Jump to content

Sad news about imaging resource...


pierces
 Share

Recommended Posts

Imaging resource has been around since the very early days of digital photography. It was there when I gave up on film and started looking at the digital alternatives. In a surprise statement this week they announced that they will be closing operations at the end of 2019. The article appearing on DP Review's site outlined the history of their friendly competition and cooperation over the years but didn't provide any details as to why Imaging Resource is ceasing operations. Personally, I will miss their fair and factual reporting on a photo industry that changes faster than most people can keep up with without sites like Imaging Resource. 

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any site catering to hardware about taking pictures that doesn't fcus on phones will soon cease to exist as an independent entitiy.  Even DPReview isn't standalone.     But it has been a wonderful 20 year run to digital imagery, now innovation is chasing the next big thing yet to be discovered.

 

The largest market for cameras is around phones and that is where the innovation, money and investment is as well as revenue and profits.   There will/is still a every shrinking nich market in classical ILC and DSLR but will end up like HiFi.    40 years ago most mid-class families had a turn-table some receiver and speakers, but that market went away as will soon ILC/DSLR to hobbiest and specialist catering to the very very high end sports/action, photojournalists, portrati/wedding and of course us hobbiest.  

 

Not the end of the world but innovation rate will slow and prices will climb making it more exclusive.

Edited by chipmaster
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best of times and worst of times for photography. 
 

smart phones have given everyone a capable camera in their pocket at all times. 
... and it’s destroying the dedicated camera industry. 
 

Popular Photography closed shop in the last couple of years. DXOMark.com has seemingly stopped reviewing cameras and lenses — they seem devoted to phones now. Imaging-resource folding. 
 

The camera makers, to try to preserve profits, have turned to high end products, but are seemingly lost in terms of cheaper and entry type cameras. Sony is still using a 3-4-year-old sensor for aps-c and still using a 5+ year old camera as their entry level. Nikon hasn’t meaningfully changed the d3xxx in years, and still don’t have a “cheap” mirrorless option. In cutting costs, Sony has made all their aps-c cameras share bodies and sensors. 
where high end customers are getting a decent array of choices, lower end users are being told they may as well stick to their phone. 
 

Some of this was inevitable with the rise of phones. But the camera makers have worsened it with lots of mistakes of their own. Computers stopped using floppy disks years ago.... why do cameras still depend on essentially floppy disks for image storage and transfer? In catering for high end users, all models have become an intimidating compilation of buttons and dials, while largely ignoring the potential benefits of computational photography. Heck, it’s 2019 and Sony still doesn’t let you navigate menus with a touch screen. 
 

The story is famous: IBM needed an operating system for their personal computers. Microsoft had DOS. Instead of buying DOS, they licensed it from Microsoft — IBM thought the profit was in making the boxes, not the software. 
The camera industry made the same mistake... and continues that mistake. They see themselves as the box makers. Apple, Google, Samsung, are focused on the entire consumer photography experience. 
 

photography isn’t going anywhere. It’s more popular than ever. But the industry around the “boxes” is collapsing.... just like the market for CD players, VCRs....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kodak/Fuji/Nikon/Canon/etc... are in the business of capturing memories and sharing them.   If you knew that was your business and how it was shifting you'd have invested in the right trend.    Sadly only Sony has played at least to the senor business to be a player for a long time, the others are retreating or gone out of business.   

 

First it was with film and mechanical cameras.     All camera makers are like HiFi migrating to the high end to try and preserve margins and revenue, on the high end you extract a lot more profit/unit at the cost of volume which is critical to amortize R&D and fixed cost.   Look only at the money Apple, Samsung and Huawei can throw at the software and hardware when you sell 200 million units.

 

To this day and age you still don't have a usable pushbutton / menu system on any DSLR to stream images to your phone, unbelievable.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

Kodak/Fuji/Nikon/Canon/etc... are in the business of capturing memories and sharing them.   If you knew that was your business and how it was shifting you'd have invested in the right trend.    Sadly only Sony has played at least to the senor business to be a player for a long time, the others are retreating or gone out of business.   

