ArticlesSoftware/App ReviewsDigital lo-fi photography - Part 1

Digital lo-fi photography - Part 1

By Kelcey Smith | Published Dec 12, 2011 | Software/App Reviews

Hipstamatic ($1.99)

Platform: iOS

Hipstamatic encourages the idea of "shooting-from-the-hip" by allowing you to choose a film type and lens before shooting and hoping for the best. This image was shot with the John S lens and Ina's 1969m film. Both of which are available by default in the app.

Incredibly popular with casual iPhone photographers, Hipstamatic is designed to emulate the entire experience of shooting with toy cameras. Its slogan 'Digital Photography never looked so analog' sums up the company's aims fairly concisely. Hipstamatic features virtual interchangeable lenses, film stock and flashes to approximate the classic toy cameras of the past. It is possible to purchase additional packs that include more 'lenses' and 'film stocks'. Each film type and lens have their own unique look.

To further replicate the toy camera experience, in 'classic' mode the 'viewfinder' preview only shows a small magnified view of what you are pointing the camera's lens at, and as with the viewfinders found on many old toy cameras, what you see is not necessarily what you get in the final image.

Hipstamatic can save its images as 1936 x 1936 px files (3.7MP), but the files take quite a while to process, sometimes up to a minute, even on the most up-to-date iPhone 4.

	The 'front' of the camera is where you can make lens, film and flash changes before shooting.
	The default purchase of Hipstamatic comes with 3 types of 'film stock'. More packs can be purchased through the app itself.
	Once you have taken a photo and it has finished processing, it can then be shared on many different social networking sites.

Hipstamatic's drive for authenticity is evidenced in the functioning of its flash switch. Once it has been turned on it cannot be turned off until you take a photograph. If you change your mind, and decide you don't want flash you can always put your finger over it, which in itself can create some very interesting effects.

Plastic Bullet ($1.99)

Platform: iOS

Plastic Bullet allows you to quickly add one of a very large number of basic filters to your image. Control over the effects is non-existant but the filters are effective, very varied, and very numerous.

In complete contrast to Snapseed, Plastic Bullet is a fully automatic app which allows you to apply one of a huge number of filters to your iPhone photographs (either already saved to your camera roll or 'live' from the camera app) which replicate a number of 'retro' effects. The breadth of filters contained in Plastic Bullet is impressive - everything from lomo-esque light leaks to outdated and cross-processed film effects. There are filters for color and monochrome, and a wide range of filters that incorporate frames and edge effects as well, which can be previewed either individually or in groups of four. Plastic Bullet's developers are fond of claiming that the possibilities are endless, and after using this app for more than a year, we'd be inclined to agree.

The appeal of Plastic Bullet is twofold - firstly, there are a crazy amount of filter effects to choose from, so you're bound to find something that appeals - and secondly, the 'shuffle' approach to selecting your desired filter is effortless and fun. Addictive in fact.

	Filters can be previewed either individually or in groups of four (iPad users have the option to view nine filter effects at a time). If you like a particular filter, just click to make it full-screen, and press the heart icon at the top of the display...
	...at which point you'll be prompted to either save the image, or share it via Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook or Flickr. Developing (saving) takes time though, especially if you choose to save at original resolution. Even on the powerful iPhone 4S, it can take more than 30 seconds.

That said, because there are so many options, it would be great to see them grouped, however basically, into general filter 'types' and some control over the intensity of effects, or a toggle for border effects on/off would naturally make Plastic Bullet more versatile. Overall though, for the price, it's a bargain, and assuming you have the patience to preview it's enormous range of filters, you'll be rewarded with some of the most interesting and convincing 'retro' filters that we've seen.

Snapseed ($4.99)

Platform: iOS

For me, this image was more about color and pattern than subject and composition. So I first applied the 'Drama' filter to increase contrast and saturation and really bring out the vibrancy of the balloon, then added a grunge filter which overlaid the texture and blurred out the edges.

Originally exclusive to the Apple iPad, Snapseed is now available for the iPhone. Although not specifically a 'retro' photography app, among Snapseed's most interesting features are a range of fun 'lo-fi' filters and special effects.

Operation is based around the idea of selecting control points that can be individually adjusted to give you more control than would otherwise be possible with a blanket adjustment. For a more in-depth look at the features of this app please read our Snapseed for iPad review.

	All of the editing features in Snapseed are available through the left-hand menu. From here you have the option to perform basic tuning adjustments like brightness, contrast, white balance and color or to apply pre-designed filters. You can also use the 'Selective Adjust' feature to change specific parameters on select areas of your image.
	In Selective Adjust mode you place points on the image where you want to apply the adjustment. Once a point is set you can change its parameter by clicking it and scrolling up and down. By scrolling left and right you will adjust the intensity of the parameter. Using a 2-finger pinch you can also adjust the range of the effect (shown as the red area around the selected point)
	For a quick edit you can also apply vintage, grunge, drama and black and white filters to your shots. Just like in the selective adjustment mode you can adjust the intensity of the filters by scrolling left and right as well as scrolling up and down to change the parameter you are adjusting.

Compared to the experience on the iPad it can be somewhat more difficult to achieve the same level of fine control on the smaller screen of the iPhone, however it is still quite easy to use and images process reasonably quickly. Unfortunately, the iPhone does not support the iPad's camera connection kit so you will only be able to edit photos taken with your iPhone (unless you copy them to your phone using an alternative method).

Other apps to consider...

We've covered some of our favourite retro photography apps here, but there are many more available. Here's a list of other apps to consider.

