photo: Courtesy of Redstone Photography

Explainer takes a snapshot of Canadian camera sales.

1. This old puppy, which uses film, is on its way out, even among many professionals. According to the latest information from the Canadian Imaging Trade Association (CITA), "Conventional film camera sales declined significantly in 2005 and are expected to continue to drop this year." Sales of camera film also took a major dive in 2005. "Total sales of film closed out the year at 20.6 million rolls," reports CITA, "...a decline of about 34 per cent compared to 2004." And it gets worse: The organization predicts film sales will drop another 30 per cent in 2006, bringing sales down to 14.5 million rolls. Sales of professional film also saw a drop, with sales of colour reversal film declining 40 per cent and professional colour negative film sales dropping 44 per cent. "Digital cameras have completely, completely taken over," says Brian Redstone, 33, a Montreal photographer. "The beauty of digital is you can take endless photos and not be charged more for film."

2. This be the digital scallywag that's killing off film. So how dominant are digital cameras today? "Canada's switchover from film-based picture-taking to digital picture-taking is close to being complete," according to CITA. In 2002, approximately 880,000 digital cameras were shipped to Canadian retailers. Last year there were 2.5 million, nearly enough to outfit one in every 10 Canadians. Along with causing a decline in film camera (and film) sales, the rise of digital photography has put a dent in sales of disposable cameras. "Unit shipments in 2005 were 5.8 million, representing slightly less than a 23 per cent decline compared to 2004," according to CITA. If you're one of the remaining film lovers, Redstone has a bit of advice for you. "The truth is you rarely need to use anything beyond 4 or even 3.2 megapixels," he says. "You should have a 4 megapixel camera to print decent 8-by-10 photographs, which is all most people need it for." As for Redstone, he uses an 8.2 megapixel Canon EOS 20D digital camera that cost between $2,500 and $3,000 when it first came out. A top of the line professional digital camera can cost as much as $15,000, according to Redstone.

 
 

		Write your comment on this article!

