Photography - dumbed down
- Topic Locked - You will not be able to post to this topic. Pointless time wasting thread
Posted 08/06/2012 - 03:22
Link
walkeja wrote:
It is said that the best selling camera on the market is the iphone. Most mobile phones have cameras built in to them. As a result of this the general public has no idea on how to take a good photograph. When you see the results from these "cameras" everything is sharp from front to back.
Fuji has bought out a camera that has a "professional" mode, all it does is blur the background. Modern zoom lenses are also to blame as the smallest aperture they mostly have is f4. As a result people are now used to seeing images with the background as prominent as the foreground.
When people see a photograph where the aperture has been opened wide, f2.4 and below, they tend to go "Wow, how have you done that?" and when you say the you opened the aperture wide they haven't a clue as to what you mean; and these can also be people who call themselves photographers!
Rant over!
I'm actually a fan of shallow DOF photography and use most of my lenses wide open 99% of the time.It is said that the best selling camera on the market is the iphone. Most mobile phones have cameras built in to them. As a result of this the general public has no idea on how to take a good photograph. When you see the results from these "cameras" everything is sharp from front to back.
Fuji has bought out a camera that has a "professional" mode, all it does is blur the background. Modern zoom lenses are also to blame as the smallest aperture they mostly have is f4. As a result people are now used to seeing images with the background as prominent as the foreground.
When people see a photograph where the aperture has been opened wide, f2.4 and below, they tend to go "Wow, how have you done that?" and when you say the you opened the aperture wide they haven't a clue as to what you mean; and these can also be people who call themselves photographers!
Rant over!
however it's a bit unfair to blame phone cams for the sharp from front to back syndrome as plenty of DSLR users are obsessed with that sharp from front to back.
I agree with the poster above who says the Best camera is the one you have with you. I carry my little Sony TX-5 everywhere.
My next camera will be the Nokia 808 phone.
check out the pics it can take
http://product.it168.com/detail/doc/460851/5444876/1/1/piclist.shtml
Yes the gallery is in Chinese, but click on the thumbs and then click on the fullsize icon, top-right, of medium size pic. Impressive
also you say "As a result of this the general public has no idea on how to take a good photograph"
At least the quality of mobile phone cams is getting to a standard where it will likely inspire people to take photography further.
I have to agree with John's comments in this thread.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 08/06/2012 - 06:08
Link
The more people there are out there taking bad pictures on tiny-sensored phones, the better my pictures look in comparison.
Every photographer needs to discover photography somehow, and a phone is as good a place to start as any.
Every photographer needs to discover photography somehow, and a phone is as good a place to start as any.
Pentax hybrid user - Digital K3, film 645 and 35mm SLR and Pentax (&other) lenses adapted to Fuji X and Panasonic L digital
Fan of DA limited and old manual lenses
Fan of DA limited and old manual lenses
Posted 08/06/2012 - 13:26
Link
Another ad to "prove" my point is the current one for HTC mobile phones. It shows a professional photographer doing a freefall jump from an aircraft shooting a fashion shoot on his mobile! That is the only time you will be pleased with the results from a mobile?
Pentax K1-ii and MZ6
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7, 28-105 DFA, 20 F4 SMC
ONE UNITED Member
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7, 28-105 DFA, 20 F4 SMC
ONE UNITED Member
Posted 08/06/2012 - 13:48
Link
Everyone has to start somewhere. I have only in the last 12 months purchase my first DSLR and before then only had a compact or camera phone. I've had an interest in Photography since I was a teen. Had a quick look on-line to define it and found a few but have this link link adverts have always been misleading in some way. Photography has many levels of experience within it. I could not find anything that says if you use a camera phone then you can't be a photographer. I have a degree in IT and many people I work with don't the still work in IT and are better at some things than I am. I'm a beginner photographer who has started using a DLSR. I could be an artist whether I used a pencil or paint. Someone has already said if someone wants to use poorer technology then it will hopefully make my images look better. Sorry for the rant but I've also been driving since 95 and give learners plenty of space and patience.