Luminance ($0.99) - iOS

Luminance gives you basic control over brightness, contrast and tone curves. Each parameter can be adjusted individually or you can apply a pre-defined effect filter to your image. After the effect is applied you can still tweak the individual adjustments to get your picture just the way you want.

PhotoForge2 ($2.99) - iOS

PhotoForge2 provides more minute control over image adjustments than many other apps currently available. With this app you can edit curves, apply effects, crop, rotate and apply layers. It is possible to purchase additional automatic vintage camera filters that can be integrated into the app.

PhotoToaster ($0.99) - iOS

PhotoToaster allows you to add retro-style filters to you images by either applying a pre-set filter or by adjusting settings manually. You can also crop, rotate and straighten within the app. All editing is non destructive, which means that you can go back and change your settings no matter how many adjustments you've made.

In the next part of this 3-part series on 'lo-fi' photography we'll take at computer software, and software techniques.

LIKE 4

Flag as inappropriate

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by dpreview.com or any affiliated companies.

Pin It

Print view

Comments

Total comments: 131

Hi, when i can expect part 2 of Digital lo-fi photography ?

0 upvotes

I'm curious to know why King Camera isn't mentioned in this list. It's by far one of the top all-in-one camera replacement apps along with ProCamera.

0 upvotes

There are too many comments here for me to read all of them, so if I say what someone else already did, apologies.

First, in a few places this article seems to have the apps listed in reverse order -- the text refers to the app that FOLLOWS rather than PRECEDES it in a few places. Like 'Unlike Hipstamatic, such-and-such-app...' ...but we haven't read about Hipstamatic yet!

Second, any comments here about 'just shoot film' etc -- shooting film doesn't normally yield a variety of looks like this. If you shoot current film with a decent camera, photos will look much more 'proper' than any of this -- and most of your shots with a given camera+film+process will have a similar look. The digital retro processing embraces unusual color shifts, vignetting, blurring, and other image contamination that we may have seen before on some old photographs but would be hard-pressed to duplicate with any level of control now.

0 upvotes

Hopefully I'm more respectful this time. Those that state that "obviously we're not Ansel Adams, it's just for fun" etc, sure. Besides that, sometimes "lo-fi" even by artists has its place. John Mellencamp's latest album "No Better than This" was DELIBERATELY recorded with a 50's-era mono recorder with 1 microphone, & the video for the title track looks sort of like black & white super 8 film or something. The album itself is one of my favorite albums ever.

Still, I listen to it on my MP3 player, not vinyl, & I stand by my belief that once you arrive to a certain level of capability, it's time to put away the snapshooting toys, I think, smartphones included. Why use something inferior just because you can? There's always mirrorless for "discreet" or "always with you" scenarios, the quality is far superior & you can still "lo-fi" it in a smartphone (via Eye-Fi) or at the PC. By the way I look forward to the follow-up on how to "lo-fi" at the PC. I hope my post was respectful.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Isn't there something to be said for someone who has adequate skill, knowledge and vision to elevate these "snapshooting toys" to a level of artistic excellence.

Polaroids were very basic cameras but almost everyone has used them and some have used them quite creatively. The same can be said for the Diana or Holga or even someone building a pinhole camera out of a tin for oatmeal. In reference to an earlier comment you posted, maybe these photos can't be blown up to 16x20, do they need to be. Sometimes keeping things small creates a better sense of intimacy and inquisitiveness than a large print.

I am the first to jump in with my large camera and try to capture everything, but occasionally my friend, with his point and shoot or cell phone can is quicker to it and less obtrusive, preserving the moment more authentically than I was able to.

0 upvotes

Your 1st paragraph--yes, there is something to be said for acknowledging that someone's skill set is as such that they can coax surprising results even out of toy cameras.

However, to me, once you reach a certain level of photography you aspire to be successful at, even at the hobbyist level, you should leave the toys behind & use a REAL camera at that point. Yes smaller cameras are less intrusive, mirrorless cameras would be such a camera. As for "keeping things small," if you're not going to enlarge 16x20 so be it, but why capture such an image that has artistic aspirations at a lower resolution just because you intend to make small prints with it? Captured at a high resolution with a real camera, at least it CAN be enlarged 16x20 if you later decide you want to

I do realize "lo-fi" can be neat sometimes, such as when John Mellencamp used a 1950s era single mike recording device for his 2010 album "No Better Than This" & recorded it in mono.

0 upvotes

A good article here about smartphone photography being used in a photojournalist role;

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/25/the_war_in_hipstamatic

2 upvotes

I will admit the photos, on a computer screen anyway, look nice and speak of a message & are worthy of conversation. HOWEVER, there's no doubt he would've obtained better results with an SLR or even a mirrorless. Try & make a 16x20 print of this & see what happens.

I read the article, nowhere that I saw does it say WHY Balazs Gardi would PURPOSELY use an iPhone for something like this. That's what irks me--yes, I will admit, he did a better job than I probably would've or plenty of other people even though I would've used an SLR. Still, why use an iPhone when you could get a mirrorless & get far better results? That's what gets me, that someone would PURPOSELY dumb-down their tool just to apparently do nothing more than prove a point or follow the latest fad. If it's connectivity you're after, use an Eye-Fi card setup.

I agree with what Olympus says in their getarealcamera.com campaign--camera phones are to photography what 2 minute noodles are to cooking.

0 upvotes

NY Times photographer Damon Winter - Pictures of the Year International prize winner, with shots taken in Afghanistan on an iPhone - says:

"I could not have taken these photos using my SLR and that perhaps is the most important point to be made about the camera phone."

"Using the phone is discreet and casual and unintimidating."

"The beauty of a new tool is that it allows you to see and approach your subjects differently."

