ended up back at the factory buying some of what I'd shot! That exposure to product was really nothing more than the equivalent of going to a real shop.
Good advertising certainly works. Unless the product is in itself unwanted.
People wouldn't spend that much on something, for so long without getting data that demonstrated its effectiveness.
And as for the only people raving about an magazine shoot or advert, in one sense that doesn't necessarily matter. They are there to influence, sometimes in quite subtle ways or to simply let people know something exists. However making ads that people talk about has been a successful staple for a longtime too. Currently a Volvo truck ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7FIvfx5J10)is interesting enough to get even quite sensible people to post to it on Facebook, which is why it has probably racked up 23millions views in 5 days. Not to mention all the other versions of the ad that people are posting on their own youtube channel and that most of the the World's media seem to be talking about it too.
Then there's the current John Lewis Christmas ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqWig2WARb0) that got everyone excited last week and the music used in it to the top of the charts.
And the weirdest thing, nowadays you may have to watch an ad before getting to see an film which is an….ad.
-
I have a Garmin GPS.
There are a lot of industries that are under threat, that's one of them (they fear the built in GPS smartphones for obvious reasons)
The print industry is scared silly now that people read news on-line and actual paper sales have dropped significantly over time.
The only advantage the GPS has now is battery life for those that are going hiking on long day or multi day hikes where a phone will just die.
Remember most of the people here have a serious interest in photography, our needs are quite different to average Joe who might use their iphone and nothing else for recording moments.
But are there enough of those people to sustain the industry at the levels we've come to expect given the competition?
As a case in point, Michael's kit started off being quite an extensive range of Canon equipment (~10 years ago) after he switched over from Nikon some time earlier. After ditching that and moving to Sony plus MFDB, he's ditched Sony and moved on to Fuji plus MFDB. At the transition from Canon to Sony, the amount of gear he had reduced substantially.
Now I don't know if everyone is like Michael but my current thoughts are around moving from DSLR to m4/3 and replacing half a dozen lenses with half that so as to have enough capability that doesn't weigh a ton. The pixel peeper in me will probably be satisfied by whatever succeeds the OM-D E-M1 (so long as it produces at least similar quality images.)
How long before the DSLR of today becomes a curiosity like the Rolleiflex is today?
Don't mistake a serious interest in photography to mean that people will have a closed mind to technological improvements in camera design.
-
The question is how much damage smartphones do..and where.
If you have a smart phone with GPS you might not buy a Garmin GPS, but not everyone has a smartphone..and some like a dedicated device for their car.
Actually after using a smartphone for GPS logging, I am now thinking of buying a proper GPS unit as job specific items tend to do….specific jobs much better.
A GPS that doesn't record as long as one's outing lasts, is about as much use as a chocolate teapot.
Much like a Swiss Army knife is really handy for little tasks, but if if you want to do say some carpentry get the proper tool.
Heck, if you do anything radical like decide to take some photos on your iPhone or record your bike ride/run with GPS, expect your battery to die even quicker than the already annoyingly short time it normally takes.
-
The only advantage the GPS has now is battery life for those that are going hiking on long day or multi day hikes where a phone will just die.
Doesn't need to be anywhere near that long. A few hours can kill your phone.
I don't expect to go on short bike rides and get a complete Strava (http://www.strava.com) recording unless phone is fully charged.
-
Interesting thread, have you heard about the latest 41 megapixel camera phone? Reviewed here (http://www.uswitch.com/mobiles/news/2013/11/nokia_lumia_1020_review/) and here (http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/mobile-phones/nokia-lumia-1020-review-50012518/) and for only £600?
Don't suppose it shoots raw though :(
Dave
-
I believe it can do raw after a recent update and Google are working on letting all Android users shoot raw due to the enthusiasm for that option.
I saw someone compare it to his D800E (http://evan-theelectricalengineer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/nikon-d800e-vs-nokia-lumia-1020.html)and....well check link out.
-
From another forum
People are realizing that they don't give a hoot about quality and are happy with mediocre junk as long as that makes their life more convenient (see trend to "social camera" rather than "better picture" camera. The same happened in the video world when youtube came around at about the same time Blue Ray was starting. People were happy with fuzzy junk on their computers and the urge to go HD and collect plastic discs just faded away. Netflix then put the nail in that coffin (even though their "HD" is lightyears away from what Blue Ray is, it is accepted by users as good enough - message matters more than format). Music went the same way with MP3 over a decade ago. Hi-Fi only exists on the very high end now, while the mainstream listens to digital garbage, because it is convenient and entertains them, which is what it is all about. There's a fringe who knows about FLAC files and has heard what real high end audio can sound like, but the masses don't even know such a thing exists - they equate a high end audio system with a big subwoofer.
