Due to the proliferation of comment spam, I’ve had to close comments on this entry. If you would like to leave comment, please use one of my recent entries. Thank you and sorry for any inconvience caused.
Here is the review from the BBC about the Dakota digital disposable camera that has probably caused most of you to land on my humble blog. If both of my faithful readers will bear with me, I would like to comment on this new innovation. I might even buy one, though I'm not sure they're available in the US.
While the idea of a digital disposable camera seems hot, the new Dakota actually throws us back to the days when we had to worry about things like the price of every shot, in both money and limited space on the roll of film, the long wait for end product, and the inability to view our pictures immediately and take another (or ten) until we get it right. Really. what's the point?
I took about four photgraphs in my life under those circumstances. I have taken 9000 photos in the last year and a half. Not all of them good, mind you, and probably 6000 are duplicates, but if you blog browse a bit, you can see that I catch something nice on film every once in awhile. Using a digital camera, of the non disposable variety, allows me to lavishly waste electrons on whatever strikes my fancy. It also, I might add, makes me look for beauty and uniqueness 'round the clock. A great way of staying in the now, for Zen afficionados, and developing appreciation, for the Abraham Hicks crowd.
The creators of the new Dakota Disposable are taking linguistic advantage of us, using all the techno jargon to seduce us into purchasing what is essentially any old disposable camera. On the other hand, I am grateful for their ruse, since, here you are!