"The image of the men resting together on a rusted bed frame could never have been made with my regular camera. They would have scattered the moment I raised my 5D with a big 24-70 lens attached. But with the phone, the men were very comfortable."

"People may have the impression that it is easy to make interesting images with a camera app like this, but it is not the case. At the heart of every solid image are the same fundamentals: composition, information, moment, emotion, connection."

(Source: Lens Blog, NY Times)

2 upvotes

You could also consider "Retro Camera" for Android, contains 6 "camera effects", including pinhole camera, polaroid-like, lomo-like ones. Pretty neat with little customising, but applies nice presets available both in color and B/W.

0 upvotes

Good to see that dpreview recognizes the dominant role of mobile photography in our current visual culture. Unfortunately, not a lot of attention for the Android platform. But luckily, as an Android shooter, I already found the best app: Vignette.

The aggrieved comments by mobile photography bashers are hilarious. By all means, keep over-analyzing and over-thinking your very serious pictures of your cat and the flowers in your garden. Meanwhile, us mobile shooters will have unpretentious fun, experimenting with our phones and apps.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting

7 upvotes

It is fine if you wish to have "fun" with photos, although I have SLRs I'm not above silly pics that have no artisitc merit.

However, don't for a minute think that using a smartphone for taking photos is "photography." It's snapshooting, which again is fine, but it's not fine-art photography anymore than Hungry Man TV dinners are fine cuisine, even if they do taste good. In my case even for "snapshooting" I always have at least something like a D40 with me because there have been many times that what looked to be like a "snapshooting" environment turned out to be one where I could get some really nice prints, & I was happy to not have had nothing but a point & shoot or a camera-phone around at the time.

In earlier days my good camera was a Nikon D50 & I'd use something like a Sony Cybershot DSC-W1 for "fun-casual" stuff, but no longer. Some use micro 4/3rds for that "always with you" scenario. Me: I'd NEVER consider a smartphone worthy of that sort of thing.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

'Don't for a minute think that using a smartphone for taking photos is "photography".'

That's an outdated conception. Every day, I see a lot of great pictures taken with smartphones. And loads of very bad/boring photos taken with dSLRs or other fancy cameras. Whether something is "photography" or not, has nothing to do with gear.

3 upvotes

It is true that there are sorry photos taken with good cameras, and good photos taken with sorry cameras. However, the good photos would've been better had a good camera been used, & while you do have the draw the line somewhere (should one have to tote an 8x10 view camera because, after all, it has higher resolution than even a Nikon D3x), nonetheless I think you have to meet a certain minimum if you want to be taken seriously as a photographer. There's a reason people who wish to at least ATTEMPT to have some skill at this use an SLR or a mirrorless. Even a 6mp Nikon D40 will blow away any smartphone.

Anyone worth their beans doesn't DARE use an iPhone for "photography" purposes (vs, say, for showing the guy at the hardware store where your leak is). They use an SLR & maybe a mirrorless for "always with you" purposes. Anyone using an iPhone for "photography" is a fraud, as far as I'm concerned. I wouldn't trust them to photograph a pile of doo-doo in the backyard.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Please. Good pictures are not about pixels. Or sensor sizes. Or fast lenses.

Good pictures are about content. Creativity. Interpretation. Maybe a touch of imperfection, to add some "soul" to the image.

In the past 30 years I have used all kinds of tools, from pro film SLRSs (Nikon F3) to basic 3mp phones. And I can honestly say that I shot some of my favorite photos (I would say even best photos) with a cameraphone. Probably because the technical limitations forced me to be even more creative.

So. Proud to be a "fraud", I guess.

3 upvotes

Come on then everyone, let's throw away P&S and buy some "serious equipment". You can't be really called a photographer if you don't have one...
Except... wait, I don't want to be a photographer. I may just want to shoot some nice photos. With a pinhole camera. Or a P&S.
There are beautiful P&S and cellphone photos out there. So please use the equipment you have, even if it's 1MP with f12. As long as it's "writing with light", suits you, and moves you and others.

2 upvotes

Actually {Michelle Kappa} that sounds fine. Not everyone wants to be a photographer, not everyone can make the connection that f/11 is smaller than f/4, what depth-of-field is, why ISO 1600 allows a faster shutter speed but also more noise etc. They just want photos that, even if they don't match what a pro or enthusiast can do, nonetheless look respectable. It's the same as how I make no pretensions towards being a chef, but I would like DECENT food without having to spend all day in the kitchen or learning advanced techniques.

That's fine. I'm just saying people who DO fancy themselves photographers (whether pro or "hobbyist") and have used SLRs or mirrorless, it's an insult to suggest that a camera-phone is every bit as "legitimate" of a tool for that sort of pursuit. I don't care who won what award for their iPhone or Nexus S photo, I will never believe that a camera-phone is worthy of THAT sort of thing.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Magnum photographer Alex Majoli used a stupid 4mp Olympus point and shoot for his award winning war photography (published in magazines like Vanity Fair and Newsweek). Dutch top fashion photographer Carli Hermès shot the album cover of DJ Armin van Buuren with a stupid LG phone. Much praised international photojournalist Zoriah bought a stupid point & shoot for $70 on eBay, to do a documentary series in Africa. Fashion photographer Ben Watts created his own stupid iPhone Hipstamatic app to shoot swimsuit models.

For real photographers, a camera is just a tool. They can get great pictures with any camera.

