It's been a remarkable run. Daguerre developed his device for capturing images nearly 170 years ago, and since that time, and especially since erstwhile bank clerk George Eastman gave up his steady salary to form the Eastman Kodak company in 1888, the camera had almost come to symbolise personal technology, a bit of science that most could use consistently.

This became particularly true with the introduction, in the early 1930s, of the 35mm single reflex camera - the closest ancestor of the hand-held cameras of today - and also with the introduction, in 1948, of the instant picture, or Polaroid camera.

1920/30s

The pursuit of photography has since meant either extracting and developing rolls of film or flapping dry the pre-exposed (or pre-developed) Polaroid sheet.

As anyone who's ever stood outside the US Embassy in Kingston (whether at Oxford Road or Old Hope Road) or inside Emancipation and Mandela Parks knows, a sizeable cottage industry has been established by individuals using either format, whether to provide instant visa and passport photos, or snapping newly-weds and their wedding parties in the first blush of nuptial bliss.

Beyond that, several film- processing labs had profited from the film-developing business and also from enlarging, enhancing and preserving particular prints. And let's not forget the news media or the myriad industrial and commercial applications, from entertainment to insurance, from high fashion to aerial survey, that also used film photography (many still do, but more on that later) in one form or another.

Cardo 'British Photo World' Ennis takes a picture of a little girl in Half-Way-Tree's, Mandela Park.

A quick stop outside the US Embassy's still new digs in Liguanea revealed that the on-site photographers are still comfortable with the Polaroid. "It quick, and we can still eat a food off it," is how one spoke of the virtues of the instant film.

But the numbers are stacked against him and his colleagues, particularly when one considers that they're working with imported devices, supplied by providers whose financial interest in non-digital imaging is clearly diminishing. Digital camera sales topped 89 million units, according to digital market watcher InfoTrends (this excludes camera phone sales), an increase of 15% over the previous year. What's more, with markets in North America and Japan either at or near saturation points, digital camera makers have begun to push aggressively into 'emerging markets' that not too pleasant lump which encompasses 'poor' nations like us. Whether he likes it or not, our Embassy photographer (name withheld) may soon find that he has to acquire to digital, that is, a digital camera and some form of portable printer, if he wants to continue to 'eat a food'.

Since its introduction in 1981, the digital camera (the Sony Mavica is listed as the first digital still camera, but Kodak sold the first widely available consumer digital camera in 1994) has rapidly ascended to the point where film, at least from the basic consumer 'point-and-shoot' perspective, is pretty much extinct.

Joe snaps a picture of the SO team with his Polaroid 600 during our interview.

As with audio CDs before them, and with the current High Definition technology in both television and radio broadcasting, digital cameras weren't universally embraced on first blush. The Mavica and its subsequent rivals (both Kodak and Apple co-marketed with computer makers to push digital photography to the public) were fairly limited in their capability, and even up to a decade ago, most consumer cameras were below one megapixel, a pixel being literally a point of light (digital cameras function similarly to the receptors in a colour TV), or hardly sharp enough to print.

But a couple of factors converged to take digital photography to the top of the consumer heap and even convince several pros (at least partially) on the way. The popularisation of e-mail and the World Wide Web in the mid-1990s created a platform, and thus the demand, for sharing images on a global scale. At a somewhat slower pace, the inclusion of built-in cameras in mobile phones (Sharp introduced them in late 2000), and the subsequent proliferation of mobiles further accelerated the adoption of digital imaging.

To be fair, only the very top-end professional digital cameras (16 megapixels and more) even approach the definition of a standard 35mm film image, which most experts put at about 20 megapixels.

2000s

But in this instant-everything world, one hardly needs that super-crisp image anyway, at least not for consumer purposes, and neither for most commercial applications. Most consumer digitals today have four or five-megapixel capacity, plenty good enough for snapping 'Mizz Ross' during her recent Jazz Fest appearance, or taking a cool family or group portrait to share with Auntie or Grandma in New York or London via email. These days, you hardly even require email, just upload to Flickr.com or any of the other photo-sharing websites and she can go on and download, store or edit at her convenience.

Indeed, convenience and cost have been the defining factors in the spread of digital photography. Just five years ago, a five megapixel camera would have set you back at least US$1,000 Today, that same five megapixel can be had for as little as US$100, and there are seven and even eight megapixel models available for around double that. And with most models in this range hardly bigger than a pack of cigarettes or playing cards, the Age of Anytime, Anywhere Photography is in full swing. Digital also took over general newspaper photography (including in this publication) with better than 99% of all images in major dailies originating on digital. Quite simply, when there are deadlines, almost no one wants to be stuck with film.

But before we pronounce the last rites on film photography, let's back up. While digital eliminates the variables, many pros continue to work with film, most in conjunction with a digital camera, some exclusively, but shooting slide (transparency) film rather than negative film. And for serious landscape photography (in black-and-white as well as in colour), film - specifically large format film - still rules.

So, how do our local pros feel about it? Hugh Wright of Just Wright Photography says that for commercial/advertising purposes, the 10% or so difference at the high end between digital and film resolution is one he's well prepared to live with. "I believe that film still has the edge in the final image on paper, and specifically for art photography, but the level of reproduction is such now that in the commercial sphere, specially here in Jamaica, the flexibility of digital makes it a must."

Peter Ferguson of 2 _ Works, who last year put out the portrait collection Changemakers, (he began and completed the work in film, then later digitised) largely agrees. He says it's now really a matter of personal preference. "Five or 10 years ago, the capability of digital was not a level to compare to high-end film photography. In fact, it would be foolish for a professional photographer to spend US$10,000 on equipment, knowing that the average Joe with the same capability in a US$300 or $500 point-and-shoot. Today, there's more parity - anybody working in film will have to digitise anyway, so you might as well take the straight line and cut out the middle."

While shooting on film will always have a place in the world of photography, digital models have taken over the consumer camera market almost completely. That's the way the world is going and in the end, that may not even be a bad thing.

Indeed, the renowned UK celebrity lensman David Bailey, in a CNN interview a few years ago, gave this irresistible perspective on the issue: "They said digital would kill photography, because anyone can do it, but they said that about the Brownie box when it came out in 1885. It makes photography interesting because everyone thinks they can take a picture. Everyone's a filmmaker too. It's mostly porn, but everyone's making films."

The shutter may be closing, but don't throw film on the cutting room floor just yet.
- Michael A Edwards

Feeding the multitude

Pepper Pot

Improvised curtains