Forbes examines why more camera phone photos aren't printed

Forbes examines why more camera phone photos aren't printed.

[More to come.]

Comments

[tychocat]

I am dubious about some of the science in the article, mainly that it makes some sweeping assumptions that I wouldn't make. First, it blames the fact that people aren't sharing their cam phone photos on the reason the photos aren't good enough. Uh, maybe once upon a time back in the sub-VGA days, but now the norm are the 1.3-megapixel cameras. Even VGA photos can be good enough, done right. We're talking snapshots, after all, not Ansel Adams. Most of the time.

Secondly, for a Forbes article, it oddly doesn't really explore the financial side of sharing cam phone photos. If you think the only way to share your pix is to e-mail them at per-megabyte-rates, that can get expensive. And I don't know many (if any) phone e-mail apps allow you to mail a batch of photos in a single sitting, which means tedious button-pushing and lots of downtime. (My old SE T300 needed 14 button-pushes to send a single photo by e-mail.)

lastly, there's the question of how many people know how to transfer their photos out of the cell phones? I'd laugh at my own question, but I read a lot of open techie forums, and there's an amazing lot of people out there who mix up cell phones with cordless phones, and think Bluetooth was Blackbeard's younger brother. HHOK, but the point is, I suspect a lot of people use their phones as photo albums only because they won't read the manual, not to mention collateral damage from unnamed companies like Verizon who cripple the tech that might facilitate photo transfers. ahem. And the article doesn't even nod at the impact this sort of corporate foot-shooting could have on the photo-transfer market.