4 upvotes

Totally agree with rbrt. partly with larry: the fact is that any tool can be used in a professional way, as long as one knows how to to use it properly.
Take music, for instance: of course recording in a professional studio, with professional instruments can help one have professional sound, but quality is a whole different aspect.
Combine both professional tools and inspiring stories and you may have works of art - or total rubbish. But even using only technique (which encompasses emotion), as well, you may have beauty. That's why the article is called "Digital lo fi photography": that is what it delivers, no more and no less.
In my opinion, intention and intent, and consequent artistic expression, come first and above tools, not vice-versa.

0 upvotes

camera phones and low tech digital may have managed to win awards however the are the exception not the rule. What DSLR do bring is a technical overhead with a large number of elements which can be adjusted and are physically imposing which can get in the way of taking the image. Which is why simple low tech camera for some have a place

0 upvotes

I would like to see a forum dedicated to crap photography.

At least all my pictures will be there.

2 upvotes

I hear ya.

0 upvotes

i would like to see a new forum dedicated to lo-fi photography.

1 upvote

what's the best desktop software for applying "canned" art filters (in post process)?

0 upvotes

I love it! More people are taking pictures than ever and the most popular camera in the world... the iPhone! As long as people are having fun and being creative while capturing images of their family, friends and pets then I think it's cool.

2 upvotes

Terms such as "retro", "ethereal" and "lo-fi" are used to describe the results from Holgas and defective or disintegrating film photographs. Terms like "rubbish" or "abysmal" are equally applicable.
Film photographers have been able to obtain excellent results for about 150 years and would only have shown results like the ones shown here as an example of what happens when things go wrong.
I have slides taken over 30 years ago and they rarely look as bad as the results on show in the article. Even when they have undergone some colour shift it can be easily be corrected digitally after scanning.
When Ansel Adams or Irving Penn were working I'm sure they had a pretty clear idea of how the end result would turn out. That's what happens when you know what you're doing.

1 upvote

Wow, isn't someone looking down their nose at the an alternate, and artistic, approach to photography. You couldn't be more wrong.
Honestly, very snobbish and narrow minded comment. None the less, enjoy your tact sharp pictures of whatever bland topic matter that motivates you but makes others simply yawn.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

5 upvotes

agreed (with hdart)

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I agree (with MP Burke).

Although I enjoy using my Holga and Diana once in a while, a lot of drastic plastic holgaesque photos are pretty poor. But, really, the emphasis is on having fun and not taking yourself too serious. Lets have some fun!

0 upvotes

Obviously we are not all Ansel Adams. This is a way to have fun, that's all.

3 upvotes

Well said Jay.

1 upvote

The unpredictable character of film is a myth. With fresh film and a regular camera (i.e. not a toy camera) you will always know what you'll get. Yes, the contribution of the medium is greater, as each film has its own palette or tonalities, and each BW developer has a specific effect but but that should not be equated with randomness.

What I don't get is why some people choose the copy, when they can have the real thing on the cheap.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

1 upvote

How about Jam-cam? I played with it for a years. There is also a site where you can see real toy photos.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Hi can you give me some advice how do recreat this looks with a Windows PC?
as PS Plugin, whatever
thanks Nic

0 upvotes

Nic,
Pixlr-o-matic has a pc version and a Chrome app that does the exact same thing. I tried both the Android app and the chrome app and I have to say it has great quality and good choice of filters, effects and framing, so the combinations are really a lot.

1 upvote

One of the following segments of this article will illustrate some of the processes of creating similar effects in Photoshop.

1 upvote

Kelcey, pls remind the readers the old ladies of Photoshop should not use it for their passport photos -- unless they want to be frisked.

0 upvotes

No chance. PC and Android users are deep in enemy territory here.

0 upvotes

OK thanks guys for the answers

0 upvotes

It's only 'Part 1' ladies and gents....why don't you give these guys a break!

0 upvotes

it is strange there is no apps for Nokia N8. It has the best camera

0 upvotes

nokia doesn't really attract app developers.

1 upvote

I like the photo app reviews here on dpreview. I agree with some others here that there's too much emphasis on the Iphone apps. To do these reviews right they have to show a fair amount of apps for all Smartphone platforms.
Including Windows Phone (7.5 Mango). I tested the sublime Nokia Lumia 800 (8MP and Carl Zeiss Tessar lens) and kept it!

Photo app TIP For Windows Phone 7: Pictures Lab 4.0 (enhance photo's, filters, lo-fi filters, borders etc).

1 upvote

Another vote here for Vignette. It works great and the developers are very, very responsive about their app. It is always on all of my devices.

1 upvote

Any of these available for Blackberry (OK - not a popular camera, but a very popular phone!) or for the Nokia N8 (best camera phone produced?)

0 upvotes

The best apps are: Vignette and Retro Camera Plus.

0 upvotes

Great. Any chance of an actual camera or lense review? Remember them back in the days...?

3 upvotes

So true. I like some of the articles and the variety, but lets get back to some hardware reviews that put DP on the map. Then again, not a lot hardware of the past few. Would like to see reviews started on some of the SLR Video peripherals.

0 upvotes

Smith is an dpreview writer?

Actually I'm learning a lot from all these new posts, about different softwares, photogs, so on. I hope dpreview can continue on with this while satisfying needs of traditional dpreview visitors.

1 upvote

Just ignore articles such as this one. Then you will have dpreview exactly as it was back in the days.

0 upvotes

IF YOU WANT THIS LOOK, JUST SHOOT FILM! FFS!!

2 upvotes

Calm, calm... :)

3 upvotes

not getting the whole FFS thing but you needn't clarify. i get that you are dismmissive of other's interest in exploring an artistic aspect of photography.