I miss the drama of having my films developed     I agree that digital cameras allow everyone to become a pretty good photographer. Even the mediocre photographers can achieve something decent. But it's becoming too democratic for me. I liked the fact that you needed to be perceptive and artistic to achieve good photos. I miss the fact that you can instantly see the results of the photos you take. I hate seeing kids jumping on their parents' cameras to see the photo just taken as soon as the flash is off. It feels like the mystery of photography is gone. I miss the excitement of receiving your photos and discovering the beauty of some of them. Or realizing you had just lost all your photos because the film was not properly positioned. There was so much attention given to photography. Hiding in a dark spot so not to overexpose your film. Now, I see people just clicking away with their camera, sometimes taking a dozen photos of the same thing, knowing they can just click and erase all the bad ones. There was something sacred about photography and now, it's as exciting as watching a rented movie on DVD.
Marc Charette	{9 votes}	February 20th, 2006
Digital is the way to go...     I have had a digital camera for quite some time now and at first I would alternate between film and digital cameras when travelling... then eventually I just used my film camera for black and white film to get that artsy creative look. But these days the features and ease of use of digital cameras keeps growing in leaps and bounds and so my 5 piel digital camera has now come to dominate my picture taking needs. As far as I am concerned, digital cameras are the best option. You can take as many photos as your memory card can hold, alternate your file size from about 120KB which are perfect for emails and online all the way up to 2MB photos great for printing them out... and I do suggest you print out the best of your pics. Computers are great and all but there is nothing quite as nice as holding the print in your hands. And of course last but not least, with all the easy to use computer programs out there any of your less than stellar pics can be cleaned up, enhanced or just plain modified into something completely different! How cool is that? What was once the domain of the professional photographer is now in reach of the average person... airbrush a photo anyone?
Philip Starecky	{33 votes}	February 16th, 2006
Extinction of Film Cameras     Well it seems that what was considered a useful product for over a 100 years will be dying out soon. Still photo cameras were always there to catch personal moments of happiness, sadness, and events (e.g. birthdays, weddings, family reunions,etc...) in one's life long before home movies. Improvements in technology are such that VCR is also heading for the same fate because of the rise of DVD recorders. There's nothing surprising about technological advances that "improve" current products which then render the "old tried and true" obsolete. I am one of the few people that do not currently own a digital camera because there are so many different kinds out there that it's hard to choose which features are best for me, and some models can cost thousands of dollars (as mentioned in the article). All I can say is that for those of you who still have a conventional film camera, hold on to it because you may wind up on "The Antiques Roadshow" where it'll be worth a lot of money one day, and you can tell stories about what memories were captured with it (not to mention you could show them how to use it). R.I.P. conventional film camera, it was nice knowing you.
Basil James	{21 votes}	February 16th, 2006
The beauty of digital     I bought my first digital camera 4 years ago and I would never go back to film. I know that a lot of film camera lovers and purist argue that the quality of digital photos do not compare to regular film, I personally can't tell the difference. Maybe high quality photos for newspapers and magazines require top notch caliber, but my photography is generally limited to countless photos of my friends, family and my number one model, my dog. So like the article suggests, people like me don't require anything more than 4 megapixels. The convenience of digital photography is the most important thing for me. I can take as many pictures as I want without fear of it costing a fortune. However, all good things are also accompanied with their share of problems. I have this knack of playing around with my camera's functions and accidently deleted 2 weeks worth of South East Asia vacation photos. Learn from my mistake and leave your memory card alone! Also backup your photos. My friend's laptop was stolen and she lost 2 years worth of photos. Despite these mishaps, digital photography is still the way to go.
Reena Tabing	{22 votes}	February 16th, 2006
Digital 21st Century technology     I have to admit, before jumping on to the "digital" band wagon I was very apprehensive of the quality of the medium !!! Four and half years later I use my 6 megapixel camera 95% of the time (by and large quite happy with the results)with only a minor complaint . My camera company magnifies all my lenses by 1.5 times, which is terrific for telephotos but, when it comes using wide angle lenses it sucks especially when on 35 mm film a 20 mm lens is considered to be a wide angle lens but on my digital camera it's no great deal (it's the same view of a 30 mm on film) !!! That's my only beef about the technology !!! However, what I truly enjoy is the fact the moment I trip my camera's shutter I see my results right away with out any disappointments with over or under exposed pictures !!! After all, If I'm not happy with the image I simply delete the image !!!
Rob Taussig		November 8th, 2006
