Thread: Fwiw
View Single Post
Old 06-23-2011, 06:02 PM   #46
Senior Member
ExNavyDoc's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 121

Originally Posted by oltmannd View Post
It was always amazing to me that each generation of mass-market cameras was worse than the previous. The 127 film camera weren't too bad and the film size was decent. Then they repackaged the film into a cartridge - 126 film, but the cartridge wouldn't keep the film as "in plane" as when it was a loose roll you loaded in -- and they made the cameras even worse quality. Fixed focus, F8, crappy lens. Everything guaranteed to be fuzzy, except maybe a person standing 15 feet away in the sun. People gobbled up the 126 film cameras, so Kodak upped the ante - the 110 camera. A crappy camera combined with ridiculously small film. Now, that 15 foot portrait looked as crappy as everything else. Then end of the line of this progression of stupidity was the disk camera. Film even smaller than 110 film! A 4x6 snapshot was beyond it's reach.
I think it had something to do with the overall post-war crappification of the U.S.

Everything, from beer to cameras to furniture to automobiles, seemed to get progressively sh*ttier. I would guess this phenomenon bottomed out about 1979.

Just a thought.


My Photos Here

My Smugmug Galleries Here
ExNavyDoc is offline   Reply With Quote