Joined on Dec 31, 2011


Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5

Hi Walter, you DO understand that you can use Instagram with REAL PHOTOGRAPHS!? It is not COMPULSORY to use any of the available filters or borders. You can process an image from a PHASEONE IQ180 and share it with 80+mill users or an 800E, S2... M9 and a $10G Noctilux. Or a Ricoh GDR...
You use words like fast food, instant gratification, lack of personal creativity... well, you do not use the app, so how could you have a credible opinion?
-"but what you have to remember is that most people like instant gratification so Istagram appeals to them and their is nothing wrong with that,..."- have a look at your calendar, mine shows 2012 AD... the above is not only false, but hugely incorrect and insulting to "most" people :) Cheers!

Link | Posted on Sep 9, 2012 at 04:13 UTC as 2nd comment

On a safer ground, just so that there are no Name Calling!... Emily Carr painted on wove paper mounted on cardboard- the medium of expression- Her craft, Painting as an Art form, her importance in Canadian Art History has never been discussed, thought of, endlessly debated by virtual abuse of free speech in considerable disregard by exchanging "It" with the "criticism" of the medium she chose to paint on.
I feel sad, really for the 70 + poster here. How could your world be so empty, that you can express so much negativity ( hatred even ) and blatant exchange of subjects for something you never actually used?
It is regrettable that you are willing to draw wrong conclusions from articles published on unsubstantiated facts and misinformation.
Continues to puzzle me that a well seen image with a $10G Leica (35mm lens) is considered serious "photography", while a well executed image with an iPhone4 (33mm or so lens) Does NOT!!!.... ???

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2012 at 17:29 UTC as 5th comment | 1 reply

What really surprises me Dan, is how the way of sharing something could be so mixed up with what is being shared. Instagram is not "photography", so good app or bad, cheesy filters or not, it will not spell the end of Photography! as an Art form, because it is Not Photography!
It is an application used on "smartphones"! Photography in any of its numerous form have existed before this app. and will continue to thrive as we will switch to yet another form of public communication tool.
Hey Dan!? do you remember the printing press? It changed the way ideas were exchanged, not the actual expression of ideas. Though on this forum, some discretion should be exercised! 60 plus negative comments/replies are posted by members on this topic who never used the app, yet preach doom and gloom of photographic arts.
How do you confuse some very clever computer code with what it is used for? 80 + mill users understand, along with yours, nearly 70 comments here do not. ??? :) Where is the " = " ???

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2012 at 04:49 UTC as 12th comment | 1 reply

It is amusing to read some of the comments ripping photojournalists, magazine editors and the general public for capturing and sharing images made with cellphones. Arriving to some sweeping doom and gloom statements about "demise of photography" and such... or, some comment about the lack of content disguised by some APP filter. ??? There, for arguments sake, are those who have limited knowledge of the technical abilities of the iPhone4 for example and they trash it with all their might. Dismissing the fact that it is capable of incredible detail ( from a 5MP) file, it allows focus and exposer control along with very accurate WB. A "raw TIFF" !? The resulting 5x7" file is indistinguishable from an DSLR capture in a newspaper or a Magazine! That is just a technical fact. The content of course is up for interpretation. Instagram bashing with access to a very wide audience is not a matter of demise of photography but the debasing of Free Speach into miss informed opinion. Kate Bevan ???

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2012 at 18:30 UTC as 8th comment

It is clear from the two images that the Judge is/was blind. These people actually get payed to do this? Presumably, the defence lawyers actually knew what they were doing, which case why on Earth did they allow an admission and intent to copy as part of the defence????? If it was not for it's possible consequences, this would actually be very funny. You know, British humour :)

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2012 at 07:08 UTC as 30th comment | 1 reply
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5