It appears the DSLR world has reached a level where only professionals and enthusiasts really feel the gain the latest imaging advances deliver are worth the purchase of a new body or system.
-
Only a few have ever been that bothered about high quality in anything. Hi-Fi was always a minority interest, mp3s are probably no worse than music on vinyl or CDs played through bottom end systems.
Photography was just the same, few dabbled with SLRs or TLRs the rest were happy with 110 or pocket 35mm p+S cameras.
Nowadays people buy flatscreen TVs despite the fact that the picture they produce is unlikely to be anywhere near as good as their old CRT.
Having said that, people will always be suckered into buying something if it has a 'better' number. An amp with 80W must be better than one with 20W, a camera with 16Mp must better than one with 10MP and a 50" TV must be better than a 42" TV. In fact why even bother with meaningful numbers, just adopt ones that people already buy into such as YouTube with it's 720p and HD settings which are nowhere near that good.
-
The industry survived before digital, with a more considered and slower progression but it was still able to meet the needs of users.
We'll go back to what is was back then, mostly enthusiast driven whilst mass market can enjoy their smart phones etc etc.
I'm sure camcorder makers hate smart phones just as much, they've dived hugely in sales too. Though no doubt they will push 4k.
Good comment above in that whilst a smart phone can do many things, a dedicated device might be better suited to some users. One thing stands out though, some makers are going to have to pull out of the industry (too many of them) and these yearly/2 yearly updates probably can't be sustained longer term. I'd expect a few ILC makers to call it quits (Samsung at some point), not sure how Pentax will fare longer term for DSLR's. Less makers, less products is fine by me. I think it's overkill currently
-
I wonder how medium format will do? Are there enough people who really need MF to sustain even one maker? It doesn't seem to me that enough MF sensors are sold to really benefit from economies of scale...Hasselblad seems to be thrashing around, some bad choices (IMHO) being made, like the bling cameras.It also seems to me that MF technology is falling behind. Not that I really know much about it.
-
I wonder how medium format will do? Are there enough people who really need MF to sustain even one maker?
What's more important is how many people want medium format and are willing to pay for it.
-
The industry survived before digital, with a more considered and slower progression but it was still able to meet the needs of users.
We'll go back to what is was back then, mostly enthusiast driven whilst mass market can enjoy their smart phones etc etc
With the ‘just surviving’ message from camera manufacturers I wonder how we had so many players in the game doing OK pre-digital.
I wonder how medium format will do? Are there enough people who really need MF to sustain even one maker? It doesn't seem to me that enough MF sensors are sold to really benefit from economies of scale...Hasselblad seems to be thrashing around, some bad choices (IMHO) being made, like the bling cameras.It also seems to me that MF technology is falling behind. Not that I really know much about it.
Somehow MF seems to be the only market that is up despite the D800 being around
-
With the ‘just surviving’ message from camera manufacturers I wonder how we had so many players in the game doing OK pre-digital.
Well it was far less expensive to produce cameras then as they were not being replaced every couple of years, so you had more time to recoup investment. A camera could be on sale for 15 years with minor tweaks. Also if you wanted a 'decent' camera an SLR was the first choice for many people. I had friends who bought one, yet now are quite happy with a cellphone and wouldn't even consider a DSLR camera.
-
Most people don't want a camera. Most people want pictures. Those people bought polaroid cameras, or 110 cameras, or in fact most of them didn't buy cameras at all, they got a few pictures made at Sears or at the school every year, and that, together with Uncle Bob and his Nikon FE2 (Bob was an enthusiast) suited them ok.
For a brief shining moment the DSLR was the right place to go if you just wanted pictures, and more generally digital cameras of all sorts were. There was a MASSIVE spike in camera sales with the advent of digital. Everyone got a camera, because it was cheap and easy and the simplest way to Get Pictures. Sales went up by a full order of magnitude in units shipped. That's winding down now. People who just want pictures can get pictures from their cell phones.
It was an astonishingly short era, but a shocking amount of money got made.
-
Hi,
I don't disagree. I would just add that most of the people buying DSLRs have already bought DSLRs. Making those people buy a new DSLR takes to make a DSLR that is attractive enough.