 

First it was with film and mechanical cameras.     All camera makers are like HiFi migrating to the high end to try and preserve margins and revenue, on the high end you extract a lot more profit/unit at the cost of volume which is critical to amortize R&D and fixed cost.   Look only at the money Apple, Samsung and Huawei can throw at the software and hardware when you sell 200 million units.

 

To this day and age you still don't have a usable pushbutton / menu system on any DSLR to stream images to your phone, unbelievable.     

 

Sony really isn't any better than the others when it comes to those consumer needs.

 

THey are all supposed to be in the business of capturing memories and sharing them -- but none of them are any good at the sharing.

In fact, Nikon is slightly better -- allowing for automatic image uploading to the phone, though it isn't very reliable. Only the Sony A9 allows for similar automatic uploading, and it really doesn't work well at all. Sony's wifi image sharing hasn't been improved over the last 5 years... it's a cumbersome unreliable process.

Worse yet -- Sony doesn't even allow basic editing in-camera..... Where a phone's touch screen allows instant adjustment to the DOF, the simulated lighting, etc, etc.

 

And truthfully... transfer to a phone is a half-baked solution. Who wants to overload a phone with 50 gb of photos? 

 

Ironically, Zeiss got this right with their designed camera, though it's not for low level consumers: automatic cloud uploading. When you taken your Nikon Z50/Canon M6, Sony A6xxx into a starbucks or home, it should automatically connect to a Nikon/Canon/Sony cloud, the images should be seamlessly uploaded into the cloud. From within the cloud, you should be able to order prints, share via social media, and perform AI-enhanced editing.  All accessible from any tablet, phone or computer. 

 

It should be the Nikon/Canon/Sony photography experience -- not just a box that completes the first step.

 

The camera makers failed to appreciate the threat of smart phones. And then when they did appreciate it, they decided to retreat to high end, instead of fighting for the lower end. (they had some feeble failed attempts at the lower end and then surrendered.... Sony hasn't updated the A5100, Nikon dropped the "1" series).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, havoc315 said:

 

Sony really isn't any better than the others when it comes to those consumer needs.

 

THey are all supposed to be in the business of capturing memories and sharing them -- but none of them are any good at the sharing.

In fact, Nikon is slightly better -- allowing for automatic image uploading to the phone, though it isn't very reliable. Only the Sony A9 allows for similar automatic uploading, and it really doesn't work well at all. Sony's wifi image sharing hasn't been improved over the last 5 years... it's a cumbersome unreliable process.

Worse yet -- Sony doesn't even allow basic editing in-camera..... Where a phone's touch screen allows instant adjustment to the DOF, the simulated lighting, etc, etc.

 

And truthfully... transfer to a phone is a half-baked solution. Who wants to overload a phone with 50 gb of photos? 

 

Ironically, Zeiss got this right with their designed camera, though it's not for low level consumers: automatic cloud uploading. When you taken your Nikon Z50/Canon M6, Sony A6xxx into a starbucks or home, it should automatically connect to a Nikon/Canon/Sony cloud, the images should be seamlessly uploaded into the cloud. From within the cloud, you should be able to order prints, share via social media, and perform AI-enhanced editing.  All accessible from any tablet, phone or computer. 

 

It should be the Nikon/Canon/Sony photography experience -- not just a box that completes the first step.

 

The camera makers failed to appreciate the threat of smart phones. And then when they did appreciate it, they decided to retreat to high end, instead of fighting for the lower end. (they had some feeble failed attempts at the lower end and then surrendered.... Sony hasn't updated the A5100, Nikon dropped the "1" series).  

 

Well Sony at least makes sensors and has a critical cog in that value chain.   IMHO Nikon, Canon and others have less and less of what is a competitive advantage in the mainstream of image capture and share.   

 

They all get a F in the consumer space, Apple and the smartphone company have grabbed that.  Everyone was skeptical of the 3 lens, selfie and computational lithography built into the latest smartphones, but they are become the differentiating items, says a lot, while the traditional camera companies struggle alone with more pixels, focus, and the transition to mirrorless with the phone platform made about 8 years ago.

