Kodak and the Digital - Two Bits of News
One:
Yesterday it was announced that George Eastman House and the International Center of Photography have entered into a partnership to form PhotoMuse, a free, online resource for the History of Photography drawing on the collections of these two magnificent institutions. They plan to have 200,000 images, both American and international, online once officially opened in September 2006. Currently there are 250 images from each institutions (although there are apparently 806 images from the photographer Roman Vishniac...so who knows how many photos are currently online) which, once clicked on, bring up details about the image, links to bibliographies on the photographer, links to chronologies (including info on developments in photography, culture and politics), and a space for user comments (which could be a wonderful space for input and a model I would like to see repeated in the archival sphere). This has the potential to be a fantastic resource for the study of photography.
Alfred Eisenstaedt, Detail of ‘Children Watching the Story of "Saint George and the Dragon" at the Puppet Theater in the Tuileries, Paris,’ 1963, ICP Collection. Online at PhotoMuse
Two:
Today, Eastman Kodak announced that it was cutting 10,000 jobs, mostly in their manufacturing plants. This is in addition to the cuts made a year and a half ago which eradicated 15,000 positions. Last year’s profits in the range of $136 million have been replaced by losses of $146 million. The film business is very far from booming and sales of Kodak’s digital products have surpassed its traditional products for the first time. The outlook is not completely bleak, however, as the company has become the largest manufacturer of digital cameras in the US and is very much restructuring itself and focussing all its attention on digital imaging technologies. What this all means is not entirely clear yet as the use of digital photography is too new to have been comprehensively studied (although scholars have been dealing with the subject since the late 1980s and early 1990s). I wonder if this is the potential end of the democracy of imaging that was witnessed with traditional film based photography. Currently, while digital cameras are becoming ever popular not everyone is willing or able to purchase a new camera and all the accoutrements that go with it to allow for the printing of images. While disposable digital cameras have been around since 2003 (although I am not entirely sure how popular and widespread their use has been) and self-serve printing kiosks popping up all over the place, will the "average person" be able to have same ability to take and print their own photographs in a completely digital environment as they are used to? On the other side of the coin, could this lead to an expansion of imaging? As more parties become involved in the production of digital imaging technologies and cameras get cheaper, smaller, and more sophisticated, could there be a boom in the taking and production of photographs? Only time will tell.
rgsc.
posted by Rgscarter @ 3:20 PM
2 Comments:
Digital imaging has certainly altered the way we create and circulate photographs - you no longer have to print all those terrible shots with your thumb over the lens, in fact you don't need to print your images at all. I think many people who initially thought that once they had their camera they would save tons of money on film and processing but then realized exactly how expensive printing your own prints is with the paper, ink and high-quality paper. Blacks et al. have done the only smart thing they could do by getting the technology to professionally print digital images but I am really curious to know what the stats are for traditional vs digital prints, especially over time. People will still hang onto their traditional cameras at least for a while yet, I think, but the ability to shoot, instantly edit, reshoot if you are not happy and store a ton of photos on a memory card rather than the usual 24 on a roll is very attractive. I am no luddite when it comes to digital imaging but there is still something that bothers me about Kodak moving away from film production.
Personally I love having a digital camera, but since I got one I havn't printed out any pictures. Besides my sister (who goes through her photos after, tuches them up, decided which are the best, and then prints those) I don't know of anyone who actually prints out their photos.
Isn't that what a blog is for?
Post a Comment
<< Home