Comments on: The camera that changed the world http://keithphilpott.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/the-camera-that-changed-the-world/ Keith Philpott's blog about photography, communication and "why not". Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:19:08 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: keith http://keithphilpott.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/the-camera-that-changed-the-world/#comment-191 keith Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:11:55 +0000 http://keithphilpott.wordpress.com/?p=615#comment-191 All good points, Mark. I was just listening to MacBreak Weekly and they were raving about how good the new iPhone camera is. They added that though good, iPhone images are still only technically suitable for on-line use. Which made me think, at some point on-line use may surpass print as the benchmark for technical quality. Thanks for your comments. All good points, Mark. I was just listening to MacBreak Weekly and they were raving about how good the new iPhone camera is. They added that though good, iPhone images are still only technically suitable for on-line use. Which made me think, at some point on-line use may surpass print as the benchmark for technical quality.

Thanks for your comments.

]]> By: Mark Hiebert http://keithphilpott.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/the-camera-that-changed-the-world/#comment-190 Mark Hiebert Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:45:24 +0000 http://keithphilpott.wordpress.com/?p=615#comment-190 It's going to be curious to see what settles out from the chaff. I think back to the 1970s/early 1980s and all the Kodak Instamatics: they seemed pervasive -- at least among my family and their friends, whatever or wherever, someone always had a camera and a lot of photographs were made, albeit mainly of mundane events. Where we now have easy platforms for mass distribution, it seems that the thing that will separate the fruit of the field from the waste will be be the intentionality of what's produced, the degree to which the person with the camera aims at revealing a point of view (as opposed to propagandizing a political position or simple narcissism), but that's always the difference. Back to the notion of the Instamatics, I'd suggest that's kind of the quality reference for the cell phone cameras -- that or the old Polaroids. They're utilitarian. It’s going to be curious to see what settles out from the chaff. I think back to the 1970s/early 1980s and all the Kodak Instamatics: they seemed pervasive — at least among my family and their friends, whatever or wherever, someone always had a camera and a lot of photographs were made, albeit mainly of mundane events.

Where we now have easy platforms for mass distribution, it seems that the thing that will separate the fruit of the field from the waste will be be the intentionality of what’s produced, the degree to which the person with the camera aims at revealing a point of view (as opposed to propagandizing a political position or simple narcissism), but that’s always the difference.

Back to the notion of the Instamatics, I’d suggest that’s kind of the quality reference for the cell phone cameras — that or the old Polaroids. They’re utilitarian.

]]>