wansai

I'm sorry but were they paid to do this? Because what they were supposedly attempting is pretty redundant and despite them trying to explain it, it still sounds damn redundant.

I know the space...

I'm sorry but were they paid to do this? Because what they were supposedly attempting is pretty redundant and despite them trying to explain it, it still sounds damn redundant.

I know the space...

I'm sorry but were they paid to do this? Because what they were supposedly attempting is pretty redundant and despite them trying to explain it, it still sounds damn redundant.

I know the space...

really great photos he has in his website. I think it helps that he's in really good locations. Some of the shots are spectacular while some others are so poor in quality you can't help but notice...

it doesn't take RAW so you're pretty much stuck with Jpeg.

@ Daniel Berman
I don't hate mobile photography. I personally really like it. I'm a huge fan of instagram and I enjoy looking at photos being posted there daily. What I am doing though, is entering...

most people can't tell the difference between high quality photo or low quality photo. All they see is a photo.

For example, even to this day, people still show me pictures that are 300px small...

These look great as long as you only view them in the website column size. On a 1080 screen clicking through, the full res looks terrible; which is a shame.

It's a good thing too. Android as an OS is pretty poor as a phone OS. It requires expensive components to run properly and it eats through battery at a fast pace.

Look at the Samsung camera. Lots...

It's a good thing too. Android as an OS is pretty poor as a camera OS. It requires expensive components to run properly and it eats through battery at a fast pace.

Look at the Samsung camera. Lots...

Yeah CCTV never puts itself out there as "art" and the people behind CCTV would likely never come out and say they are artists or photographers.

The purpose and intent of the 2 are rather quite...

you call this innovation? This is a purely technical solution to not having to deal with people. It objectifies the subject and does not even stick around for a reaction to the photographer. you...

Google aren't photographing people. It's a by product of them taking a picture of a scene by purely technical means for purely technical reasons. They will often blur people's faces out.

Their...

it's drive by shooting. There is little "art" to it. This is all technical. He does not in any way interact with his subjects. He doesn't give them a chance to react or not react to him. At the...

this is my suspicion as well. people state before-hand that it's from a mobile phone and it suddenly "excuses" the poor quality.

It shouldn't, but people do and it does.

I really like his pro photos. This mobile photo is *alright* but his pro collection is stunning.

I think he means clients are willing to pay for social media led efforts through, say, instagram. So they send someone on assignment and while doing *real* photography, he's also taking social...

the MP doesn't determine the image quality. Only the sensor and lense combo do. MP can give you more detail but most uses don't require 24+ mp.

However, to say a mobile phone can take same quality...

getty licensed these for one reason only: Pictures of Stars sell.

Had these been ordinary people, no one would even bat an eye; as far as portraits go, they are quite unremarkable even by mobile...

these aren't even particularly good as far as portraits go. There are tons of better mobile photo portraits out on the net; why this got chosen was because the subjects are stars. Nothing more than...