I had a Sony Alpha 900 I was perfectly happy with, except it didn't have live view. When the first Sony Alpha with real live view arrived I bought it within weeks. Next year I ought the next "semi pro" model. Finally I bought the top of the line model. So Sony sold me three cameras, because I desperately wanted a feature. On the other hand, it was very close I switched to Nikon.
Had the Sony Alpha 900 LV when it was released, I would probably not have upgraded.
Best regards
Erik
Most people don't want a camera. Most people want pictures. Those people bought polaroid cameras, or 110 cameras, or in fact most of them didn't buy cameras at all, they got a few pictures made at Sears or at the school every year, and that, together with Uncle Bob and his Nikon FE2 (Bob was an enthusiast) suited them ok.
For a brief shining moment the DSLR was the right place to go if you just wanted pictures, and more generally digital cameras of all sorts were. There was a MASSIVE spike in camera sales with the advent of digital. Everyone got a camera, because it was cheap and easy and the simplest way to Get Pictures. Sales went up by a full order of magnitude in units shipped. That's winding down now. People who just want pictures can get pictures from their cell phones.
It was an astonishingly short era, but a shocking amount of money got made.
-
There was a MASSIVE spike in camera sales with the advent of digital. Everyone got a camera, because it was cheap and easy and the simplest way to Get Pictures. Sales went up by a full order of magnitude in units shipped. That's winding down now. People who just want pictures can get pictures from their cell phones.
It was an astonishingly short era, but a shocking amount of money got made.
And lost. Just look at how many photographic companies went out of business.
-
I don't disagree. I would just add that most of the people buying DSLRs have already bought DSLRs. Making those people buy a new DSLR takes to make a DSLR that is attractive enough.
We're back to the first comment -- 4: "Good enough" related to upgrade fever.
The 2 year-old bottom-of-the-range α35 I have is still good enough for me to continue learning. The camera really isn't the problem, I am ;-)
-
Good advertising certainly works. Unless the product is in itself unwanted.
People wouldn't spend that much on something, for so long without getting data that demonstrated its effectiveness.
And as for the only people raving about an magazine shoot or advert, in one sense that doesn't necessarily matter. They are there to influence, sometimes in quite subtle ways or to simply let people know something exists. However making ads that people talk about has been a successful staple for a longtime too. Currently a Volvo truck ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7FIvfx5J10)is interesting enough to get even quite sensible people to post to it on Facebook, which is why it has probably racked up 23millions views in 5 days. Not to mention all the other versions of the ad that people are posting on their own youtube channel and that most of the the World's media seem to be talking about it too.
Then there's the current John Lewis Christmas ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqWig2WARb0) that got everyone excited last week and the music used in it to the top of the charts.
And the weirdest thing, nowadays you may have to watch an ad before getting to see an film which is an….ad.
Increasingly we can include photography in that category.
As for camera sales then perhaps people are just getting bored with them. When digitals were being pushed they were marketed as producing results as splendid as the pros and image quality could indeed be as good as 35mm even if the other requisites were absent. Freed from the necessity of having to develop film the world rushed into buying cameras if only so that they might have something sensible to do with their shiny new PC's. Now the novelty has worn off and the attention of the great unwashed has shifted to gossiping on Idiotbook or playing war games/watching porn.
-
Most people don't want a camera. Most people want pictures. Those people bought polaroid cameras, or 110 cameras, or in fact most of them didn't buy cameras at all, they got a few pictures made at Sears or at the school every year, and that, together with Uncle Bob and his Nikon FE2 (Bob was an enthusiast) suited them ok.
For a brief shining moment the DSLR was the right place to go if you just wanted pictures, and more generally digital cameras of all sorts were. There was a MASSIVE spike in camera sales with the advent of digital. Everyone got a camera, because it was cheap and easy and the simplest way to Get Pictures. Sales went up by a full order of magnitude in units shipped. That's winding down now. People who just want pictures can get pictures from their cell phones.
It was an astonishingly short era, but a shocking amount of money got made.
My thoughts entirely and I should have read this before posting as I've pretty much repeated it. Doh!
-
I think if you ask my wife, she'd be sure to complain that I'm still doing plenty to support the camera industry.