 

Agreed they didn't have a clue to the nature and scope of the competitive threat and by the time it had steamrolled them they had little choice.   Almost a textbook example of Innovators Dilemma, the were so sure of what cameras and image capture was about they simply couldn't come to grips the vision and business was now driven by such a different set of measure sticks and behaviors and in such lost the business completely.  

Edited by chipmaster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sony making sensors isn't really a differentiator -- It's a separate business, Sony Semi conductor. Unless they want to run afoul of anti-trust laws, Sony Imaging has to operate with Sony Semiconductor just like anyone else. Nikon can order sensors from Sony Semi conductor, and Sony Semiconductor can't give an advantage to Sony imaging. 

Sony Semiconductor does some sensors "off the rack" but they also can do custom builds, where Nikon/Sony imaging, etc, requests a specific sensor design.

In fact, Sony Semiconductor tried to get Nikon to use the A7r 42mp sensor in the Nikon D850, but Nikon decided to go with the custom 45mp sensor instead. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though I will reluctantly admit that a touch-enabled menu system would be a useful addition to my camera, I can't imagine editing in the camera on a 3" LCD beyond RAW to JPEG, brightening or temperature. I suppose there is a market for filters and such in a camera so you can add a puppy nose and ears to your photo and mannequinizing your skin before uploading it to snapchat, but the people who add those "enhancements" probably aren't in the market for a $2000 camera body.  Unless designers dump the buttons and stuff that giant Ikon-like touchscreen on the back (I can hear the screams now), it would make more sense to make the camera operate as NAS connected to a phone's Wi-Fi hotspot (Bluetooth is too slow) to allow direct access to the camera files from the phone or a tablet connected through the phone's local network. That way you could edit a copy, do Lightroom-like non-destructive edits or just add nose and ears and upload. It would also allow for stream-to-cloud in the wild if necessary or, as mentioned, trigger an upload via a recognized Wi-Fi connection when available.

 

On another note, they just announced the Pixel 4 and the pricing ensured that I will be doing my unintentional part to kill the compact camera market by upgrading my original Pixel XL.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, pierces said:

Though I will reluctantly admit that a touch-enabled menu system would be a useful addition to my camera, I can't imagine editing in the camera on a 3" LCD beyond RAW to JPEG, brightening or temperature. I suppose there is a market for filters and such in a camera so you can add a puppy nose and ears to your photo and mannequinizing your skin before uploading it to snapchat, but the people who add those "enhancements" probably aren't in the market for a $2000 camera body.  Unless designers dump the buttons and stuff that giant Ikon-like touchscreen on the back (I can hear the screams now), it would make more sense to make the camera operate as NAS connected to a phone's Wi-Fi hotspot (Bluetooth is too slow) to allow direct access to the camera files from the phone or a tablet connected through the phone's local network. That way you could edit a copy, do Lightroom-like non-destructive edits or just add nose and ears and upload. It would also allow for stream-to-cloud in the wild if necessary or, as mentioned, trigger an upload via a recognized Wi-Fi connection when available.

 

On another note, they just announced the Pixel 4 and the pricing ensured that I will be doing my unintentional part to kill the compact camera market by upgrading my original Pixel XL.

 

Dave

 

Not talking about doing extensive edits on the back of the camera -- but adjusting the exposure, maybe cropping, applying a filter -- good options.

 

Pixel/iPhone night modes (and other modes) automatically take lots of exposures, then merge them to create a final image, nearly instantly. To do something like that with your camera, you better have a tripod, and then you better have good photoshop skills to do after the fact.

 

Notice Sony has actually been removing features like auto-panorama, multi-frame NR, etc, from cameras. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed!

 

Boost computational photography in the "real" cameras beyond correcting vignetting and distortion. Smooth the onion rings out of the bokeh. Wipe out moiré. Use the autofocus and electronic shutter to stack focus macros or landscapes. Compute a 50mm f/1.8 into an 85mm f/1.2.

 

Old tech doesn't need to die when you can stuff some new tech into it!