3 upvotes

Almost only iOS? Why Android apps are so deliberately being alienated?
What about Vignette or Camera 360 for Android?
I guess it depends on Apple's paycheque, right?
What a shame!
I hope I am wrong and that some corrections with a more balanced article will be made on Part 2!!!!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

7 upvotes

Hey Nicola, Android will be covered in more depth in future articles.

0 upvotes

Then they should really say that this is an iOS article only and an Android one is coming then. The fact that Android is mentioned in one of the apps and no mention that this is actually an iOS app article leaves one to believe that this is shilling to Apple.

4 upvotes

I agree, so many times Android is left behind because people are SO enamored with the iPhone.

0 upvotes

As of yesterday the iPhone and iPad cannot be sold in Germany. Motorola is prevailing in its patent rights fight and Motorola is not the only one. (This contest is not about imaging but about voice transmission technology.)
If it goes against Apple the whole European market would get affected even though the Europe's infringement laws are milder compared to the US. Editorially speaking, its okay to be aggressive but don't get arrogant if you get caught.
I own but one Apple product (the original iPhone) -- and use it daily -- but I know my next phone is 5" Android. The iPhone used to lock up periodically until I started rebooting it after every charge. Okay, maybe a good Android phone's camera would have me retire the iPhone.

0 upvotes

I still miss my Commodore Amiga. The world became a really dark place when I sold it in 1994.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

You can't compare the original iPhone with the current iPhone. My gal switched from an iPhone to a seemingly capable HTC Thunderbolt. She can't wait for the new iPhone 5 ... the Thunderbolt ended up being frustrating to use

0 upvotes

don't forget blackberry, palm, nokia, and windows mobile.

0 upvotes

I have seen such images prominent, & I'm sure whether I like them or not. You see this a lot in portraits, as an 87 year old pro photographer said to me recently (he's still shooting & highly in demand by the way), he finds the whole thing "faddish and gimmicky," as if a quality portrait isn't good enough anymore. I tend to agree with him somewhat, although I admit I have been applying such "jazz" to people photos I've taken lately.

And yes, more Apple idolatry. Ugh. Further, I DON'T CARE that the iPhone 4S it the most popular "camera" on Flickr, it isn't a real camera, period. McDonald's may be the most popular fast food establishment in the world, but I wouldn't expect a site or magazine devoted to chefs aspiring to fine cuisine to talk about the golden arches & justify it based on their popularity. If the "lo-fi" look is something to experiment with, though, why not an article on how to do this with your d-SLR images at the PC? That would be FAR more appropriate for here.

7 upvotes

This is just the first article of a series. We will be covering Photoshop techniques as well.

0 upvotes

How about Lightroom?

0 upvotes

No. How about Gimp (it's many plug-ins, and even ufraw, for Raw dev). The Gimp is all over this (Effects, and including several auto, instant, and lomo treatments.) Yet alas, it's not only open, and just better, but it also just happens to be free. Let see how much consideration it gets, shall we?

0 upvotes

I agree with the total BS around entire the notion of " lo-fi" photography. Including most if not the entire range of camera phones. I currently own a camera phone for the business of doing certain real business. THAT'S IT

0 upvotes

With an EyeFi card and direct transfer mode you can play with any of these apps on photos you just took with a "real camera". Unless you're so pro that your DSLR is CF-only ;)

1 upvote

The best camera is the one you have with you ... and you always have your cell phone with you, so if you care about photography you'll want the smart phone with the best camera. For me that's the iPhone 4s

1 upvote

The best tripod is the one you have with you: any table/counter.
The best food is the one in your house: Peanut Butter sandwiches.
The best friend is the one next to you:go ahead, talk to some random stranger about your cheating wife.

Let's reverse this, shall we?

The worst camera is the one not on you. The worst food is the one you don't have.
The worst pet is the one that's gone and passed over the rainbow bridge.
The worst mother is the one that kicked you out of the house and forced you to grow up, because she's not with you. Thanks, Mom.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

another great mind heard from...My only response is, deal with it because, like HDR, it isn't going away.

By Camera Nuts Jim (Dec 13, 2011 at 02:15:25 GMT)
I agree with the total BS around entire the notion of " lo-fi" photography. Including most if not the entire range of camera phones. I currently own a camera phone for the business of doing certain real business. THAT'S IT

1 upvote

"The best camera is the one you have with you?" Yes, I agree, and REAL photographers will ALWAYS have an SLR with them, or if not, something like an Olympus PEN or Sony NEX. Camera phones are for soccer moms & dads and teens showing their drunk college exploits.

0 upvotes

While not specifically a lo-fi photo app, I've been quite impressed with Luminance and use it in preference to Snapseed when I don't need localized adjustments. This article sells it short.

Things to like about Luminance:
--keep a library of your edited photos so you can revisit adjustments later and copy edits from one photo to another;
--edit history!
--filters apply as sets of regular edits, so you can adjust each aspect of the filter effect independently;
--each adjustment in the edit stack can be turned on or off individually.

It's the closest editing experience to Lightroom that I've found for the iPhone.

0 upvotes

The iPhone 4s is the latest model - was that used for testing (not the iPhone 4 as listed in the article)?

0 upvotes

we didn't test anything

0 upvotes

"It's all Apple s*, NOT FAIR! iOS is for TOOLZ. HTC Evo rulez m*f*!!!!"

...and then Jr. kept reading the article and discovered this:

"Almost all of the most popular photo sharing apps have some kind of 'lo-fi' or toy camera filter available, but for the purposes of this article we have chosen to focus on some of the most representative apps in the 'lo-fi' genre for Apple's iOS."

Not to worry, his mother heard him crying, went to his room and pet his head.

