# future directions for point & shoot cameras



## zuluclayman (Dec 16, 2005)

this item looks at 3 point & shoot style cameras either in production or just about to be - some interesting ideas in them.
Q: who'd of thunk Polaroids would be back? 
A: anybody in touch with this generation that have embraced the "retro" aesthetic - same goes for the Instagram camera with its built in retro "looks"

Who knows, film might have a renaissance soon - in fact, there are a few of my ex-students who post pics on FB that have been done using film cameras then had hi res scans made.


Future of photography video | Point and shoot cameras


----------



## WereBo (Apr 5, 2008)

Whilst film-cameras will always have a niche, I can't see them making a commercial return to the market, most everyday users enjoy the instant results of digital, along with saving the D&P costs.


----------



## zuluclayman (Dec 16, 2005)

too true WereBo - it's just interesting that the younger generation have embraced film & scratchy, grainy looks as a bit of a novelty because they grew up with clean digital images from their cameras


----------



## WereBo (Apr 5, 2008)

In a way, I still miss 35mm (though not the costs, toxic chemicals used and waiting for the postman :laugh - With a good quality scanner, the detail available is far superior to most P&S and 'Bridge' cameras. I reckon that in years to come, as memory-card sizes increases, along with photo save-times and camera-processors getting faster, they'll get a lot closer to 'real' cameras. A major improvement would be to increase the camera-resolution from 72DPI to, say, 300DPI for a start :grin:

As an aside, you mentioning about youngsters going back to film along with it's grain and scratches, I've noticed that there's also a return to the old vinyl-records, over CDs etc. and for the same reason too, old analogue media has the depth and warmth that digital loses :grin:


Apologies, but I cannot resist posting this..... (Blame the couple of single malts







)

Joe Walsh - Analog Man + Lyrics! (new June 2012 album) - YouTube


----------



## zuluclayman (Dec 16, 2005)

> A major improvement would be to increase the camera-resolution from 72DPI to, say, 300DPI for a start


My old Olympus jpeg images came off the camera at 314dpi, my Canon jpegs via Camera RAW come out at 240dpi (Camera RAW's limit)

I remember reading somewhere that if Photoshop can't tell what resolution the image has been exported from your camera it will automatically assign 72dpi as the default.

here are two forum posts that kinda explain why:

Why always 72dpi in Photoshop?

Why does k-x images open at 72dpi in Photoshop? - PentaxForums.com


----------



## WereBo (Apr 5, 2008)

It's not just PhotoShop, most of the pic-editing software shows pics at 72DPI. I had to read some of the answers you linked several times, my brain was hurting at first







, but I got the hang of it now.

The problem now is that 72DPI applies to the old CRT-monitors, most flat-screens are at 96DPI, great for looking at but there's little 'zoomable' detail, when retouching/repairing pics - That's why I'd like my camera to save the pics at a higher resolution, but I suspect I'll need to upgrade to a camera that saves as .RAW :sigh:


----------



## zuluclayman (Dec 16, 2005)

Your camera will save at a higher resolution than 72dpi - it's just the monitor/software that is deciding to show it at lower resolution


----------



## WereBo (Apr 5, 2008)

I'm not so sure really, there's not much scope for zooming in before pixelation becomes prominent, though showing a pic at print-size does take all 4 edges off the screen.

A couple of pics I've had to edit, I had to up the res to 300DPI, edit the marks out (dust/raindrops on lens etc.), then resample back to 96DPI to get a usable file-size.


----------

