Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Shot with iPhone  (Read 21966 times)

Colorado David

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1178
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #60 on: April 15, 2015, 12:47:04 am »

Why are those men all seated when there are women standing?  Isn't there a gentleman in the bunch?

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #61 on: April 15, 2015, 01:24:29 am »

I'm more than happy to read Kevin Raber on MF photography, because he seems to know the subject inside out, but does he really know iPhone photography inside out? Or is this just a fad he picked up? If he has to write on iPhones, will he dedicate as much time and effort to the MF stuff that he does really well, and that many people here are interested in?


I suspect you don't know Kevin personally? I do...Kevin knows MF, DSLR, mirrorless and iPhone about equally...Kevin is all about capturing IMAGES...he really cares less about the technology than the image. Some of Kev's best images have come smaller format/iPhone cameras.

I'm really a bit shocked by the arrogance exhibited by some in this thread...image making is about image making. Who really cares about the equipment?

Those people who are insecure about their process...I went to RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology). As a school they were very, VERY slow to adopt digital photography. Why?

Their tenured professors were scared to death by new technology. And I mean SCARED TO DEATH! When faced with new technology, all their private, personal processes went out the window...kinda like old'sters facing an iPhone and Hipstamatic approach to image making.

Chill out old'sters...the old style landscape photography will continue for a while. It's the younger crowd that is migrating to iPhones & social media for consumption of images. You see the dichotomy between Kev & Michael...Kev is into it (he wrote the article) and Mike is less enthused...it represents the LuLa crowd pretty well.

Note, I still get a kick out of giving Kevin crap for shooting images with his iPhone instead of a "real camera" when out shooting with him. But hey, that's just me!
Logged

ashaughnessy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
    • My wordpress blog
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #62 on: April 15, 2015, 02:23:16 am »

The whole thread reminds me of similar discussions around the internet post-2000 about the introduction of these new-fangled digital cameras and how they'd never achieve the quality of a good film camera, they weren't photographs they were just numbers, etc.
Anthony
Logged
Anthony Shaughnessy
https://anthonyshaug

bernie west

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
    • Wild Photo Australia
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #63 on: April 15, 2015, 12:10:22 pm »

Photography isn't solely about "work"...
Logged

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1535
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #64 on: April 15, 2015, 12:36:46 pm »

I am thrilled with the iphone6+ and amazed at the quality.  But not for serious landscape work.

Which brings us back full circle to ' it doesn't need to be mutually exclusive '.
Or, to put it another way, would you use a sushi knife to carve roast beef ?


Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6416
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #65 on: April 15, 2015, 02:48:45 pm »

Which brings us back full circle to ' it doesn't need to be mutually exclusive '.
Or, to put it another way, would you use a sushi knife to carve roast beef ?
Agreed.  Or "would you pull out and set up the food processor to squeeze the juice of one lemon, and have to disassemble and wash it up afterwards?"  For some "personal documentation and unexpected opportunity photography", it makes sense to use the smallest, quickest, lightest tool -- maybe even when you also have a real(TM) camera in your back pack.  And so it makes sense for us to exchange tips and ideas on how best to use this new option -- and on when not to fall into that temptation!

I see little reason to fear that adding one new sub-forum to the thirty-three others at LuLa will sap the energy from all those others, and lead many of us into the temptation of using our phones when other gear is more appropriate.
Logged

bernie west

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
    • Wild Photo Australia
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #66 on: April 15, 2015, 03:07:20 pm »

Too late...  I just threw my DSLR in the bin.


 :P
Logged

bernie west

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
    • Wild Photo Australia
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #67 on: April 15, 2015, 05:39:44 pm »

Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6416
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #68 on: April 15, 2015, 09:56:13 pm »

You won't need a DSLR soon, allegedly..

http://petapixel.com/2015/04/14/apple-acquires-linx-a-camera-maker-that-promises-dslr-performance-in-phones/
That sounds like wild exaggeration, but if the rumors are right about zoom lenses coming to phone-cameras, that will take another huge bite out of the low-end compact camera market, squeezing it ever more towards super-zooms and big sensor models (1" and up?).
Logged

John Camp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1442
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #69 on: April 15, 2015, 11:14:54 pm »


I'm really a bit shocked by the arrogance exhibited by some in this thread...image making is about image making. Who really cares about the equipment?


