Thom on the price of enthusiasm

brianric said:

Dropping removal SSD in cameras not going to cut it for my use, same goes for wireless uploads. I have to many back to back events where I don't have the luxury of uploading to my computer for culling and processing. Wireless uploads is pretty much useless when you're trying to upload two to three thousand pictures, both on speed and having batteries go dead on the camera. By the time such technology is feasible I'll be pushing daisies.

Click to expand...

Malikknows said:

Clayton1985 said:

mg_k said:

Or am I missing something from the discussion?

Click to expand...

Yes, and you aren't the only one. I'd say the camera companies still think this way too. This kind of thinking is exactly why the iPhone blindsided the other phone manufacturers. Sometimes it is not what it can do but how easy and enjoyable the experience is while doing it. Wifi on every camera I've owned ranges from primitive and clumsy to downright terrible. My phone OTOH uploads pictures without me pressing a single button.... night and day between the two experiences.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure, and I'm not an expert, but I think there are real bandwidth issues involved here which makes it slow. Large, large megapixel files are the problem.

If any one knows better, please let us know.

Click to expand...

valsan said:

valsan said:

453C wrote

It uses WiFi, but unlike the Oly app, it's easy to use. I haven't played with an M1, but I'll bet it's similar. YI seems to be a nimble company.

Click to expand...

I dont see the difference.

You need to enable wifi on both (YI and Oly)

Phone needs to connect to that wifi.

Import photos.

Am I missing something?

Click to expand...

Erik de Vries said:

Olympus tried to make a camera for smart phone users with the Olympus Air. The connectivity seems to be just as clumsy as the O.I.Share connectivity with other Olympus cameras though.

Maybe Olympus can fix it in the next version. The set up should be instant though, snap the Olympus air on your phone and the phone screen immediately turns into the display for your camera. Photos taken with the Air should be immediately added to the phone photo library.

Click to expand...

mferencz said:

On Sansmirror over the past few years he's said significantly more than that. An elegant yarn lasting months of false conjecture. I wouldn't mention it if it wasn't such a reported soap opera drama that turned out to be ripe BS. Building off in with more BS ... Take it for what you will.

Click to expand...

ediblestarfish said:

Camera hardware I have is mostly good enough for what I want, but the workflow issues are the biggest challenge. So easy to take a picture how I want now, just hard to transfer the data, process the data, upload the data, and then share the data.

Example is the Halloween images of the family I took. By the time I got back to the computer to sort, process, upload, and share my images of 'superior quality', the phone images everyone took and immediately shared got a much more positive reaction, especially while they were living in the moment, and not afterwards. I might have better images for the archive to relive, but I missed out on the fleeting moments of fun without the ability to participate in immediate interaction.

I may get flamed for it again, but I really think cameras and smartphones need to converge somewhere to maintain some minimum expected standards for ease of use and data connectivity.

Click to expand...

ediblestarfish said:

Actually a lot of it come from my wife, who is communicating with friends all around, each seeing what kind of fun they are up to. She's always asking me to send her my great photos while they are all chatting, and most of the time I'm empty handed, with all my photos on my SD card instead of somewhere I can easily share them.

It always disappoints her, my friends; even my own family wonder what's with the holdup a lot of the time. Maybe they are just more tech centric than other people, but then again, I don't think this trend is going away.

It's even harder with video on my camera. Wife is shooting, editing, and sharing in minutes. 4k and slo-mo video is also within easy access for her.

For all the great hardware I have, it's not done much to share what I take and be a more active participant.

For all the people that are annoyed by the constant mobile phone junkies, it seems they are just as impatient and irked with my method of taking photos and video.

Click to expand...

brianric said:

Dropping removal SSD in cameras not going to cut it for my use, same goes for wireless uploads. I have to many back to back events where I don't have the luxury of uploading to my computer for culling and processing. Wireless uploads is pretty much useless when you're trying to upload two to three thousand pictures, both on speed and having batteries go dead on the camera. By the time such technology is feasible I'll be pushing daisies.

Click to expand...

ASINMT said:

Erik de Vries said:

Olympus tried to make a camera for smart phone users with the Olympus Air. The connectivity seems to be just as clumsy as the O.I.Share connectivity with other Olympus cameras though.

Maybe Olympus can fix it in the next version. The set up should be instant though, snap the Olympus air on your phone and the phone screen immediately turns into the display for your camera. Photos taken with the Air should be immediately added to the phone photo library.

Click to expand...

Works fine for me. Have you tried it?

Neil

Click to expand...