-
I wonder how medium format will do? Are there enough people who really need MF to sustain even one maker? It doesn't seem to me that enough MF sensors are sold to really benefit from economies of scale...Hasselblad seems to be thrashing around, some bad choices (IMHO) being made, like the bling cameras.It also seems to me that MF technology is falling behind. Not that I really know much about it.
Somehow MF seems to be the only market that is up despite the D800 being around
The Phase One IQ2 series has more advanced image review than anything on the market.
Touch screen Retina-grade LCD, focus mask, customizable exposure warning, 2 axis level that feeds to metadata for auto-correction, native wireless edit and review.
Our sales in Phase One are up year-over-year for several years now. It's the best year for medium format since I came on board (5 years ago).
I ascribe this to the same bifurcation as many other markets. The low-end (cell phones) are thriving. The high-end (medium format) is thriving. It's everything in between that is getting squeezed.
-
I'm not sure I understand how the industry is in decline. Back in the days of film, most of us would buy camera bodies that we kept five - ten years or more. The 35mm bodies cost $1500 - 2500 on average. Now I've been replacing my $8000 bodies every two to three years! MF is even more nuts with cameras costing $20-60K. And digital has made DSLRs much easier for amateurs to use, which means more sales. So in what way is the market declining?
Just curious….
-
The degree of decline would seem to depend on the chosen time window. If you look back 10 years (the dawn of digital), then perhaps decline is the right word. If you look back 20 or 30 years, "fluctuation" is perhaps the right word?
The prosumer video camera industry have seemingly been in a worse shape than the still-image camera industry. Squeezed in between ever improving iPhones on the low end, and (in many ways) superior sensor DSLRs on the high end. But GoPro seems to have carved a new niche for themselves by doing things slightly differently (and avoiding nit-picking 1dB +/- noise or 10% +/- sharpness compared to established competitors).
As a technologist, I tend to instinctively assume that relevant improvements will be with faster/more accurate AF performance, less sensor noise, more accurate colours, etc. But these improvements tends to be incremental and come at significant R&D expense. There is always the possibility that someone, somewhere will "crack the code". It might take an "underdog" to do it, and it might (probably) be something most of us can not imagine.
But please come up with something more imaginative than "in-camera Facebook integration"...
-h
-
As for camera sales then perhaps people are just getting bored with them. When digitals were being pushed they were marketed as producing results as splendid as the pros and image quality could indeed be as good as 35mm even if the other requisites were absent. Freed from the necessity of having to develop film the world rushed into buying cameras if only so that they might have something sensible to do with their shiny new PC's. Now the novelty has worn off and the attention of the great unwashed has shifted to gossiping on Idiotbook or playing war games/watching porn.
Nope, cameras or phones are simply more than good enough for most people now not to worry about upgrading. And people always indulged in other distractions, not to mention Facebook and other social media tend increase, not decrease time spent doing photography stuff.
-
The prosumer video camera industry have seemingly been in a worse shape than the still-image camera industry. Squeezed in between ever improving iPhones on the low end, and (in many ways) superior sensor DSLRs on the high end. But GoPro seems to have carved a new niche for themselves by doing things slightly differently (and avoiding nit-picking 1dB +/- noise or 10% +/- sharpness compared to established competitors).
They do not need to. Their cameras are strikingly better than the opposition's.
-
Nope, cameras or phones are simply more than good enough for most people now not to worry about upgrading. And people always indulged in other distractions, not to mention Facebook and other social media tend increase, not decrease time spent doing photography stuff.
Without all sorts of surveys and other paraphernalia attendant to the black art of marketing we shall never know for sure so it will remain a matter of opinion based upon ones perspective. I shall remain true to my views as expressed for the time being.
-
Uh, it's blindly obvious what is happening. Smart phones are not only good enough for the average user [i.e. for snapshots], there can do so, so much more than a mere camera can manage. Heck I am now beginning to get frustrated at the lack of connectivity of my big cameras. Particularly when traveling light. A friend of mine is currently travelling in China and blogging her trip. No photos from her DSLR yet as she's waiting to get back to have time to work on them on computer - lots of shots from her iPhone though to illustrate her articles. And they are way better quality than the ones I took with a pocket digital camera when I was in China a few year's back.
Previously people upgraded frequently as new cameras were so much better than previous versions - which was unsurprising as it was a new and immature market. It's nothing to do with perspective either as cameras sales have definitely plummeted because of smartphone uptake. I hardly ever see people using P+S cameras anymore, but I still see an awful lot of photos being taken. Possibly more, as even those who didn't have a P+S now have a smartphone. And if you think social media has reduced time for photography then you are so very off target.
