John C. Dvorak

Do you take pictures? More importantly, do your children take pictures? If anyone in the family takes pictures and enjoys it, there is no excuse not to get a digital camera—even a cheap one. This topic rose to the top of my stack of column ideas because I was playing around with the Intel Pocket Digital PC Camera that I gave to my daughter for Christmas. It seemed functional, although a little toylike, which is okay for a kid. But having used the camera myself, I have to admit that I'm impressed enough to recommend it. The camera takes an excellent 1,024-by-768, 1.3-megapixel shot. A decade ago, a camera with this resolution would have cost $1,000 and this one was about $150.

Now $150 is expensive for a snapshot camera when you can buy a good Advantix or cheap 35-mm camera for $50. But this $100 delta is more than made up for by long-term cost savings.

Do the Math. Kids love to take a lot of pictures, and the only thing holding them back is running out of film. If you let kids go crazy, they'll break the bank with film and processing charges. Let's say a cheap roll of 24-exposure Advantix film averages about $3 a roll—if you really know where to shop. That's $12 for every 100 pictures. Add to that processing charges of about $10 a roll, or $40 per 100 pictures, for a total of $52 per 100 pictures. With this math in mind, 300 pictures pays for a digital camera. The trade-off looks even more appealing when you consider the costs for 24-hour processing, or more expensive film. And take into account the delta in camera costs, which reduces the price even more. Do the math and you'll see that you can't afford not to have a digital camera. You can do similar math with the more professional cameras, too, and always get to a magic number of pictures that pays for the camera in savings.

Nitpickers who read the online columns here will point out that battery costs add to the price. But, in fact, if one uses a nickel hydride battery, which costs about $5, the battery can easily be recharged 1,000 times, resulting in a net cost of about 0.5 cents (half a penny) per battery or 2 cents per camera cycle (four batteries per camera). A cycle can easily deliver 100 photos, especially with snapshot resolution. This is a battery cost of about $0.0002 per picture, which is a meaningless expense.

I can go on and on extolling the virtues of digital cameras, especially now that the pixel count is fantastic. What is not understood well is the sociology of this new medium when compared to the old.

Return to the Past. A certain throwback arises from the fact that most of these pictures are viewed on-screen, and this brings back the concept of the slide show, which was very popular in the 1950s and 1960s. Sometime after that, the machines that allowed cheaper prints to be made resulted in the slow elimination of the slide show as entertainment to be replaced by people passing around a pile of snapshots. The advantage was that the "show" was portable, and you didn't need a darkened room or a captive audience. Digital photography, although prints can be made, lends itself to the slide show presentation.

You can also use newer presentation technologies and incorporate the Web to renew the portability aspect of snapshots with Web posting. You can use specific service sites that do this or do it yourself with a little JavaScript or a utility. I can think of two examples: First, there is the traditional slide show you can post on the Web. Here are a few snapshots I took on a recent visit to Copenhagen. And in a more old-fashioned style, here is a Web page of photos from China taken in 1997 and posted with the simple Web posting tool that comes with ThumbsPlus, a photo editor/organizer. The older 1997 presentation is less slick but still effective as a way to pass around pictures.

The Professional Edge. A more interesting piece of sociology that has emerged from digital photography is the promiscuity factor. Without qualms, you can shoot photos until you can't push the button anymore. There is no prohibition unless you somehow can't off-load the pictures from the memory card. This results in better photographs once the total number of pictures gets pared down. Most professionals shoot a ton of pictures to get the one or two they use. Now this capability is in the hands of everyone, and you can expect to see much better images from friends who go digital.

Anyone who has followed this column knows that I'm a digital-photography maven, having long since sold off a Nikon F4 and having shelved a powerful N90. I simply have more fun with the digital cameras. I still have a soft spot in my heart for film, though, just like I do for typewriters. But this is pure sentimentalism. Few children today will ever know typewriters or film. And who really cares? Times change, and the good news is that the digital-photography revolution will save you a fortune. Do the math!

Discuss this article in the forum.