Lights said:

Think I pretty much agree with him. Some big newspapers have fired their photographers and use reporters with phones, since most people care more about content than quality (especially when the quality is good enough). Yeah ssd thingy is debatable...depends on use, and some cameras have the capability (or easily can have) of transfer through mobile devices. Do agree about the prices, and what's driving them though. When companies aren't selling P&S cameras to finance R&D on higher end models, the price for the R&D is going to be paid by tacking it on to the high end stuff. Can they survive doing that? How much room is there for companies like Leica?

Click to expand...

dv312 said:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-price-of-enthusiasm.html

As a side note on Macbook Pro, I've decided to replace my stolen Mac with an older 2015 model since I still want the SD card, USB, and HDMI slots

I'm not quite ready for USB-C with a whole bunch of adapter dongles

Call me old fashioned

Cheers,

Click to expand...

gatorowl said:

brianric said:

Dropping removal SSD in cameras not going to cut it for my use, same goes for wireless uploads. I have to many back to back events where I don't have the luxury of uploading to my computer for culling and processing. Wireless uploads is pretty much useless when you're trying to upload two to three thousand pictures, both on speed and having batteries go dead on the camera. By the time such technology is feasible I'll be pushing daisies.

Click to expand...

He's not talking about you, the pro or semipro event shooter. You folks don't buy enough cameras to save the industry.

Instead he is talking the casual shooter, the family shooter, they young adults who want to take a dozen or couple of dozen shots when they're out for a social event. These shooters are not going to download their images to a computer. They're going to post them immediately. Current dedicated cameras can't compete.

Click to expand...

Member said:

I've experienced it both ways. Last Thanksgiving, I pulled out the DSLR, and thought I'd post my shots in a day or two. The young people at the event had already created iPhone galleries and circulated their shots before I finished shooting. This actually pressured me to post immediately (still with an hour lag).

Click to expand...

Member said:

By contrast, last week I shot a "Zombie Run". Over 2 thousand shots. Yes, those with their iPhones had shots up immediately. However, workflow--and actually work, since I am not a working pro--prevented me from getting to it immediately. Plus it took several hours to process these images (it's not something I do often, so I'm not real efficient). Connectivity was not the concern here, and the iPhones could not compete with what I produced.

Different markets and different problems for different applications. It's just that the latter market is too small to sustain the camera industry.

Click to expand...

SpinOne said:

He's wrong that the camera industry could be fixed by connecting cameras to the Internet. Camera makers have tried to make a few hybrids, it hasn't worked.

Click to expand...

Lights said:

Think I pretty much agree with him. Some big newspapers have fired their photographers and use reporters with phones, since most people care more about content than quality (especially when the quality is good enough). Yeah ssd thingy is debatable...depends on use, and some cameras have the capability (or easily can have) of transfer through mobile devices. Do agree about the prices, and what's driving them though. When companies aren't selling P&S cameras to finance R&D on higher end models, the price for the R&D is going to be paid by tacking it on to the high end stuff. Can they survive doing that? How much room is there for companies like Leica?

Click to expand...

Lights said:

--
My Gallery is here -
http://www.pbase.com/madlights
The Joker: Why so serious?

Click to expand...

brianric said:

gatorowl said:

brianric said:

Dropping removal SSD in cameras not going to cut it for my use, same goes for wireless uploads. I have to many back to back events where I don't have the luxury of uploading to my computer for culling and processing. Wireless uploads is pretty much useless when you're trying to upload two to three thousand pictures, both on speed and having batteries go dead on the camera. By the time such technology is feasible I'll be pushing daisies.

Click to expand...

He's not talking about you, the pro or semipro event shooter. You folks don't buy enough cameras to save the industry.

Instead he is talking the casual shooter, the family shooter, they young adults who want to take a dozen or couple of dozen shots when they're out for a social event. These shooters are not going to download their images to a computer. They're going to post them immediately. Current dedicated cameras can't compete.

Click to expand...

Young person at a social event is not going to bring a separate camera with him/her when all they need is their smart phone.

brianric said:

I've experienced it both ways. Last Thanksgiving, I pulled out the DSLR, and thought I'd post my shots in a day or two. The young people at the event had already created iPhone galleries and circulated their shots before I finished shooting. This actually pressured me to post immediately (still with an hour lag).

Click to expand...

I was the photographer at an American Cancer Society awards ceremony at King of Prussia PA last Wednesday using a Nikon D5. Yes, there were people with their smartphone, but their was a line with people waiting for me to take their picture. Pictures were on my site within a day for their free download. Considering there were only 150 people there, there were 5,800 hits so far to my site just for that particular event.

brianric said:

By contrast, last week I shot a "Zombie Run". Over 2 thousand shots. Yes, those with their iPhones had shots up immediately. However, workflow--and actually work, since I am not a working pro--prevented me from getting to it immediately. Plus it took several hours to process these images (it's not something I do often, so I'm not real efficient). Connectivity was not the concern here, and the iPhones could not compete with what I produced.