Oh BTW, thinking such things are for the 'great unwashed'. Dear me what a very ignorant and snobbish thing to say. Have you ever even used 'idiotbook' as you sneeringly refer to it? And if you have and your FB newsfeed is full of inane idiotic posts then that is more a reflection of the company you keep, not FB.
-
Uh, it's blindly obvious what is happening. Smart phones are not only good enough for the average user [i.e. for snapshots], there can do so, so much more than a mere camera can manage. Heck I am now beginning to get frustrated at the lack of connectivity of my big cameras. Particularly when traveling light. A friend of mine is currently travelling in China and blogging her trip. No photos from her DSLR yet as she's waiting to get back to have time to work on them on computer - lots of shots from her iPhone though to illustrate her articles. And they are way better quality than the ones I took with a pocket digital camera when I was in China a few year's back.
Previously people upgraded frequently as new cameras were so much better than previous versions - which was unsurprising as it was a new and immature market. It's nothing to do with perspective either as cameras sales have definitely plummeted because of smartphone uptake. I hardly ever see people using P+S cameras anymore, but I still see an awful lot of photos being taken. Possibly more, as even those who didn't have a P+S now have a smartphone. And if you think social media has reduced time for photography then you are so very off target.
Oh BTW, thinking such things are for the 'great unwashed'. Dear me what a very ignorant and snobbish thing to say. Have you ever even used 'idiotbook' as you sneeringly refer to it? And if you have and your FB newsfeed is full of inane idiotic posts then that is more a reflection of the company you keep, not FB.
You're a rum one you are. Quite comical in fact for if you fail to note the irony in the expression 'the great unwashed' then we are obviously going to have difficulty in communicating.
Have fun.
-
You're a rum one you are. Quite comical in fact for if you fail to note the irony in the expression 'the great unwashed' then we are obviously going to have difficulty in communicating.
Quite probably as there was no obvious irony in your sentence, it simply reads as someone sneering.
There a good reason smileys are used in written conversations - they make it obvious that the words written may have a meaning other than the direct meaning. Just like intonation and facial expressions give clues in meat space.
-
Quite probably as there was no obvious irony in your sentence, it simply reads as someone sneering.
There a good reason smileys are used in written conversations - they make it obvious that the words written may have a meaning other than the direct meaning. Just like intonation and facial expressions give clues in meat space.
Perhaps you should read a few more books instead. If you are reduced to needing smileys to understand what is being said then it's not me that is lacking.
-
Words at one time were enough. Words haven't changed. I wonder what has?
Peter
-
Perhaps you should read a few more books instead. If you are reduced to needing smileys to understand what is being said then it's not me that is lacking.
And again with the sneering. Air must be quite rarefied from the height you look down on the proles down below.
BTW, I have read an awful lot of books in my time. Yet that is not relevant. This is a forum, not a book where when someone says something, the author can add exposition to explain nuances that would be otherwise missed. Which is nothing more than the written equivalent of a smiley.
-
Words at one time were enough. Words haven't changed. I wonder what has?
Misunderstanding written communication is nothing new and also editors used to proof people's work before being published, unlike our online mutterings.
-
And again with the sneering. Air must be quite rarefied from the height you look down on the proles down below.
BTW, I have read an awful lot of books in my time. Yet that is not relevant. This is a forum, not a book where when someone says something, the author can add exposition to explain nuances that would be otherwise missed. Which is nothing more than the written equivalent of a smiley.
Not quite me old prole, there used to be this thing called style.
-
Guys, let me pour some layers of extra-extra-virgin olive oil; it does wonders for the gut, let's pray it does the same for a forum!
;-)
Rob C
P.S. Extra-virgin has always troubled me as an adjective; the closest I can remember coming to an explanation was in the movie What's New, Pussycat? my favourite comedy ever. In it, Peter T'Toole is doing his best to get it on with a delightful, delicious, totally scatty and fascinating Paula Prentiss. She holds him off - terminally - and when he asks why she informs him that she's a semi-virgin. When he asks her what, in the name of all that's holy, a semi-v might be, she tells him that in America she's not a virgin, but that in Paris, she is. They are in Paris. I like situation ethics like that: unworkable, but absolutely charming nonetheless. They can get you killed.
-
Words were enough when they were carefully crafted and understood in context, often including an existing relationship.