 

image.thumb.png.e3225bdea11c3bbc2af43b700cfa567e.png

 

Dave

Edited by pierces
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, havoc315 said:

Sony making sensors isn't really a differentiator -- It's a separate business, Sony Semi conductor. Unless they want to run afoul of anti-trust laws, Sony Imaging has to operate with Sony Semiconductor just like anyone else. Nikon can order sensors from Sony Semi conductor, and Sony Semiconductor can't give an advantage to Sony imaging. 

Sony Semiconductor does some sensors "off the rack" but they also can do custom builds, where Nikon/Sony imaging, etc, requests a specific sensor design.

In fact, Sony Semiconductor tried to get Nikon to use the A7r 42mp sensor in the Nikon D850, but Nikon decided to go with the custom 45mp sensor instead. 

 

 

Glad you believe the laws, you think there was a reason Apple in the end left Samsung for both APU and Memory and building a base of display away from them too?

 

You know why some foundry had a credibility problem and TSMC doesn't.

 

Of course Sony would love to sell Nikon the same sensor amortizing the R&D increasing capacity and dropping unit cost.   Nikon for reasons only some are public did their own design.  BTW I believe the sensor is manufactured at Sony.  This is something within the design rules and technology of any give process flow probably not a big deal, but more complexity and optimization anytime you deviate on design.  Far more work for Sony fab to run two lines, targeting and process optimization then just one sensor design. 

 

The difference between a 42 and 45 Meg is really nothing, but the other elements for the circuits is likely more IP and again why having your own fab has it's unique advantage.   Don't think for one bit that Apple doesn't have priority at TSMC nor that when Samsung and Apple had competing priorities a few generations ago at Samsung that internal products didn't get some priority.   Of course they "met" their external commits.   

Edited by chipmaster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a Cannon DSLR and Nikon D90, but looking for a bridge camera to take on my cruise to Alaska, do any of you have a suggestion for something that's reliable, higher photo quality than your typical point in shoot or phone camera?  I've been looking at the Panasonic Luminex LZ85 I think is the model and some of the Kodak and Cannon models.  I'd like to stay in the 200-300 range, as I already have other cameras for use at home, I just don't want the extra weight on the flight and cruise.

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, chipmaster said:

 

Glad you believe the laws, you think there was a reason Apple in the end left Samsung for both APU and Memory and building a base of display away from them too?

 

You know why some foundry had a credibility problem and TSMC doesn't.

 

Of course Sony would love to sell Nikon the same sensor amortizing the R&D increasing capacity and dropping unit cost.   Nikon for reasons only some are public did their own design.  BTW I believe the sensor is manufactured at Sony.  This is something within the design rules and technology of any give process flow probably not a big deal, but more complexity and optimization anytime you deviate on design.  Far more work for Sony fab to run two lines, targeting and process optimization then just one sensor design. 

 

The difference between a 42 and 45 Meg is really nothing, but the other elements for the circuits is likely more IP and again why having your own fab has it's unique advantage.   Don't think for one bit that Apple doesn't have priority at TSMC nor that when Samsung and Apple had competing priorities a few generations ago at Samsung that internal products didn't get some priority.   Of course they "met" their external commits.   


Having spoken to an insider, I know you’re wrong. Sony Semiconductor takes in about 100 times the revenue of Sony imaging and separately reports their profits. They aren’t going to take dings in their profits to give tiny Sony imaging an advantage. 
And the proof is out there: the best aps-c sensor made by Sony Semiconductor currently is ..... the 26mp sensor being used by Fuji. 
Sony Imaging isn’t even using the best Sony Semiconductor. 
The reason Sony is still using a 4 year old aps-c sensor? Because they didn’t get special treatment— to get the a6300 copper wired sensors, they had to commit to a certain number of sensors. They still haven’t hit that minimum, so they need to keep using that old sensor until they hit their minimum and can get something new. 
Go back to the Sony 36mp sensor, that first appeared in the Nikon d800/d810 — Nikon got exclusive rights to that sensor locked up for a period before Sony Imaging was allowed to use it. 
 

Though it’s not really Sony and Nikon and Fuji competing against each other for sensors, that’s the issue. The issue is they are all competing with phones for sensors. 
Sony imaging says “we need 100,000 sensors”... Apple calls and says “we need 10 million sensors”... which order takes priority in the factory?