*Explain this!!!*     Does anybody deny that digital photography is cool, cheap and convenient? No. That'd just be madness itself because *it is* cool, cheap and convenient. Nope, not gonna deny any of that. ~ No, despite all of these positive points in its favor digital photography *still* takes a backseat to old school photography in the hearts and minds of many. Why's that? Well here's the thing: as cool, cheap and convenient as digital photography is it just lacks a certain sense or ritual and romance. Sorry but it doesn't really feel like an artform or a craft without the dark room or the fumes from the film developing fluids. Not to me anyways. There's a whole tactile realm that you just don't get with digital that just removes from the craft of photography I find. Before it took skill to get the right shot, now all it takes is good software to make up for your lack of artistry and skill. I use both old school and digital and honestly despite all the bonuses in favor of digital photography (and there are many) I'm still a junkie for the old ways. Yes, inconvenient and expensive as it is. That might make me old school but at least I feel I've earned the shots I got and didn't have to resort to digital trickery.
Pedro Eggers	{2 votes}	March 2nd, 2006
Film Fixations     I realise that I'm probably one of the few people out there who is offering up any type of resistance to the juggernaut that is digital photgraphy. I feel a sense of comfort offered up by 35 mm that I'm yet to get with these new-fangled technical marvels. It seems that every day the new standard for minimum megapixel quality increases, rendering a digital cam that is no more than a couple of years old, already all but obselete. I know I'm hopelessly stubborn but for now, I'll cling to my trusty old camera until it and/or the industry gives up the ghost!
Mark St Pierre	{2 votes}	February 18th, 2006
Digital is good     I've been using film for over 35 years and digital for about 10 years. My Film SLR still takes the best photos, but my digital cameras have their place to. I have a small Sony digital camera that I often use in low light situations because it takes clear shots with no hassle where my film camera need all the adjustments to be perfect. Digital cameras have made it easier for the average person to take photographs, but they tend to leave them on their computer and only print out a few. If there wasn't so many different memory formats, digital would become more popular because you would be able to use your old cards in your new upgrade. If one has a Secure Digital Card for their low Mega Pixel camera it will most likely not be both large and fast enough for the new camera. Lets set a standard and reap the benefits.
Bryan Murray	{7 votes}	February 17th, 2006
This is news?     What's next, an article about CDs versus vinyl records? Or how about the rumour that those darn newfangled "computing" machines are slowly replacing good old manual typewriters, as well as Gutenberg's trusty ol' movable type? And did you really need to contact a professional photographer to discover that "The beauty of digital is you can take endless photos and not be charged more for film"? Get with the times, Explainer. Unless you actually explain why rolls of film were better in the first place, it might not be quite clear why the decline in such sales is "worse."
Charles Montpetit	{4 votes}	February 16th, 2006
Personal Experiences     I own two digital cameras one being a 3 megapixel and the other a 5 megapixel model with camera pouches and a tripod. These are now dinosaurs when you can get slimmer more lightweight and feature rich models with 7 or 8 megapixels at reasonable prices. I already have a sizeable investment in SD memory cards that cost me more than my cameras. It influenced my recent purchase of a laptop where having a built-in memory card reader was an absolute requirement. My biggest bellyache is that the batteries do not last very long because they suck up so much juice. Also the software does not always install properly on your PC. But cameras also have limitations. You cannot take them into the cinema during movie premieres. They are also forbidden in the locker rooms of YMCAs. Many stores also expressly prohibit the taking of pictures.
Stephen Talko	{16 votes}	February 16th, 2006
Cheap is cheap..     I've never been a camera buff - mostly due to the expense of film & processing. I've also thought that constant picture taking, is almost like masturbation - a complete focus on one'e self (and things you've done). That all being said - with the advent of digital camera's - and the almost nil cost of taking pictures, I'll probably take a run at it eventually. What keeps me out right now, is the relatively high price of digital camera's ( as opposed to regular ). Give it a year or so, they'll be giving away these things I think, that's when I'll probably give it a chance. What amazes me about the marketing of these things, is how none of the ads focus on the greatest possible use of these things - the taking of explicit photo's. Be interesting to see the actual stats on how much they're used for that.
Rob Postuma	{2 votes}	February 19th, 2006
to digital, or not to digital...that is the quesion...     humm... i'm so tempted to jump on the band wagon of digital cameras...no, i don't have one yet...i say YET...i am going to asia in another week, so we'll see what great prices come up over there...but i LOVE using my manual cameras.. i'm no pro by any standards, but i just like the old school way of taking photos... light meters, installing film, adjusting, re-adjusting, etc...but i must admit, that not having to waste film, the ability to view your photos as you take them, the general sleekness of them, etc etc, is all very VERY tempting indeed......although those super small, credit-card-sized ones just don't look like they can do jack shit... but i could be wrong!!
Genia Chepurniy	{5 votes}	February 18th, 2006

Write your comment! please follow these guidelines

Information requested in blue will remain confidential   [privacy policy] Please indicate your real first and last names.

First name :

Last name :

Your email :

Confirm your email :

Title of your comment (max. 150 characters)   Your comment (max. 2000 characters)  characters remaining       LIMIT PER PERSON : one comment per article per member. Thank you. Your comment will be read by our approval team and, if it is approved, will be posted on the website within 24 hours. It could also be published, along with your name, in the printed version of Hour magazine and on any of our partner websites. In order to present the highest quality of comments, Hour reserves the right to refuse certain submissions. Any plagiarism will entail the entire removal of the member’s profile. Hour is not responsible for the opinions expressed by the members.