Slideshow: Winners of the 10th Annual Mobile Photography Awards

Commercial entities often support these competitions. Maybe that’s the case here. I’m guessing, and didn’t take the time and effort to research it.

Mar 6, 2021*permalink

dw2001

These topics really trigger something in the to-old-to-adapt members here: "Darn, I desperately need to find an incredible argument to why this is bad photography. Preferably some technical aspect of the photos where surely my 10k gear would excel by a mile. Yeah, that I must do!"

Mar 5, 2021permalink

Strobist

Maybe everyone can win on this.

95% of the population being happy with mobile-snaps. (like back in the days with the Agfamatic 2000 pocket camera)

And then we have the 5% who takes photographs where reach and very fast eye-af is a must.

Probably will post-edit be a thing of the past when AI-aided post editing presets will surpass human by-hand effort to bring the best out of images.

What do not change is that it still takes skill to select the right framing, of the right subject, in the right moment.

If that would not be true, everybody that has ever owned a pen would have written a Pulitzer Price novel.

We, the humans should focus on our strenght, the human imagination, and leave the technical part to the computers, regardless of medium.

Mar 5, 2021*permalink

ecka84

"These topics really trigger something in the to-old-to-adapt members here" - Phones are very capable tools these days. But they can't replace proper photography gear. If you really think that 10k gear can't do anything better or more than phone snaps, then I feel sorry for you. Because you are missing so much.

Mar 6, 2021permalink

Chris5685

Nah mate, phone image quality is, and has been quite okay for a few years now. That's not my reason to lug around a DSLR, I prefer it because of the flexibility it offers over my smartphone. I can take the appropriate lens, set pretty much anything manually if I so desire, and it's lightning fast to operate when necessary. Okay, that, and the image quality too, but it's a lot less important today, when most people only take a glance of a terribly compressed photo on a small phone screen.

Mar 6, 2021permalink

ecka84

"the image quality too, but it's a lot less important today, when most people only take a glance of a terribly compressed photo on a small phone screen"
- Which has little to do with 10k gear and ultra-high-def photography. Why do people even bother to compare these things? They are different worlds. Why people buy 10k gear to shoot phone snaps? It's stupid. Why don't they buy 40"(ish) monitors to actually see their images in full glory and all the differences compared to phones or other camera systems? Well, I have the answer. It's laziness, ignorance, indifference, fanboyism and herd mentality.
When it comes to cars, taxi drivers don't know better just because they are professionals. Same way all the photography pros don't know better, despite that they can (and they do) preach stuff (half of which is BS) and teach other people to do the job (which isn't the goal).

Mar 7, 2021permalink

Chris5685

Just for the record I use a 40 inch 4k TV as a monitor, that's why I care about image quality of my own stuff.

Mar 7, 2021permalink

four under

So who do you consider "too old to adapt"? I don't shoot with a phone but I find several of these to be very compelling photographs.

Mar 7, 2021permalink

Cheapo Marx

" to-old-to-adapt "

Too young to spell?

Mar 8, 2021permalink

Nate Kong

Street photography winner is pure gold. Love it.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

four under

Yes absolutely. I wonder how long the photographer waited for that moment.

Mar 7, 2021permalink

Sue Anne Rush

Thank you.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

Neverlost99

Why do I get sucked I. And read the comments when they never change. Sad, burned out photographers must be like old actors that never made it.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

generationfourth

I feel your pain. I liked all the photos and was excited to check them out. A bunch of butt hurt 'photographers' gatekeeping photography because they blow all their money on gear yet and never realized that spec's/megapixels/more K's/AF/longest lenses don't actually make quality photographs- the photographer does. They do it with which ever tool they have, all the while balancing creativity with technical limitations. That is what makes photography interesting.

I had the realization that this isn't a photography site in a creative sense. It's an image quality site. "Image quality does not equal quality image". But sites like this and camera spec marketing have reversed this adage.

100% of the time I click the profile of the comment troll and they have no work associated with their profile, and if they do it's pretty bad- but hey they have really expensive gear to make up for it.

Mar 4, 2021*permalink

Malling

Generationf...

Your right that expensive equipment dos not equal a good composed picture, hopefully no one disagree with that. I use whatever tool I have at hand, being a smartphone or camera it doesn’t matter, often I use my phone to find the right composition/angle. Sure I own a fancy expensive camera with even more expensive lenses, but you won’t always have it at hand or use it every situation, other times I used a smaller well used m4/3 with a prime and I made some of my most intriguing photos on it...