Oh, bullshit, Jeff. Are you really trying to sell the idea that you don't care about equipment? Or that Kevin doesn't? Then why did I read those serious in-depth Schewe books about how to squeeze the last drop of quality out of a printer? I might be mis-remembering, but didn't you say in one book or another that you have four or five printers in house? Didn't Kevin used to post fairly frequently about the superiority of the most expensive possible MF cameras? What were all those Michael/Schewe videos about?

Further, I don't think there was a lot of arrogance here...mostly just a equation of why the forum is going in this particular direction when, as somebody noted, there was never a P&S forum back when millions of people were shooting P&S digitals. And I think some of the concerns are valid. And, as a lot of people noted, including me, most of us don't care what the forum does. More a matter of bemusement than opposition.
Logged

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6229
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #70 on: April 15, 2015, 11:29:11 pm »

Oh, bullshit, Jeff. Are you really trying to sell the idea that you don't care about equipment? Or that Kevin doesn't?

Actually, I care far less about the cameras and printers (yes I have several) than I do caring about the image and the print. I do have a lot of cameras...both Canon, Sony, Panasonic and now Nikon. But I also shoot a lot with my iPhone too. My last two trips to Italy, I only took my Sony RX100 (the original one) instead of any of my bigger cameras. I got a lot of really nice shots with the little point and shoot I could carry in a shirt pocket. Oh, I also took my iPhone and got a bunch of really nice panos with it (something the iPhone 6 is really good at). I've made prints from both cameras...BTW, if you are interested in why, it's because I'm married (42 years) and my wife appreciated that I didn't take a lot of cameras & lenses :~)

Look, I'm an image maker...I enjoy making images regardless of the camera. I'm positive that Kev feels the same. But I really don't obsess over over cameras and lenses ya know? They're just tools to make an image. So I shoot with anything I have handy :~)
Logged

MarkL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 475
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #71 on: April 16, 2015, 08:10:11 am »

People keep mentioning “who cares about the equipment” in this thread but then argue in favor of phones being specifically covered and having a separate forum section for them. If it didn’t matter to them, why mention pictures where shot on a phone in the first place?

The entire premise of this site's existance was discussion of equipment.
Logged

Kevin Raber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1345
  • Kevin Raber
    • Kevin Raber
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #72 on: April 16, 2015, 09:36:49 am »

People keep mentioning “who cares about the equipment” in this thread but then argue in favor of phones being specifically covered and having a separate forum section for them. If it didn’t matter to them, why mention pictures where shot on a phone in the first place?

The entire premise of this site's existance was discussion of equipment.

This sites existence was never the topic of "discussion of equipment".  It has always been about everything photographic.  The sharing of knowledge.  We have recently added a tag line to our logo "The Photographers Knowledge Resource".  That clearly defines what we want to accomplish here.

This new topic is here for those that want it.  Like other topics it is here to help people that want to learn something in regards to the topic. 

Yesterday morning I came down to meet Michael and Chris for breakfast.  We were at a lodge in the Columbia River Gorge.  The sun was just coming over the mountains with low hanging clouds and my cameras were in the room.  No problem I stepped outside used my iPhone and took a picture using Pro HDR X and ended up with a lovely image.  Maybe I'll share it maybe I won't.  It was all about taking the picture though.  I shared the image at breakfast and Michael and a friend with us downloaded the app and took similar images on their iPhones.

During breakfast we discussed the image, how to share images and printing of images and a dozen other things photographic because that is what we do. 

