iPhone images and apps—much ado about nothing

There appears to be a minor tempest brewing over the fact that Damon Winter of the New York Times won third place for a feature essay in the annual Pictures of the Year competition which he photographed using an iPhone.   Further compounding the matter is the fact that he used an app called Hipstamatic, which does a degree of post processing (adding color tints and or changing light values on portions of the image, etc).  As an iPhone user, a photographer and a tinkerer, I have tried most of the photo apps that seemed to be worth trying.  The Hipstamatic app is on my phone and I used it to shoot this picture of my cat this morning.

I admit that I haven't used this app much as, like many these days, directions are fuzzy at best and time is too short to try to figure out everything.  There was a time when software came with instruction books.

To the matter at hand however, the camera, on the iPhone 4 in particular, is a beautifully executed little piece of machinery.  I use mine to take photos of items that I want to purchase at the grocery or hardware store. I use it to record signs that refer to something that I shoot with my Canon or Panasonic (information about an animal at the zoo for example) and I use it to take location shots because the built in GPS will pinpoint the area for me on a map if I need it for reference later.  Oh, I also use it to take photos of things that interest me and sometimes, as in the case of Damon Winter, because it is unobtrusive and less intimidating.  If you turn off the sound, no one will even hear the shutter.

I use it when it is the only camera I am carrying

Chase Jarvis a well-known commercial, sports, etc., photographer wrote a little book about the iPhone called "The Best Camera is the One That's With You".  His "Best Camera" app for the iPhone is a best seller on iTunes.

When you do something for a living, you try to keep up.  I read quite a bit about technology related to cameras to try and stay on top of what's going on.  It amazes me that "reviewers" will dis a camera because the name plate on the front is too large or the lens cap has an attached strap.  There is a cadre of internet writers who endlessly discuss the resolution test charts and wax lyrical over the merits of 14 megapixels vs. 12.1 megapixels.  Michael Reichmann, a Toronto based photographer ( http://luminous-landscape.com ) calls them "pixel peepers".  My advice:  If you buy a camera or lens that doesn't turn out to be as advertised or not what you really wanted, send it back.  Also an entire volume could be written about megapixels (Reading it would be a waste of your time, I promise you.)  None of this, of course, has anything to do with photography.

Photography is about seeing, recording the world around you from your own unique point of view and perspective.  Apparently for some, if you want to see the world as a journalist you have to use a certain kind of equipment.  We are past the days of the rangefinder Leica with black and white film — at least for every day use.  I hated to part with mine.  These critics need to get over it and move on.

Snobbery in any form is seldom excusable.

We have a new breed of haves and have nots these days.  We really shouldn't be playing the game of my camera is better than yours.  Wedding photographers are having a hard time because uncle Charlie has a full-frame DSLR.  While uncle Charlie may be proud of his high-priced machine and it will take impressively sharp and colorful images, that does not make him a wedding photographer.  Sadly, while many newspaper editors would want to make it so, putting a camera in the hands of a reporter going to cover a story does not make that reporter a photojournalist.

Almost any camera, in the hands of a professional, can be made to take acceptable, if not exceptional photos.

Damon Winter's essay is an exceptional piece of work.  I would like to add my congratulations on a job well done.  The recognition from the Pictures of the Year competition is well deserved.