Including webcams, phones, etc, I own X cameras:

if civilization crumbles I might be powering the digital ones with external homemade battery pack but we're not going back to film even in that case, too hard to make.

If civilization crumbles, it will be much easier to make old fashioned film than the computer/printer/rectified power/battery you will need for the digital. We were making the old kind of film over 100 years ago, before the masses had running water, electricity, cars or refrigeration.

There. Fixed that for ya.

What are you talking about? I absolutely love the fact that my phone has a camera.

We've three cameras on our phones, 3 digital cameras, and a DSLR. Now, after getting used to the DSLR, I pretty much don't care about using anything else, other than the camera on my phone.

I travel a lot, and it's amazing to be able to snap up a quick picture of something interesting. Not to mention its usefulness at work -- you've whiteboarded something that you'd like to take a picture of? No problem!

My wife and I were at a restaurant last evening, and we were in a goofy mood, and took just several random pictures of ourselves. In fact, some of the most candid pictures we've taken of ourselves and our friends have been on our camera phones.

The LG phone I just got at work (GU292) has no camera. It's a simple feature phone, so maybe if you're after one of those new fangled smart phones you'll be more limited.

Chose that one for the lack of camera, as I do work in some areas that don't allow cameras. Also the talk/standby time was about twice as long as the other options.

> I am wondering which option will people with exact 7 cameras choose. 4-7 or 7-10?

Yes.

Other questions?

I went with the 7-10, on the assumption that this works like ranges in Python: inclusive at the start, exclusive at the end.

Two phones, one digital camera, one old Polaroid, a webcam on my laptop, and a Kinect which I counted as two.

Simple. If you just barely have 7, then it's 4-7. If you almost have more than 7, then it's 7-10.

I found a camera amongst my Dad's stuff that's approximately 60 years old. Medium format "120" film -- like turn of the century Kodak Brownies used. I assumed that I'd never find film for it, but low and behold, 120 is still in production. Has been for almost 110 years. More than one manufacturer, too.

Figured I'd have to order it from somewhere on the interwebs, but I was wrong again. Not only did a local shop carry it, the closest shop had the film and processed it in house.

To top it all off, the camera works!

I used to have a Kodak disc camera. It'd be impossible to get film for it if I still had it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_film [wikipedia.org]

Of course.

I like to be able to use my old cameras, to take pictures of things they might have taken in their day (say, vintage cars), or things that weren't thought of - like taking a picture of an iPhone with a 1930s folding camera. Fun.

I routinely respool 120 film on to 620 spools for some of my antiques. I also load 4x5 fim holders. My supply of large format Polaroid is down to my last box of black and white and my last box of colour. The alternatives, like Fuji Quickload film, are defunct too. When I run out that will be it.

...laura

I wish somebody would make and sell a replacement back/door for high end film cameras with a 35mm image sensor and some flash memory. Then I could make use of that old gear I've still got on the shelf. Sure it would be expensive -- perhaps more expensive than buying a DSLR body -- but when you add up all the lenses too, I think it would still be worth it.

I am just saying there might be something to this "Take your picture, lose your soul" thing.

That's only if you use a Sony camera.

Negative, positive. You pays for the film, you gets to pick.

Maybe its simply that a large number of people don't find the "huh-huh, it equals negative 3" joke all that funny. Deliberate obtuseness on the part of supposedly intelligent people is not something that generally leaves me rolling on the floor.

Actually, if you want to get psuedo-technical and ignore the obvious fact that this is text substitution and not an algebraic formula, then the last result would be: the set of all numbers that are not equal to one. Thus, 0, -55, 0.9999953, pi, e, 3i+2, 625.95, and -625.95 are all valid solutions, since nary of them is a one. What we really need to round this stupidity all out is a long argument about whether .9999.... counts as "nary a one".

Of course, "I own nary a one camera" is pretty dubious grammar, and "not one" would have been a better option for the last choice, but that's a separate matter.

I own two and use two. There's the crappy one on my phone that I use when there's nothing better at hand, and a somewhat nicer one I take with me when I know in advance that I'm going to want to take pictures.

I'm an amateur photographer, and I've got a lot of cameras that I do use regularly - two DSLRs (actually one is the Olympus EP-2 which isn't really an SLR but has interchangeable lenses and is very small, so a lot more portable than my full-size Canon 40D but better image quality than point and shoots), a waterproof point-and-shoot (handy for lots of situations), two working higher-end film cameras (one late 60's and all manual, other late 70's with some electronic stuff) I use once in a while, the camera on my Nexus One which is useful quite frequently, the webcam on my macbook pro that I frequently use to skype with my girlfriend who's overseas.

So that's seven that have seen recent regular use (the film cameras only a couple times a year though).

However, I answered more than ten for the poll, because it didn't specify that they be cameras that got regular use :) I have several more that don't see use anymore, including some other film cameras and a pinhole camera I made myself, outdated point-and-shoot digitals, earlier cell phones with cameras, other webcams, possibly other stuff I can't think of...

In fact I'd find it a bit unusual if people answered the question honestly with a number as low as one or two... most slashdotters are not the type to get rid of old electronics even if they're outdated, and in 2011 most people probably have one or two old digital point and shoots around somewhere, probably one relatively new one (and/or a DSLR if they're more serious about photography), most probably have a camera on their cell phone, a good percentage probably have one built in to their laptop, others have pointed out that the kinect actually has two cameras by itself... this is the type of poll where if you think about it your answer starts to really quickly increase.

As usual, everyone will answer differently according to how they interpret the spirit of the question :)

God bless you.

My father is a radiologist, and he's taken some interesting x-rays.

He's been known to take images of gadgets that he can't open without breaking. There was a kitchen tap model from Ikea that was moulded into plastic (in the 80s) and that kept failing. I think when the 3rd tap failed, he took it to work and x-rayed the damned thing, showing a rubber ring inside was twisted. He then sent the x-ray to Ikea, and they soon stopped selling it.

He was also one of the first to x-ray egyptian mummies.

I that you Chuck Berry?

I just counted 5 at first, then remembered the window to my left that's covered in blackout fabric with a 1cm diameter hole in it. In a few weeks the trees outside will have too much foliage to let through much light and I'll put it up again till fall, but for now I'm still enjoying the upside-down streetscape on my wall.