So the camera companies are all competing with the phones to get fabrication time. Forcing the camera companies to make commitments to buy certain numbers of sensors. Forcing them to keep using the same sensor again and again, limiting their ability to update. 
same Song for Sony imaging as it is for everyone else. 

Edited by havoc315
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, LeeLee29 said:

I have a Cannon DSLR and Nikon D90, but looking for a bridge camera to take on my cruise to Alaska, do any of you have a suggestion for something that's reliable, higher photo quality than your typical point in shoot or phone camera?  I've been looking at the Panasonic Luminex LZ85 I think is the model and some of the Kodak and Cannon models.  I'd like to stay in the 200-300 range, as I already have other cameras for use at home, I just don't want the extra weight on the flight and cruise.

 

Thanks


A $200-300 bridge camera is a point and shoot. And will be worse than the newest phones, in terms of image quality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, LeeLee29 said:

I have a Cannon DSLR and Nikon D90, but looking for a bridge camera to take on my cruise to Alaska, do any of you have a suggestion for something that's reliable, higher photo quality than your typical point in shoot or phone camera?  I've been looking at the Panasonic Luminex LZ85 I think is the model and some of the Kodak and Cannon models.  I'd like to stay in the 200-300 range, as I already have other cameras for use at home, I just don't want the extra weight on the flight and cruise.

 

Thanks

 

I'm pretty sure Havoc's point is that if you already own a good DLSR (or two), use them. To me, not traveling with my "good" cameras is like buying formal wear but hitting the red carpet in t-shirt and shorts because it's more comfortable and you might spill something on your "good" clothes.

 

I've owned Powershots and a Sony HX-5V and while I liked the size and convenience, I always ended up with the big camera when the pictures mattered. When I picked up a Nokia Icon phone about six years ago, I stopped carrying the compact camera because with the exception of occasionally missing the compact's longer zoom, the phone took better pictures. My current Pixel didn't do anything to change my mind about compacts but I still use the big camera when the photos matter. (Full disclosure...I like my camera and I like using it.) There are compacts like the Sony RX100 series that will rival or beat phones in overall versatility but nothing under the $500 mark and most over $1000. 

 

Instead of spending a couple hundred dollars on a cheap camera for Alaska, pack a DSLR, rent a good zoom and have fun taking pictures. I assume you bought the DSLRs because you like taking pictures and if that's the case, you'll find that Alaska is worth a little effort. It is a target-rich environment for photography.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, havoc315 said:


Having spoken to an insider, I know you’re wrong. Sony Semiconductor takes in about 100 times the revenue of Sony imaging and separately reports their profits. They aren’t going to take dings in their profits to give tiny Sony imaging an advantage. 
And the proof is out there: the best aps-c sensor made by Sony Semiconductor currently is ..... the 26mp sensor being used by Fuji. 
Sony Imaging isn’t even using the best Sony Semiconductor. 
The reason Sony is still using a 4 year old aps-c sensor? Because they didn’t get special treatment— to get the a6300 copper wired sensors, they had to commit to a certain number of sensors. They still haven’t hit that minimum, so they need to keep using that old sensor until they hit their minimum and can get something new. 
Go back to the Sony 36mp sensor, that first appeared in the Nikon d800/d810 — Nikon got exclusive rights to that sensor locked up for a period before Sony Imaging was allowed to use it. 
 

Though it’s not really Sony and Nikon and Fuji competing against each other for sensors, that’s the issue. The issue is they are all competing with phones for sensors. 
Sony imaging says “we need 100,000 sensors”... Apple calls and says “we need 10 million sensors”... which order takes priority in the factory?

So the camera companies are all competing with the phones to get fabrication time. Forcing the camera companies to make commitments to buy certain numbers of sensors. Forcing them to keep using the same sensor again and again, limiting their ability to update. 
same Song for Sony imaging as it is for everyone else. 

 

Apple and Samsung and Huawai don't ask for 10million, they each come asking for upwards of 50 mnillion/quarter,  or 200 million / year give or take a little.

 

Glad you insider knows it all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...