Today's New York Times feature photo by iphone

As cell phone makers continue to improve the camera components of these devices I would not be surprised to see more of this. Whether we like it or not there are going to be plenty of circumstances where a reporter can take out his cell phone and take the shots of a story that he is writing thus eliminating the need to send along a qualified photographer.

--Link--

This Instacrap thing needs to fade away.

The person taking the photos was a photographer. If he decided that an iphone and instagram were the tools he needed to get the image he wanted, I fail to see the problem. If you're saying that you don't like the images or that they're bad then that's a different matter entirely. From looking at the screenshot, the image looks both purposefully composed and lit.

As for the article, I think it's BS. The article implies that "the skills needed to make beautiful shots" are a knowledge of photoshop. The author also admits in the same article that the pictures were great and taken by a pro photographer. It's as if the first and second halves of the article were written by two different people.

Exactly. The problem with the wave of mobile phone/ipad photography is not the lack of quality technology but rather the lack of photographic skills in those wielding the phone. Of course the same can be said for quite a few DSLRs.

Hahaha....this is the day. Are you sure this isn't an April fool joke? Basically, any Iphone user can have their photos published. Forget about using your freelance photojournalists (as if it isn't bad they don't even have a full time photography staff). Just used photos submitted by their own readers.

That article's author isn't very intelligent when it comes to photography. She assumes that using an iPhone means no skills are required. The truth is, skill is required because Latham (a photographer) knew the iPhone would be good enough, and found the right light to make it so.

Instagram is neither here nor there.

EDIT: Just found this from the photographer's blog:

Bold emphasis mine. So yeah, it wasn't as if he only went in with an iPhone. The NYT simply chose that shot because they liked it. Editors are as quirky as regular consumers when it comes to picking favorites, and neither tends to care what equipment was used. The BI article is just a fluff piece.

my only issue with the iphone as a camera is that is forced done our throats how great of a camera it is. so many articles selling that you don't need a pro camera to take good pictures. its almost as if apple if spoon feeding these editorials.

if you are a professional photographer, use what ever tool works for you and if the iphone and instagram is that tool so be it, but you also know that that tool is going to fail miserably more often than not in less than ideal conditions where a dslr and traditional editing will continue to excel.

we use dslrs not because they are the best, but because they are adapt to capture an image in most any condition and when you are being paid to get the shot, thats important.

mike_311 wrote in post #15782085
my only issue with the iphone as a camera is that is forced done our throats how great of a camera it is. so many articles selling that you don't need a pro camera to take good pictures. its almost as if apple if spoon feeding these editorials.

Well, it actually does have a really good camera mechanism in it. As do the top tier Samsung Galaxies. My S3, for example, blows away my dedicated P&S from just a couple years ago...even at ISO1600. I don't think any professional is going to be fooled into thinking the iPhone or Samsung Galaxies are going to be the end all be all of their career, but for a lot of people they really are fantastic.

I'll even go so far as to say that I believe most people do NOT need a professional camera to take good pictures and many people only buy them because a hyperenthusiast relative, professional friend, or camera shop salesperson said they need one. After all, not everyone is even after the ultimate high end fancy results that require all the gear we have...they just want a decent snapshot of a memory with the most convenience possible.

cdifoto wrote in post #15782095
Well, it actually does have a really good camera mechanism in it. As do the top tier Samsung Galaxies. My S3, for example, blows away my dedicated P&S from just a couple years ago...even at ISO1600. I don't think any professional is going to be fooled into thinking the iPhone or Samsung Galaxies are going to be the end all be all of their career, but for a lot of people they really are fantastic.

that was my point, i have an htc one x with a really great camera that it lightyears ahead of my old p&S, but you don't hear about the other phones, only the iphone. i swear every day i see an article on how great the iphone camera is.

ssim wrote in post #15776834
As cell phone makers continue to improve the camera components of these devices I would not be surprised to see more of this. Whether we like it or not there are going to be plenty of circumstances where a reporter can take out his cell phone and take the shots of a story that he is writing thus eliminating the need to send along a qualified photographer.

--Link--

another highly compensated professional photographer is replaced

watt100 wrote in post #15782292
another highly compensated professional photographer is replaced

Yeah...with himself. Did you read the article?

cdifoto wrote in post #15782306
Yeah...with himself. Did you read the article?

"where a reporter can take out his cell phone and take the shots of a story that he is writing thus eliminating the need to send along a qualified photographer"

"Traditional Photographers Should Be Horrified"

"the skills needed to make beautiful shots that are worthy of the cover of a newspaper continue to diminish rapidly."

Just proves it's not all about the equipment which is a good lesson.

It probably also helps the subject you are photographing is famous/infamous.

On a separate note, it seems while equipment/technology is getting better every year, the vintage look has gotten wildly popular maybe due to instagram alone. For example, for all the research and technology camera makers have spent on fixing to prevent light leaks, now we're intentionally adding them in in post.

aIpha wrote in post #15782375
Just proves it's not all about the equipment which is a good lesson.

It probably also helps the subject you are photographing is famous/infamous.

On a separate note, it seems while equipment/technology is getting better every year, the vintage look has gotten wildly popular maybe due to instagram alone. For example, for all the research and technology camera makers have spent on fixing to prevent light leaks, now we're intentionally adding them in in post.

instagram is popular because it hides the flaws in amateur photography by applying a gimmick processing. the image relies too much on the processing and as a result gets old quickly to those of us who know better.

i really have no problem with instagram except that im bored with seeing it, besides the pretty dramatic colors the images usually offer nothing to me so tire of seeing them.

watt100 wrote in post #15782361
"where a reporter can take out his cell phone and take the shots of a story that he is writing thus eliminating the need to send along a qualified photographer"

"Traditional Photographers Should Be Horrified"

"the skills needed to make beautiful shots that are worthy of the cover of a newspaper continue to diminish rapidly."

Except none of those quotes indicate that a skilled photographer was actually replaced. That's fluff and FUD on the part of the author.

Are photographers losing jobs? Absolutely. But not in this instance. This is a photographer using an iPhone to take supplemental images to those with his "real" camera. This is not a photographer being replaced by a journalist with an iPhone, no matter how much the article says otherwise.

In other words, the author is an idiot.