Thanks. That's a fascinating idea and one I've spent a lot of time thinking about. A while back I started a thread here asking what photos meant to people, but the response was slim and most people still said memories, for the most part.
But the communication makes sense in a fast moving, throw away world. "Here's me today. Tomorrow, this reality is gone -- and a new picture will replace it."
Makes me wonder if we lose a lot of history this way -- personal and otherwise.
Paper will surely hang on for a while. I always see people printing pictures when I go in CVS, Walgreens, etc. Maybe 20 years from now that will all be gone too. Imagine going to a photo show in a gallery and having nothing but screens on the wall -- with resolutions that look so real you could walk into them; that's the future of digital imaging, I believe.
Kodak would need a miracle at this point.
Here's another take on why Kodak is on the brink:
This article argues that Kodak failed to understand the shift in the reasons why people take photographs. - Because Kodak still thought that people were taking photos for recording memories, they focused on printing, and missed the fact that most people take photos to share them online - that is photos have become a form of communication rather than a form of memory.