0 upvotes

I Use Retrocam on Android. Also free. It's got six cams. Great fun.

https://market.android.com/details?id=org.urbian.android.tools.vintagecam

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I for one am so tired of all these 'photgraphic tools' that give inexperienced photographers the idea that such gadgets are all they need to take catchy photographs. Instead of finding out for themselves about composition, exposure, dof, color rendition,... they just point-and-shoot, press the button for one filter, and are happy with the results-that-always-look-the-same.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

2 upvotes

You're tired of those tools why? Is someone forcing you to use them? Most of the amateur snapshooters out there have absolutely no interest in learning more about exposure, dof, etc. They just point and shoot. Only now, their iPhones let them apply interesting effects with the push of a button. These folks have no clue what app to use to create such effects on their computers; but now it's so easy that they can't resist. Before digital photography, most of these people were wasting good money on film and processing only to end up with prints that only a mother could love. For them, things have improved greatly. What's the harm? If you don't like it, ignore it.

5 upvotes

Congrats, Greg, you just described the typical Polaroid user. You may find this hard to accept, but not everyone shares your level of interest in photography - they just want to take pretty pictures without having to get engineering degrees. Try 'live and let live' someday, your blood pressure will be a lot lower.

0 upvotes

Well while I understand what (AD in KC) and (Faintandfuzzy) are saying somewhat, I agree somewhat with (greg VdB). I ESPECIALLY find the frequent coverage of such tools in a site like DPreview suspect. Would a chef want McDonald's and Hamburger Helper and microwave Hungry Man Dinners talked about so much in a magazine/site devoted to fine chef cooking? Who cares how much such products sell, they have no place in a fine cuisine site/magazine.

Also, in like manner, it's totally normal that (say) a chef would look at disdain at advertisements for (say) Hamburger Helper or Hungry Man Dinners promising "you don't have to be a chef & go through all of that trouble, just throw this in the zapper for 90 seconds." It's an insult to what (s)he does to hear such nonsense, even though obviously not all of us want to have to be a chef to get a half-decent meal.

As for Polaroids? Puh-leze. They make the most God-awful photographs. They're an affront even to snapshots, much less REAL photography.

1 upvote

I admit that you both have a point that photography is not something that everybody is interested in as a hobby, and if people enjoy using these apps, by all means, let them enjoy it. However, I cannot like such apps because they destroy creativity rather than inspire it. In contrast to many of these apps, Polaroids did not make every picture get the same look, they actually made photography available to the masses. These days, the latter is achieved by built-in cameras in mobile phones and a terrific choice of point-and-shoot cameras, not by the apps.

edit: thanks larrytusaz, you expressed it much better than I did

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Greg, the reasons you can even feel like that is because you are neither good or bad. Too ashamed to admit how bad you are and to o honest to face that you are not good at all.

I took about 500 pics a week on my iphone (most of them burst of course - the nature of photographing children) and upload about 10 of them on facebook so family can see. I used to do them all in photoshop but time made it impossible to keep doing so.

I find these tools priceless and I adore those with sliders for further adjustment rather that take it or leave it presets. Photogene is simply the best and I use instagram and Luminance on daily basis.

Your comment is an insult to a lot of people

1 upvote

Well, starting with the basics: not all of the filters produce the same output. Limiting discussion to even just one of the apps (instagram), Walden will get you a different look than Inkwell. There are also quite a bit of folks on instagram who don't use the filters to make it "retro". I take DSLR shots, crop them to a square, and post to friends and family. It's a different composition than the original shot and I like the challenge. It's entertaining and enjoyable; I photograph for fun and enjoyment. People having fun with cameras causes photography to be popular. That means photographers get better treatment (hopefully). It's a good thing.

IG is supposed to be coming to Android at which should quell some of the complaints here.

Edit: I actually think DPreview posts stuff like this to get all of the traffic from folks throwing flames on both sides. I'm a cynic though. YMMV.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Too ashamed to admit how bad I am and too honest to face that I'm not good at all? Thanks for the psychoanalysis - otherwise would have cost me good money...

0 upvotes

@jquagga: that's the main problem of the internet. Put us together in a bar and even though we come from different point-of-views, after only one pint we can come to understand and appreciate what the other person means. On the internet however, opinions are usually polarized and interpreted as 'before' versus 'against'.

In this particular case, what I wanted to say is that I find it a pity that, in my perception (from what I see amongst my friends on facebook), apps like the ones described shift people's perception of what makes a picture good. Style over substance... Of course this is just my personal opinion based on a small sampling pool, and reflecting the perspective of a photography enthusiast. Btw, I am surprized that some people seem to value my opinion enough to feel sincerely offended by it... or is that just another bad side effect of the internet :)

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Well {king_author}, if that is the type of photo-taking you like to do, that is certainly your prerogative & nothing to be ashamed of. But DPreview has always been, to me anyway (& others I'd dare to venture), about REAL photography, and using an iPhone to take kiddy clicks for Facebook is nothing of the sort.

And again, that's nothing to be ashamed of. I cook almost daily for our family, they are meals that I find to taste really good. I use microwave "cook a whole meal in a bag" Stouffer's & the like for that, & make no apology for preferring that to spending half my life in the kitchen making meals from scratch.

BUT, I have no problem admitting that such isn't fine cuisine cooking that a real CHEF does, nor do I call chefs who look at disdain at such things "elitists" or "snobs" as others do, nor do I expect sites or magazines on the subject to feature such "meals in a bag" shortcuts either. The same should apply here.

0 upvotes

I am blantly attacking OP. I understand and respect your point of view.

Let's revisit his post:
- I for one am so tired....
- inexperienced photographers
- such gadgets are all they need to take catchy photographs
- they just point-and-shoot
- press the button for one filter
- happy with the results-that-always-look-the-same.

