Just seen an interesting retweet by @LATimesPhotos over an article debating whether iPhone apps like hipstamatic 'et all' should really be a respected form of photography/photojournalism after a shot taken on a phone won third place in the international pictures of the year competition
"A GRUNT'S LIFE" by New York Times photographer Damon Winter.
So where do you stand?
is it camera snobbery, or is it a justified argument?
After all, i guess alot of us use editing software to tweek and crop the original shot from time to time, no....?
As a relevant newcomer to photography it seems as if I’ve gone straight into the "glitzy digital ages" of Dslrs and photoshop, so I’m not sure i can really even comment, as I’ve never stood in a dark room for hours on end, developing rolls of film that might turn out ace or might be a total miss.
I suppose i am kind of on the fence with this one though - I’ve had to work hard to learn about ISO & f stop numbers and all that jargon so i can understand how my dslr camera works... but then i also have that dreaded app on my phone that's a piece of piss to just point and shoot to get an interesting image.
And anyway, i actually quite like the image above - the green tint gives it a nice 'toy soldier' kinda feel.
So, in a Jerry Springer's 'final thought' moment i guess that anyone can take a photograph (be it on an iPhone, dslr camera, lomo, polaroid, box brownie etc etc....) but if the outcome is a good, interesting image that tells a story then does it reeeeally matter?
ahh the inner ramblings of my brain.