Forums > Photography Talk > USB "thumb drives": Ignored by the photo industry?

Photographer

Rp-photo

Posts: 42711

Houston, Texas, US

I have noticed that ubiquitous USB "thumb drives" are usually not supported by those in-store printing PC's, and also that digital cameras do not support them as a method of data storage.

Why is this?

Aug 17 05 06:45 pm Link

Photographer

Christopher Hartman

Posts: 54196

Buena Park, California, US

In-store printing should add support.

As for cameras...do you really want one of those things sticking out?

Aug 17 05 07:45 pm Link

Photographer

Bruce Muir

Posts: 586

Potomac, Maryland, US

I've used one one occasion to transport files but I have enough CF cards were I doubt I'd but one. Dont use print kiosks so i wouldn't need one there either.

Aug 17 05 07:52 pm Link

Photographer

Peter Dattolo

Posts: 1669

Wolcott, Connecticut, US

As to the camera issue and using the USB device.....I cant say i ever heard of one "Working" with a camera or being inserted and used in a camera while your using the camera.

Any of the USB storage devices are for just that, storage. You should be able to put images on it to bring to get printed. Thats what they are for.
Can you put a link to the device your talking about? I would be interested is seeing what device you are talking about.
As for it working in the "In store" computers/kiosk's that could be a 1.0/2.0 issue. I think the in store computers and kiosk's only work with consumer type usb/memory cards and devices.
If the speed of this usb device is too fast, that may be the reason why  it does not work also.
My memory cards do not work in the kiosk because the kiosks only work with up to the 40x cards. They have a hard time running those if the files are really big.

Aug 17 05 08:06 pm Link

Photographer

Hugh Jorgen

Posts: 2850

Ashland, Oregon, US

I just use my CF cards to transfer data works real nice..
cant see the aditional cost for something i already have..
Probably would use it though..
Saw a nifty little MP3 player that used them

Aug 17 05 08:13 pm Link

Photographer

Marcus J. Ranum

Posts: 3247

MORRISDALE, Pennsylvania, US

DigitalCMH wrote:
As for cameras...do you really want one of those things sticking out?

I'd be thrilled. Because it'd mean that the camera knew how to write its files to a USB-mounted disk device. That'd be great because there are all kinds of fascinating USB devices for storing files - like wireless USB disks, etc. I'd love to be able to put the USB wireless dongle in the camera and have it automatically write to the disk in my storage server. My studio is just within wireless-N range of my server so that'd mean I'd have a 3 terabyte "hard disk" available to the camera. And I could have the computer sitting there projecting images on a data projector as soon as they hit the computer's hard disk - the whole idea of "view your images on a TV" is ridiculous when it'd be a 4 line perl script to project them on your studio wall 10'x20' high.

I'm a "computer guy" so it drives me nuts the way that the folks who build digital cameras think like photographers only when they're building the cameras. sad The darned things are computers, really, they're just running stupid software. They give me 800 silly menus built into the camera instead of 10 presets and a remote that lets me change them. They're just now finally (apparently) realizing that integrating a flash controller in the camera is a good idea. Hellooooo?? Is it 2005 yet? All this miscellaneous glarp (1920's style flash sync cord terminals? Heloooooooo?) could be replaced with a single $2 wireless transmitter chip, a (free) TCP/IP stack, and a reference implementation of some camera control packets.

What's really ironic is that so many computer geeks play with cameras, but the camera-makers still think "let's not annoy the photographers" - that's like the MIDI guys who worked so hard to make their gear non-intellectually-challenging for drummers and then the computer guys all started kicking things with Pro Tools and blew them all away.

Mark my words, the next revolution in photography isn't going to be more megapixels, it's when the pure digital internet-everywhere wireless generation that grew up with computers re-invent the camera. The coolest cameras around are going to be in cell phones if we're not careful - we'll be stuck with the dinosaurs because the radical new designs will lack one thing: high quality imaging and optics.

mjr.

Aug 17 05 08:17 pm Link

Photographer

Peter Dattolo

Posts: 1669

Wolcott, Connecticut, US

I have a digital device i use for photos. That does everything from playing digital music, Mp3's, movies, games ect. Very nice to have for photography.

I just wanted to bring up that if you use a USB device, CF card or any other memory card to these stores and use thier kiosk or computers to print from.
What i have noticed is that the kiosk/computer will routinly load everything on the card before yuo get access to do anything (edit/print).
I woul donly put the photos you want to print on the USB.CF ect cards and just have those on the card. It will be much faster.
As a side note, did you wait long enough for the kiosk/computer to load all the files so you can edit/print them?
Could you have possible taken the usb card out before it had a chance to fully load all the files so you can edit/print them?

Aug 17 05 08:22 pm Link

Photographer

Peter Dattolo

Posts: 1669

Wolcott, Connecticut, US

Marcus J. Ranum wrote:

I'd be thrilled. Because it'd mean that the camera knew how to write its files to a USB-mounted disk device. That'd be great because there are all kinds of fascinating USB devices for storing files - like wireless USB disks, etc. I'd love to be able to put the USB wireless dongle in the camera and have it automatically write to the disk in my storage server. My studio is just within wireless-N range of my server so that'd mean I'd have a 3 terabyte "hard disk" available to the camera. And I could have the computer sitting there projecting images on a data projector as soon as they hit the computer's hard disk - the whole idea of "view your images on a TV" is ridiculous when it'd be a 4 line perl script to project them on your studio wall 10'x20' high.

I'm a "computer guy" so it drives me nuts the way that the folks who build digital cameras think like photographers only when they're building the cameras. sad The darned things are computers, really, they're just running stupid software. They give me 800 silly menus built into the camera instead of 10 presets and a remote that lets me change them. They're just now finally (apparently) realizing that integrating a flash controller in the camera is a good idea. Hellooooo?? Is it 2005 yet? All this miscellaneous glarp (1920's style flash sync cord terminals? Heloooooooo?) could be replaced with a single $2 wireless transmitter chip, a (free) TCP/IP stack, and a reference implementation of some camera control packets.

What's really ironic is that so many computer geeks play with cameras, but the camera-makers still think "let's not annoy the photographers" - that's like the MIDI guys who worked so hard to make their gear non-intellectually-challenging for drummers and then the computer guys all started kicking things with Pro Tools and blew them all away.

Mark my words, the next revolution in photography isn't going to be more megapixels, it's when the pure digital internet-everywhere wireless generation that grew up with computers re-invent the camera. The coolest cameras around are going to be in cell phones if we're not careful - we'll be stuck with the dinosaurs because the radical new designs will lack one thing: high quality imaging and optics.

mjr.

I use the D70 and that has commander mode. It is also wireless capable. Control all the flash/slave units in the room and send the photos directly to my PC.
Technology is great

Aug 17 05 08:30 pm Link