When we're just dashing stuff out on the internet, and being read by someone who may or may not remember what we said a few minutes ago, and may or may not remember that we said it, smilies and other devices are useful.
You do come across as a sneering prig, Justin. And don't try the 'you need to read more' line out on me. It's possible that I've written more than you have read, to say nothing of what I've read. It's not jjj, it's you.
-
Not quite me old prole, there used to be this thing called style.
Ah yes, the good old days where everything was better than the scummy, badly dressed and uneducated time us illiterates currently live in.
An absurd stance, used by deluded people who have no back up to their argument and who ignore how much better things are now and that people despite fashion and technology changes are no different from previous times.
Most Extra Virgin oil is only labelled as such Rob, the reality is shall we say more tawdry.
-
Words were enough when they were carefully crafted and understood in context, often including an existing relationship.
When we're just dashing stuff out on the internet, and being read by someone who may or may not remember what we said a few minutes ago, and may or may not remember that we said it, smilies and other devices are useful.
You do come across as a sneering prig, Justin. And don't try the 'you need to read more' line out on me. It's possible that I've written more than you have read, to say nothing of what I've read. It's not jjj, it's you.
And you strike me as a total twat, but that's life eh!
-
Words were enough when they were carefully crafted and understood in context, often including an existing relationship.
When we're just dashing stuff out on the internet, and being read by someone who may or may not remember what we said a few minutes ago, and may or may not remember that we said it, smilies and other devices are useful.
Very true. Though I actually take try and take time to read and reread posts in before responding to try and avoid misunderstandings, but some people's writing skills defy correct parsing at times and emoticons are very useful devices to help avoiding misunderstandings.
Though from previous discussions with Justin which give some context, I'm of a mind to think he was being quite literal and not in the slightest bit 'ironic'. A claim made methinks to back down from his snooty comments.
-
And you strike me as a total twat, but that's life eh!
So is this you being ironic again? I cannot tell due to my poor reading skills and the lack of smilies.
-
Ah yes, the good old days where everything was better than the scummy, badly dressed and uneducated time us illiterates currently live in.
An absurd stance, used by deluded people who have no back up to their argument and who ignore how much better things are now and that people despite fashion and technology changes are no different from previous times.
Most Extra Virgin oil is only labelled as such Rob, the reality is shall we say more tawdry.
Its what you choose to believe in, and I'm talking about values rather than religions.
Just as each generation thinks it's the first to discover sex so they also think that the world they create around themselves is superior to what went before. In many ways that may be so, but it's not always the case as you will come to appreciate as time passes.
-
So is this you being ironic again? I cannot tell do to my poor reading skills and the lack of smilies.
:D :D :D :D :D
Happy now?
-
Its what you choose to believe in, and I'm talking about values rather than religions.
No faith involved on my part, just boring facts. But if you think World Wars, no vaccines, no decent fertilisers, no proper health care or anaesthetics/antibiotics, systematic slavery, serfdom and so on made for better times then carry on on being deluded. Admittedly some countries are further along the progress curve than others, but more are improving as time goes on and as overall poverty decreases.
Just as each generation thinks it's the first to discover sex so they also think that the world they create around themselves is superior to what went before. In many ways that may be so, but it's not always the case as you will come to appreciate as time passes.
I never thought any particular generation discovered sex, nor do I think all new items are automatically good. And if you could read half as well as you can think, you'd have seen that I never claimed that. Pointing out that the past was in fact a bit grim and not all roses, doesn't mean I therefore think all new stuff is therefore wonderful.
-
Just as each generation thinks it's the first to discover sex so they also think that the world they create around themselves is superior to what went before.
To which I am tempted to add "and as they age, they also think that the world they created, and became comfortable in, is superior to what comes after" -- but glib intergenerational fanboyism does not help this discussion.
-
No faith involved on my part, just boring facts. But if you think World Wars, no vaccines, no decent fertilisers, no proper health care or anaesthetics/antibiotics, systematic slavery, serfdom and so on made for better times then carry on on being deluded. Admittedly some countries are further along the progress curve than others, but more are improving as time goes on and as overall poverty decreases.
I never thought any particular generation discovered sex, nor do I think all new items are automatically good. And if you could read half as well as you can think, you'd have seen that I never claimed that. Pointing out that the past was in fact a bit grim and not all roses, doesn't mean I therefore think all new stuff is therefore wonderful.