Kevin Raber
Logged
Kevin Raber
kwr@rabereyes.com
kevin@photopxl.com
rockhopperworkshops.com
photopxl.com

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6416
the photographic "gamut" of camera-phones
« Reply #73 on: April 16, 2015, 10:28:14 am »

We are getting into the familiar false dichotomy "equipment matters/does not matter".  It seem obvious that differences in equipment can make big differences in the results in some cases, such as landscape scenes with high subject brightness range and lots of interesting details, or animals that must be photographed from a distance and at high shutter speeds; no pocketable camera will ever do as well with those scenes as a suitable "big camera".  But every camera/lens combination has a "gamut"; a range of situations and subject matter where its results are fine, to the point that a bigger sensor or lens, or faster AF, or whatever, will not make a significant difference to the appearance of the final displayed image (except to pixel peepers and print sniffers.)

Clearly, phone-cameras have a far smaller photographic gamut than any modern ILC system, but plenty of everyday subjects fall within that gamut, and then the omnipresent phone-camera (or pocketable compact) can be a good choice of gear.
Logged

Alan Smallbone

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 779
    • APS Photography
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #74 on: April 16, 2015, 10:28:31 am »

Well said Kevin. It is all about the image.  :)  If you really want to piss off everyone, put a "like" button for posts.....  ;D That should create many pages of nattering on the forum.

Alan
Logged
Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15485
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: the photographic "gamut" of camera-phones
« Reply #75 on: April 16, 2015, 10:33:37 am »

We are getting into the familiar false dichotomy "equipment matters/does not matter". 
I don’t believe anyone here feels that is true. But the equipment isn’t necessary to know about from the viewers perspective, it’s the qualities of the image.
If you see a lovely image, that’s what’s critical, not whether it was shot on a $40K system or an iPhone.
IF all that mattered was the equipment, all the amazing images that were captured over the life of photography’s history could be dismissed because today, we have ‘better’ equipment.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

MatthewCromer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 505
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #76 on: April 16, 2015, 01:33:01 pm »

I used to use my iPhone camera until I got an RX100.

Seriously, is it so much work to carry around an RX100 in your pocket?
Logged

mezzoduomo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
Re: Shot with iPhone
« Reply #77 on: April 16, 2015, 01:37:22 pm »

Create a place where readers could upload photos, and the rest of us could try to guess what camera was used.
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3690
Re: the photographic "gamut" of camera-phones
« Reply #78 on: April 16, 2015, 05:11:11 pm »

IF all that mattered was the equipment, all the amazing images that were captured over the life of photography’s history could be dismissed because today, we have ‘better’ equipment.

Not long ago I read an interview with Art Wolfe about his recent "retrospective" photo book. It turns out he revisited a number of places and even groups of people he'd photographed years & decades ago, making new photos with his current gear because he was unhappy with the technical quality of the older photos. I'm personally unsure what to make of this. There's a whiff of postcard photography about it—find relatively static & eye-pleasing locales, take eye-pleasing pics—that suggests a rather mechanical, non-spontaneous approach. OTOH…much of the pic-taking I do personally has less to do with photos per se than about being somewhere with the heightened awareness that seeing through a viewfinder can bring on. I often take pics of places & people & things I've photographed before. My 2014 Grand Canyon photos are certainly of higher technical quality than those from 1994. So maybe I can also understand why Wolfe took the approach he did. Yet the gorgeous stormy sunsets of November 1994 happened only then. That I captured them on 35mm Provia 100, with its particular color palette and ~5 stops of dynamic range, rather than the far more capable Olympus E-M1 I used last year…that's just the way it is. And those Provia pics are the ones I'd put in a book, technical superiority be damned.

-Dave-
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6416
Re: the photographic "gamut" of camera-phones
« Reply #79 on: April 16, 2015, 05:41:58 pm »

We are getting into the familiar false dichotomy "equipment matters/does not matter".
I don’t believe anyone here feels that is true.
Of course nobody believes that the equipment is irrelevant, or the opposite extreme that using the best possible gear is critical to all "serious" photography, but this common sense sometimes gets lost in forum debates, where some of the rhetoric degenerates into those simplistic extremes; one side with versions of the populist cliché that "it's the photographer that matters, not the gear", perhaps in over-reaction to perceived elitism like "cameras below some threshold are mere toys, unworthy of any serious photographer" on the other side.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up