Will
Will
Pentax K-x, DAL f3.5-5.6 18-55mm,Pentax-A 50mm f2, DAL f4-5.6 50-200mm, FG360FGZ
Posted 08/06/2012 - 13:53
Link
Why should we care whether it is being 'dumbed' down, we don't have to follow suit.
As for an advertising "puff" showing how a professional 'might' use the phonecam it's highly unlikely Joe public will be able to copy/verify this anyway.
If mobile phones had predated photography, quite feasible if the science of Chemistry had dramatically lagged Physics, then we might be asking why do we need big black/white/silver boxes with huge lenses when we already have 'perfectly good' image takers.
Thanks Smeggy, your comments appreciated. The other sad thing is children doing much the same when parents/grandparents are gone.
regards
Bernard
As for an advertising "puff" showing how a professional 'might' use the phonecam it's highly unlikely Joe public will be able to copy/verify this anyway.
If mobile phones had predated photography, quite feasible if the science of Chemistry had dramatically lagged Physics, then we might be asking why do we need big black/white/silver boxes with huge lenses when we already have 'perfectly good' image takers.
Thanks Smeggy, your comments appreciated. The other sad thing is children doing much the same when parents/grandparents are gone.
regards
Bernard
Posted 08/06/2012 - 13:57
Link
This argument can be applied to a lot of things. I love music and there is nothing to beat live opera in a concert hall. When I'm at home I'm happy with my CDs. They are convenient and (with a decent stereo system) sound very good. When I'm on the bus or train or when I'm at work then I use my MP3 player. It's simply too inconvenient to get a whole opera company in a bus! The quality isn't as good but it's the best I can do, and it is good enough.
The reason 99%+ or people take photographs is for fun or for memories. And who are we to spoil that?
EDIT: It took me a while to find it. This shows how powerful and significant shots taken on a mobile phone can be: link
The reason 99%+ or people take photographs is for fun or for memories. And who are we to spoil that?
EDIT: It took me a while to find it. This shows how powerful and significant shots taken on a mobile phone can be: link
Posted 08/06/2012 - 14:28
Link
greynolds999 wrote:
This argument can be applied to a lot of things. I love music and there is nothing to beat live opera in a concert hall. When I'm at home I'm happy with my CDs. They are convenient and (with a decent stereo system) sound very good. When I'm on the bus or train or when I'm at work then I use my MP3 player. It's simply too inconvenient to get a whole opera company in a bus! The quality isn't as good but it's the best I can do, and it is good enough.
The reason 99%+ or people take photographs is for fun or for memories. And who are we to spoil that?
EDIT: It took me a while to find it. This shows how powerful and significant shots taken on a mobile phone can be: link
Proves my point exactly, as photographs they are c**p, no where for the eye to rest, i.e. no central point, everything either sharp or fuzzy, but that is ok because you are pleased to accept c**p!This argument can be applied to a lot of things. I love music and there is nothing to beat live opera in a concert hall. When I'm at home I'm happy with my CDs. They are convenient and (with a decent stereo system) sound very good. When I'm on the bus or train or when I'm at work then I use my MP3 player. It's simply too inconvenient to get a whole opera company in a bus! The quality isn't as good but it's the best I can do, and it is good enough.
The reason 99%+ or people take photographs is for fun or for memories. And who are we to spoil that?
EDIT: It took me a while to find it. This shows how powerful and significant shots taken on a mobile phone can be: link
Sorry for any offence taken.
Pentax K1-ii and MZ6
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7, 28-105 DFA, 20 F4 SMC
ONE UNITED Member
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7, 28-105 DFA, 20 F4 SMC
ONE UNITED Member
Posted 08/06/2012 - 14:40
Link
I think under the circumstances they were taken quality and composition have to have lower priorities. He did have a proper camera with him but discretion proved a better survival tactic. This was not, after all, a sunny day with joyous people.
regards
Bernard
regards
Bernard
Posted 08/06/2012 - 14:57
Link
If its c**p or nothing then c**p is better!
Not everyone can afford an SLR. Are you saying that if someone can only afford a camera phone that they should not use it?
Not everyone can afford an SLR. Are you saying that if someone can only afford a camera phone that they should not use it?