Actually, I've just finished a series of articles for a magazine over here looking at the advent of IT in agriculture and explaining current and new uses for GPS, yield mapping, ISOBUS etc etc. All in very positive terms. Might I suggest that you would perhaps consider your primary comment a little ill advised should you ever get to see them.
-
And you strike me as a total twat, but that's life eh!
So is this you being ironic again? I cannot tell due to my poor reading skills and the lack of smilies.
:D :D :D :D :D
Happy now?
Point. Missed. Entirely.
It was extremely obvious you were simply being quite rude.
-
Actually, I've just finished a series of articles for a magazine over here looking at the advent of IT in agriculture and explaining current and new uses for GPS, yield mapping, ISOBUS etc etc. All in very positive terms. Might I suggest that you would perhaps consider your primary comment a little ill advised should you ever get to see them.
Well in that case, your articles will support my stance that things are better now.
And not sure why I should reconsider my 'primary comment', as it was this...5D to 5DII was a no brainer upgrade, wheras I know people who'd rather a II than a III, as they prefer the look over the minor ergonomic improvements which seemed to be all there was to a lot of people.
Or are you just struggling with words again? Maybe you should read some more books. ;D
-
To which I am tempted to add "and as they age, they also think that the world they created, and became comfortable in, is superior to what comes after" -- but glib intergenerational fanboyism does not help this discussion.
But that is the stance some people take sadly. And even worse confuse it with facts.
-
To which I am tempted to add "and as they age, they also think that the world they created, and became comfortable in, is superior to what comes after" -- but glib intergenerational fanboyism does not help this discussion.
Go right ahead, say it. There are many benefits of the modern world, I like clean food and jet travel but I also despair at the lack of privacy and wholesale rape of web content for commercial purposes. In fact the civilian application of the internet is a classic example of the degradation of a noble idea. A decade or so ago it was there mainly for the exchange of information between interested parties and there was much to be learned from it, now it is far shallower in the knowledge it transmits but much broader in its appeal which is fair enough, but from my point of view it is a lot less useful that it once was, or promised to be, all those years ago and I mourn that passing of what could have been. Call me what you will, it only goes to illustrate how a forum for discussion can so easily regress to an arena for shouting.
-
Well in that case, your articles will support my stance that things are better now.
And not sure why I should reconsider my 'primary comment', as it was this...Or are you just struggling with words again? Maybe you should read some more books. ;D
Now stop being silly. It was the primary comment in the post I was replying to as I'm sure you are aware.
-
:D :D :D :D :D
Happy now?
Point. Missed. Entirely.
It was extremely obvious you were simply being quite rude.
Don't you have anything better to do? You strike me as someone still unsure as to their role in life so making up arguments on fora is all that you can find to bring you fulfilment.
-
Is there something in the water here at LuLa Forums lately?
-
Now stop being silly. It was the primary comment in the post I was replying to as I'm sure you are aware.
Seeing as posts in forums are also referred to as comments. You were not exactly being accurate with your English, yet again. I now guessing what you should have written was 'first sentence'.
And either way, your reply only supports my point about the past not being so rosy.
-
Don't you have anything better to do? You strike me as someone still unsure as to their role in life so making up arguments on fora is all that you can find to bring you fulfilment.
Sorry, I didn't realise mocking your rudeness, was in fact making up an argument.
Forum debates are simply an entertaining diversion as a break from actual work.
And I like to see alternative points of views from my own.
-
Is there something in the water here at LuLa Forums lately?
Seems to be a lot of rude and belligerent posts at moment. Usually made by people who like to criticise other's writing skills whilst demonstrating a rather loose grasp of English in their own posts/rants.
-
Seems to be a lot of rude and belligerent posts at moment. Usually made by people who like to criticise other's writing skills whilst demonstrating a rather loose grasp of English in their own posts/rants.
:D :D :D :D :D
I'm quite getting the hang of these smiley things.
-
Seeing as posts in forums are also referred to as comments. You were not exactly being accurate with your English, yet again. I now guessing what you should have written was 'first sentence'.
And either way, your reply only supports my point about the past not being so rosy.
Let us know when your balls drop.
-
My advice is to take it to PMs, starting immediately. I'm reporting this thread right now.
-
Let us know when your balls drop.
And another person goes on the ignore list.
-
I told you: olive oil should do it. Not boiling in it, just skating upon it.
Rob C
-
I like mine with some seasoning.
-
OK kids - time to move on. Topic locked
-
Goodnight kids.
Michael