WTF? Sometimes I earn money doing Photography. No, Not with my iPhone. With my 550D and Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I am sorry if that specs insult you or anyone for not owning a "REAL PHOTOGRAPHERS" equipment, but I always tried to make the best with what I got.

Find any definition of Photography, no where you will find a certain equipment or price range to be qualified to be called photography.

I am blantly attacking OP insult words

1 upvote

Well {king_arthur}, you can read it here: using an iPhone to take clicks is NOT photography, not SERIOUS photography anyway. And that's okay, I've in the past been known to use a point & shoot in situations where I figured the shooting environment wasn't going to lend itself to quality prints & didn't want to risk the d-SLR getting lost or left behind in that situation. That's "snapshooting," & that's fine, but it's not photography by MY definition anyway.

0 upvotes

I don't really agree with that. I'm a head chef; I work in quite a good restaurant. Ok, I'm sad when I see people eating Fast food, but hey! Everybody is different, everybody need something that suits him well, that answer to want they are asking at that exact moment.

Like photography, I started with films 20 years ago, I have a digital one now, but with my camera phone, I shoot with Vignette because I love this old feeling.

And if people like it, that's great.

Not everybody is a pro or a big "connoisseur" ...

Some people should accept that the majority of people want something that work well, that suits their demands, and that are simple to use.

I don't like these kind of guys, who are passionate, who are pros, who are specialist, and who don't see that most of people are different and want something different. We are not all geeks.

:-)))

1 upvote

@king_arthur: You're making assumptions on the OP. He never mentioned anything about what gear constitutes as "real photography". You make money with your 550D. That is a (D)SLR. It may not be a 5DmkII, but it gets the job done and clients will take you seriously. Next time you get a gig, walk in with just your iPhone and see if the client pays you.

You are blatantly taking offense to some fabricated attack the OP didn't make. All photographers have to start somewhere...but an iPhone and it's apps aren't going to bring home much bacon.

0 upvotes

{YannickChauvet} I don't disagree with you actually. Other people want fast food, fine. If they say fast food is good enough for them, or that yes what you do is better but they don't have the inclination to go through all that everytime they eat & fast food is acceptable in its place or whatever, that is fine.

However, it would be an insult if they dared suggest that fast food was every bit as good as what you labor to do, as if all you do is for naught. In like manner, it would be ridiculous for a site or magazine that is supposed to be oriented towards chef topics & fine cuisine/cooking to make a big deal about fast food & its uses when it's supposed to be a site/magazine about chef-fine cuisine type of things.

0 upvotes

@HeezDeadJim : Assumption?

Let's revisit his post:
- I for one am so tired....
- inexperienced photographers. WTF???
- such gadgets are all they need to take catchy photographs. WTF???
- they just point-and-shoot. WTF???
- press the button for one filter. WTF???
- happy with the results-that-always-look-the-same. WTF????

THIS is what i am attacking.

1 upvote

yet another humor-laden response! Dude, this brings to mind the naysayers that attacked the arrival of the calculator and its negative implications to understanding of the processes leading to the results.
If these 'photographic tools' can improve photography without the need to know the underpinnings of image capture, then that's a good thing and people can focus on creativity while 'purists' stay slaves to the journey rather than the destination. Enjoy it but don't be threatened like you apparently are.

2 upvotes

@ larrytusaz

It depends. Fast food is not only Mc Donalds, Burger King, KFC or Kebab.

If a magazine post a full article about street food in Asia (which can be assimilated to Fast Food here), that would be great.

I French magazine (about food), and last month was something about fast food in NY, and it was great to read that because it shows that there are not only burgers in America, but other kind of Fast/Street Food.

They never said it was better than "Normal" food, they just said it existed and it was great for what it was.

Like here, these pieces of softwares exist, we have to know that, we can't ignore them. If we don't use them, if we don't care, it's all right but some people might find them useful. I do. For fun. For some projects I have in mind.

Even when I take pictures with my real camera I post work on them with Lightroom depending on my project. I don't want to travel with lots of cameras & films because we have to be true to the spirit of photography.

1 upvote

This is the dumbest thing! Spend thousands on the latest digital camera, computer, programs, etc, etc and then use it all to reproduce the look of film! Why not write a program that makes your phone sound line tin cans and string? Or makes your HD flatscreen TV look like hand-shadows on a cave wall?

2 upvotes

Because some people like the look of film, and don't own a film camera. Pretty easy to understand.

4 upvotes

Faintandfuzzy, so buy a friggen film camera then? ebay is your friend. May I recommend a Pentax K1000?

1 upvote

How do you put film in an iPhone? <scratch head>

0 upvotes

Actually, most aren't spending thousands. Some of these kids are given a phone (so free). For the ones that do buy the iPhone, that's only $99-$299. They may not even have a computer/laptop of their own (family computer, again free). They may not have CS5 to fake the film look. Just $.99 for the app...that's no where near thousands.

Now that we have digital cinema cameras that can do 60fps, I expect 60fps (or 120fps for proper 3D) for smooth action and motion in movies. So why are they still making movies in the lowly 24fps to mimic that "film" look? Let's go on a tirade about that!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

it is simply amazing to see the number of people here gettin' their oversized panties in a wad over what some others are interested in that they perceive as assaulting their beloved philosophy of what photography ought to be.
I gotta resurrect my photo blog so I can rant endlessly on the posts I read on these forums. Unbelievable, but thanks for providing some good material and the inspiration to write again...right after some lo-fi shots.

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

I have AT&T Wireless. My phone does sound like tin cans and a string.