Different markets and different problems for different applications. It's just that the latter market is too small to sustain the camera industry.

Click to expand...

For the type of cameras you're talking about they will never compete for the convenience of a smart phone.

Click to expand...

gatorowl said:

brianric said:

gatorowl said:

brianric said:

Dropping removal SSD in cameras not going to cut it for my use, same goes for wireless uploads. I have to many back to back events where I don't have the luxury of uploading to my computer for culling and processing. Wireless uploads is pretty much useless when you're trying to upload two to three thousand pictures, both on speed and having batteries go dead on the camera. By the time such technology is feasible I'll be pushing daisies.

Click to expand...

He's not talking about you, the pro or semipro event shooter. You folks don't buy enough cameras to save the industry.

Instead he is talking the casual shooter, the family shooter, they young adults who want to take a dozen or couple of dozen shots when they're out for a social event. These shooters are not going to download their images to a computer. They're going to post them immediately. Current dedicated cameras can't compete.

Click to expand...

Young person at a social event is not going to bring a separate camera with him/her when all they need is their smart phone.

Member said:

I've experienced it both ways. Last Thanksgiving, I pulled out the DSLR, and thought I'd post my shots in a day or two. The young people at the event had already created iPhone galleries and circulated their shots before I finished shooting. This actually pressured me to post immediately (still with an hour lag).

Click to expand...

I was the photographer at an American Cancer Society awards ceremony at King of Prussia PA last Wednesday using a Nikon D5. Yes, there were people with their smartphone, but their was a line with people waiting for me to take their picture. Pictures were on my site within a day for their free download. Considering there were only 150 people there, there were 5,800 hits so far to my site just for that particular event.

Member said:

By contrast, last week I shot a "Zombie Run". Over 2 thousand shots. Yes, those with their iPhones had shots up immediately. However, workflow--and actually work, since I am not a working pro--prevented me from getting to it immediately. Plus it took several hours to process these images (it's not something I do often, so I'm not real efficient). Connectivity was not the concern here, and the iPhones could not compete with what I produced.

Different markets and different problems for different applications. It's just that the latter market is too small to sustain the camera industry.

Click to expand...

For the type of cameras you're talking about they will never compete for the convenience of a smart phone.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I tend to agree. Short of camera companies building cameras with smartphone features (i.e., camera first phones), I don't see an answer, and I don't think Thom has an answer either.

Click to expand...

SpinOne said:

Seems to me that he's half right.

His analysis on price increases is correct. Cameras are increasingly tools for professionals, and affluent enthusiasts.

He's wrong that the camera industry could be fixed by connecting cameras to the Internet. Camera makers have tried to make a few hybrids, it hasn't worked.

The reality is that smartphones were always going to win that battle. They're small, ubiquitous, intuitive, easy to change apps, always with you, and you're already paying for the data service.

While it's going to suck for camera manufacturers, and make gear a little more expensive, and potentially reduce consumer choices, I have to say it doesn't bother me that much. Despite the stereotype, it's rare that a technology is truly wiped out. I'm reasonably confident that photography will not disappear any time soon.

Click to expand...

Bhima78 said:

gatorowl said:

brianric said:

gatorowl said:

brianric said:

Dropping removal SSD in cameras not going to cut it for my use, same goes for wireless uploads. I have to many back to back events where I don't have the luxury of uploading to my computer for culling and processing. Wireless uploads is pretty much useless when you're trying to upload two to three thousand pictures, both on speed and having batteries go dead on the camera. By the time such technology is feasible I'll be pushing daisies.

Click to expand...

He's not talking about you, the pro or semipro event shooter. You folks don't buy enough cameras to save the industry.

Instead he is talking the casual shooter, the family shooter, they young adults who want to take a dozen or couple of dozen shots when they're out for a social event. These shooters are not going to download their images to a computer. They're going to post them immediately. Current dedicated cameras can't compete.

Click to expand...

Young person at a social event is not going to bring a separate camera with him/her when all they need is their smart phone.

Bhima78 said:

I've experienced it both ways. Last Thanksgiving, I pulled out the DSLR, and thought I'd post my shots in a day or two. The young people at the event had already created iPhone galleries and circulated their shots before I finished shooting. This actually pressured me to post immediately (still with an hour lag).

Click to expand...

I was the photographer at an American Cancer Society awards ceremony at King of Prussia PA last Wednesday using a Nikon D5. Yes, there were people with their smartphone, but their was a line with people waiting for me to take their picture. Pictures were on my site within a day for their free download. Considering there were only 150 people there, there were 5,800 hits so far to my site just for that particular event.