Posted 08/06/2012 - 15:59
Link
Actually I think the composition of many of the pictures is superb - they tell the story very vividly and are deeply moving. There is much more to a 'good' photo than technical quality. And it is not unknown for photographers to make a virtue out of technical limitations (coarse grain anyone??)
Tony Milner
Super A, ME Super, MZ6, K5II, Ricoh GR & lenses from 8-500mm
www.amilner.org
www.flickr.com/photos/tonymilner
Super A, ME Super, MZ6, K5II, Ricoh GR & lenses from 8-500mm
www.amilner.org
www.flickr.com/photos/tonymilner
Posted 08/06/2012 - 16:00
Link
walkeja wrote:
Sorry for any offence taken.
I'm not offended, but you're getting unnecessarily angry on other people's behalf. As Frogherder says "why should we follow suit?" Are all the crap photos out there forcing you to shoot crap?greynolds999 wrote:
This argument can be applied to a lot of things. I love music and there is nothing to beat live opera in a concert hall. When I'm at home I'm happy with my CDs. They are convenient and (with a decent stereo system) sound very good. When I'm on the bus or train or when I'm at work then I use my MP3 player. It's simply too inconvenient to get a whole opera company in a bus! The quality isn't as good but it's the best I can do, and it is good enough.
The reason 99%+ or people take photographs is for fun or for memories. And who are we to spoil that?
EDIT: It took me a while to find it. This shows how powerful and significant shots taken on a mobile phone can be: link
Proves my point exactly, as photographs they are c**p, no where for the eye to rest, i.e. no central point, everything either sharp or fuzzy, but that is ok because you are pleased to accept c**p!This argument can be applied to a lot of things. I love music and there is nothing to beat live opera in a concert hall. When I'm at home I'm happy with my CDs. They are convenient and (with a decent stereo system) sound very good. When I'm on the bus or train or when I'm at work then I use my MP3 player. It's simply too inconvenient to get a whole opera company in a bus! The quality isn't as good but it's the best I can do, and it is good enough.
The reason 99%+ or people take photographs is for fun or for memories. And who are we to spoil that?
EDIT: It took me a while to find it. This shows how powerful and significant shots taken on a mobile phone can be: link
Sorry for any offence taken.
I don't understand why you are that bothered? Unless you are projecting some issues with your own photography?
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Posted 08/06/2012 - 17:32
Link
greynolds999 wrote:
If its c**p or nothing then c**p is better!
I'm pleased you said that, I might publish some of mine taken at iso 1600, light source a tilley lamp, location deep in a cave, when the camera showed "battery exhausted" when deploying the pop up flash
If its c**p or nothing then c**p is better!
Posted 08/06/2012 - 18:54
Link
greynolds999 wrote:
If its c**p or nothing then c**p is better!
Not everyone can afford an SLR. Are you saying that if someone can only afford a camera phone that they should not use it?
Tell that to a photographic judge at a camera club competition. I believe he would slate them for the reasons I have stated. From a newsworthy point of view I agree with you but most of us, espcially Pentaxians these days, do not work for a living off our cameras. Though there are a few who do.
If its c**p or nothing then c**p is better!
Not everyone can afford an SLR. Are you saying that if someone can only afford a camera phone that they should not use it?
Pentax K1-ii and MZ6
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7, 28-105 DFA, 20 F4 SMC
ONE UNITED Member
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7, 28-105 DFA, 20 F4 SMC
ONE UNITED Member
Posted 08/06/2012 - 19:19
Link
Sorry, I'm not going to continue this pointless and ridiculous discussion.


7671 posts
17 years
Smegland
Sadly my mum used to have regular purges and whole decades went up in smoke. She never ever kept any negatives (who'd want another picture of your grandad/dad/grandma/me anyway was her favourite phrase), often throwing them in the nearest bin as we left the chemist.
Consequently I have a total of 8 miscellaneous snaps that go back to my childhood, including 1 of 1 of my grandads and 1 of 1 of my grandmas -who knows which one).
I now scan any pic I can find of my family and archive it for my grandchildren (I assume that jpg's will be readable in 20 years time, thats assuming the cd/dvds last that long) The originals are stored separately
regards
Bernard
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283