0 upvotes

it was quite kind of them to include an, shhhhh "an android app"...
Title should have said, "Hot Camera Effect Apps for your iTool"

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting

1 upvote

oh no you di-int.

0 upvotes

>>Instagram also includes a simulated tilt-shift effect that can be adjusted to add an artificially increased depth of field

That should reead "artificially decreased depth of field".

2 upvotes

Adobe is for old ladies.

The views and opinions expressed in this reply are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by any other person on this planet.

0 upvotes

Almost all the apps featured on this website are for iOs. Coincidence DPReview?

2 upvotes

Considering Android now has more users than the iPhone, I'd like to see more focus on the Android apps.

1 upvote

No, not a coincidence. DPReview is evidently concentrating on the best and most popular smartphone camera, which is clearly the iPhone, regardless of what some will claim. Android is so second-best that it's third-rate. :-)

0 upvotes

It was certainly nice of you to do this round-up of apps. However, the article sends a wrong message. It reads "with a right choice of software anything will look vintage". Not true. First you have to style the shot, make it look vintage from within, and then apply finishing touches.
Using your own examples, just to be material, let's look at the dog picture. No amount of vignetting and "creative" frames will make it look vintage.

3 upvotes

I have "Retro Camera Plus" ($2.99) on my Galaxy 7 Android tablet... LOVE IT! There's a free version of it as well.... "Retro Camera".
Wes

0 upvotes

CameraZoom fx on android as well.

0 upvotes

You forgot to mention FX Photo Studio Pro, which has lot's of LoFi filters that can be masked and superimposed on each other. I use it quite a lot, but there are limitations and a lot of the filters are useless.

1 upvote

This is too much iOS love, you left out Paper Camera, an awesome Android app that makes lots of awesome looking images.

7 upvotes

i missed the part where we said this was a complete roundup of the entire market and not an overview...

5 upvotes

Would have been nice to se a Blackberry App....they are about 20% of the market.

1 upvote

I, in turn, missed the part where jjmiphoto implied that this was a complete roundup, rather than simply suggesting that your overview should contain more of a balance between apps for iOS and those for other operating systems.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

Hi Simon,
JJ and odoketa pointed out the very strong focus on iOS. JJ merely suggested one Android app.
I think a more specific reply from dpreview could have explained why you looked at 10 iOS apps and 1 Android app - surely you had a good reason for that imbalance. Is it market share? I don't know, I don't have a "smart"phone. Maybe titling this "an overview of lo-fi iPhone apps" would have created fewer false hopes.

4 upvotes

We have to read to the end of the intro to learn that this is for iPhonies. Putting that in the title would have better served readers.

5 upvotes

Simon.... look on the bright side. Maybe if they start accusing you of "favoring Apple" they will stop accusing you of "favoring Canon and Nikon?"

0 upvotes

it's the first part of an article looking at the emergence of a fashion for retro-styled lo-fi photography, it's not billed as a roundup of apps, nor is it a buying guide. The person that wrote it uses an iphone, that's all. If he had a galaxy he would've mentioned a lot of android apps. The apps were simply used to illustrate the tools that have sprung up to feed this trend, nothing more. I'll find someone with an android phone to write a companion piece. Then we'll all be happy. Except that Blackberry guy.

0 upvotes

People do all kinds of stuff with iPhones. Here's a story I saw on the Harley-Davidon Facebook page about a guy shooting a travel story with his iPhone and Camera+. Pretty cool, I think.

http://www.ultimatemotorcycling.com/magazines/january-2012.html

In the Contents menu the story is called Phoning It In On US Route 6. I couldn't find a direct link.

0 upvotes

PhotoForge2 is, imho, the most underrated ios photo app

It replaces histogram, Photoshop for iphone, and many other apps,
i believe its the only app that actually has LAYERS! yes, layers with MASKING!!
it has an in-app purchase with lomo filters - which i found to be the best

0 upvotes

Agreed. Love PhotoForge!

0 upvotes

That was a whole lot of iOS love! I'm glad there's one Android app!

6 upvotes

...and I get the impression that it's probably only because that app is available on both formats. Sigh. I also find this comment from a member of the dpreview team somewhat unprofessional in tone;
'i missed the part where we said this was a complete roundup of the entire market and not an overview...' (see above)

for me it could potentially aggravate a disgruntled Android (or other smartphone operating system) reader rather than address some of the above observations.

1 upvote

There´s also an amazing app called iMstupid for those anchored in past times. Those interested won´t be desappointed.

1 upvote

and it continues...
By G del Treve (Dec 13, 2011 at 11:50:42 GMT)
"The new dopiness.... Why learn to master art if every nitwit with a smartphone is hailed as an artist."

Looks like we have another person feeling threatened by what they don't know and the reality that the creativity of others cannot be controlled by them.

2 upvotes

Don't know where you got the fear from but that's okay, not all people shrink from action when feeling threatened.
I don't see how an article about lo-fi apps...which incidentally you read, devolves into superficiality. If you feel disappointment because many here have differing opinions than yourself, then the choice is yours to be open minded or share reasons that advance your take.
Lo-fi being recreated with the aid of software is another tool for processing and has nothing to do with people liking or using it being 'nit wits'. Maybe you could post your world class photographic work on here for some scrutiny?

3 upvotes

I am a reformed iPhone 4 (former) owner and proud of it. The latest Droids camera are superior at this point.

0 upvotes

You're not mastering art with a professional camera, you may master craft, but even that is not a given.

0 upvotes

the hipstamatic with iphone 4S is saving 2448x2448 px files (6mb)

0 upvotes

Total comments: 131