Bhima78 said:

By contrast, last week I shot a "Zombie Run". Over 2 thousand shots. Yes, those with their iPhones had shots up immediately. However, workflow--and actually work, since I am not a working pro--prevented me from getting to it immediately. Plus it took several hours to process these images (it's not something I do often, so I'm not real efficient). Connectivity was not the concern here, and the iPhones could not compete with what I produced.

Different markets and different problems for different applications. It's just that the latter market is too small to sustain the camera industry.

Click to expand...

For the type of cameras you're talking about they will never compete for the convenience of a smart phone.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I tend to agree. Short of camera companies building cameras with smartphone features (i.e., camera first phones), I don't see an answer, and I don't think Thom has an answer either.

Click to expand...

Rebuild the UI to run off of either a very narrow focused version of Android, or Linux. Collaborate with all the major image sharing websites to fully integrate the camera with uploading to Flickr, Instagram, Facebook, etc. We already have wifi, and connections are everywhere, so you wouldn't need to have to connect via cellular. Though, for a premium, that should be an option as well.

The UI could look and feel exactly the same as your camera is today, the difference is there would be a share button that would open a more smartphone-like interface to share your photos immediately across your favorite sharing sites.

Click to expand...

Erik de Vries said:

Bhima78 said:

gatorowl said:

brianric said:

gatorowl said:

brianric said:

Dropping removal SSD in cameras not going to cut it for my use, same goes for wireless uploads. I have to many back to back events where I don't have the luxury of uploading to my computer for culling and processing. Wireless uploads is pretty much useless when you're trying to upload two to three thousand pictures, both on speed and having batteries go dead on the camera. By the time such technology is feasible I'll be pushing daisies.

Click to expand...

He's not talking about you, the pro or semipro event shooter. You folks don't buy enough cameras to save the industry.

Instead he is talking the casual shooter, the family shooter, they young adults who want to take a dozen or couple of dozen shots when they're out for a social event. These shooters are not going to download their images to a computer. They're going to post them immediately. Current dedicated cameras can't compete.

Click to expand...

Young person at a social event is not going to bring a separate camera with him/her when all they need is their smart phone.

Erik de Vries said:

I've experienced it both ways. Last Thanksgiving, I pulled out the DSLR, and thought I'd post my shots in a day or two. The young people at the event had already created iPhone galleries and circulated their shots before I finished shooting. This actually pressured me to post immediately (still with an hour lag).

Click to expand...

I was the photographer at an American Cancer Society awards ceremony at King of Prussia PA last Wednesday using a Nikon D5. Yes, there were people with their smartphone, but their was a line with people waiting for me to take their picture. Pictures were on my site within a day for their free download. Considering there were only 150 people there, there were 5,800 hits so far to my site just for that particular event.

Erik de Vries said:

By contrast, last week I shot a "Zombie Run". Over 2 thousand shots. Yes, those with their iPhones had shots up immediately. However, workflow--and actually work, since I am not a working pro--prevented me from getting to it immediately. Plus it took several hours to process these images (it's not something I do often, so I'm not real efficient). Connectivity was not the concern here, and the iPhones could not compete with what I produced.

Different markets and different problems for different applications. It's just that the latter market is too small to sustain the camera industry.

Click to expand...

For the type of cameras you're talking about they will never compete for the convenience of a smart phone.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I tend to agree. Short of camera companies building cameras with smartphone features (i.e., camera first phones), I don't see an answer, and I don't think Thom has an answer either.

Click to expand...

Rebuild the UI to run off of either a very narrow focused version of Android, or Linux. Collaborate with all the major image sharing websites to fully integrate the camera with uploading to Flickr, Instagram, Facebook, etc. We already have wifi, and connections are everywhere, so you wouldn't need to have to connect via cellular. Though, for a premium, that should be an option as well.

The UI could look and feel exactly the same as your camera is today, the difference is there would be a share button that would open a more smartphone-like interface to share your photos immediately across your favorite sharing sites.

Click to expand...

I agree. It should not be too hard. They should change the wifi set up though. Instead of creating a wifi network and connecting my phone, the camera should connect to a wifi network. If there is no wifi available, then I can turn on my phone's hotspot. As long as I can sync only those photos that I want to share, then there should not be a bandwidth issue.

Most image sharing sites already have APIs that can be used to upload photos. Apple probably won't open up their service. They prefer that people use their iPhone to take photos. The only thing to figure out is how to use the camera screen effectively to select contacts and add comments. If others already started sharing photos, then it will be easy to add photos to the same group.

Click to expand...