Shutters of the Wrong Kind
It has almost become cliché to talk about how digital has changed the photography industry. Some of those changes have been very good (such as the control photographers are able to exercise over their images), and some of those changes have been bad (such as the significantly more time photographers need to spend in order to manage their growing library of images).
As we (for the most part) embrace digital photography and cast aside film, there has also been a very significant impact on the cottage industry that had grown for many years to support photographers. While we used to drop off rolls of film at a photo lab and perhaps chat about our recent excursion over a cup of coffee to the person behind the counter, now we sit (often alone) at our computers, processing our images and producing our own prints.
The result has been a huge decline in the amount of film processed each year, and as a result a precipitous decline in the potential revenue for film processing by the many small labs found in cities and towns large and small. Some labs saw the writing on the wall and quickly started offering digital services. Some of those, and many others, couldn’t generate enough revenue and started going out of business.
Obviously such a change is a bad thing for the folks whose livelihood depended on those labs. On a broader scale I think of it more as simply a change rather than something inherently “bad”. But it is a change that stared me in the face this holiday season as I visited various malls and shopping centers to do some shopping. In many cases I simply recognized a business as occupying the same space where a photo lab had previously operated. In other cases the sign had been removed but left clear evidence of a photo lab that had been shuttered, such as the photo shown here.
I don’t miss film. Not one bit. So in a way I don’t miss the photo labs that went along with film. But I do feel bad for those who had their livelihood harmed by the changes that have taken place in the industry. Hopefully they all found jobs somewhere else in the industry or doing something else they love. Even good changes can leave challenges in their wake. But I do think that overall the advent of digital photography has been a good thing for photographers. Not entirely, but mostly. I just wonder what sort of upheaval the next big change in photography might bring. Predictions?
Explore posts in the same categories: Photo Industry, Film
January 19th, 2010 at 8:42 am
The other negative I see has to do with digital photography being so tremendously popular. Ten years ago, I was one of only a few established professional photographers in my local area. Now there are dozens, if not hundreds. All of a sudden “everyone is a photographer”. Many are even billing themselves as “professional”. I have seen my stock photography business plummet because of the flood of available images. It has gotten more competitive. But as they say, the cream always rises to the top. Hopefully the old pros can reinvent themselves enough to hang in there, and the internet is a great way to do just that.
January 24th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
Michael,
You’re absolutely right. It is an increasingly competitive landscape by virtue of the fact that there are so many more photographers out there. However, we can find ways to differentiate ourselves and demonstrate the value we have to offer our clients. The challenge, of course, is that the larger pool of photographers does put significant downward pressure on the rates that can be charged for photography.
Tim