It’s a tool, that said a better tool will always be a better option if you have the right skills to use it. You can still only do so much with a a basic tool, but sometimes the limitations leads to creativity to get something else of it that you otherwise would not have thought about. Smartphones definitely have their place and you can take pictures that otherwise would be a hassle or impossible to make

Mar 6, 2021permalink

generationfourth

Malling, Yes I shoot exclusively with m43 for that reason. I've taken mine on 20+ day through hikes off trail in the Sierras, up/down big wall climbs in Yosemite, international surf trips, snuck them into concerts/weddings, etc. Along the way I've run into the dreaded "spec photographer" who will patronize me about IQ, shallow DOF, low light capability arguments about their bigger sensor camera- to which I agree wholeheartedly to all their points and ask them where is their camera? It's at home, often a continent away, merely a shelf trophy.

I never understood discounting someones photographic efforts, especially good results, because you don't agree with the gear used. I'm also sure that the best photographers aren't the ones complaining in comment sections about IQ.

Mar 6, 2021permalink

The Point and Shoot Pro

@generationfourth. My screen name says it all! ha ha. It's not the gear, its the person behind the gear. Just because I prefer shooting point and shoot cameras does not make me any LESS of a photographer than some twatwaffle with a new FF flavor of the week. ;-)

I love the comment how hard is it to create an image that looks good on a compressed 5" screen? well, I am looking at them on my color corrected screens on my desk and they look GREAT. Better than lots I have seen from FF cameras because someone has no idea how to compose for light and composition. But hey I have 40mp FF I am a real photog....

Mar 8, 2021*permalink

Neverlost99

It is amazing what people post and are proud of. No idea of light, composition or interest.

Mar 8, 2021permalink

The Point and Shoot Pro

would you like to share examples? :-)

Mar 8, 2021*permalink

Ingo70

I thought with this new technique there would be new compositions possible or maybe just a different view on the subjects.
But this is what photographers have done for years with their DSLRs. But now, hey, its all easier to do. Does this qualifies the photos for a prize?
Technically, you can clearly see the limitations of a smartphone. Look at the face of the fisher in the third-place-winner "Beach fishing". Or the first-place-winner Black and white "horse play" with texture in the snow. Or even the first-place-winner Darkness/Noir. A lot of suspense and a great mood to find here, but quite artificial and looking like Hipstamatic.
Maybe next time take a camera? They also are quite small and light to carry if you take the right one. The pictures may have a much more appealing.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

piccolbo

By artificial looking do you mean "soft and over-sharpened"? Whatever your observations, do you need to zoom in or are you looking at the image fullscreen? (not criticizing here, I mix smartphone and camera shots so I am interested in you elaborating on your point).

Mar 3, 2021permalink

In full screen mode some of the pictures here have horrible image quality.
I like though the ones that captured the moment, the story - nevermind IQ.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

Ingo70

@ piccolbo
First let me excuse for my bad grammar, English isn't my nativ language.
My observations are not about pixelpeeping. It is more about the texture, the tonality (the richness of the colors but also about the colorcontrast) and the dynamic range. You really need not zoom in or go fullscreen. Just look at the face of the fisher in the third-place-winner "Beach fishing". You will see it has low contrast and details in it. This ist no way a winning photo to me. It looks gray without any natural texture in it. If you compare this to a photo from a Leica Monochrom, even of a photographer like Sobol with his extremely high contrast prints, there is a richness in a face like this fisher. Let me explain this way. At a proper Photo you could see the hard life in any detail of his face, the wrinkles, the skin in the harsh conditions of the salt sea.
Here, you can barely see the fisher wears glasses.
See https://lfi-online.de/ceemes/de/galerie/sl-mastershots/Ladi-1065372.html (Leica SL)

Mar 4, 2021*permalink

piccolbo

Thanks, that helps.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

Meh, not bad photos but not worthy of awards, regardless of the gear used.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

KoolKool

Can you do better?

Mar 3, 2021permalink

Have and will continue to, just can't see why I'd use a phone if I had a real camera.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

ewelch

No he/she can't or they wouldn't have said such a thing.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

I like to run tests, sometimes these experiments involve fooling people into thinking I've used a particular lens or camera by telling them I have, alluding to it, or displaying incorrect exif data.

I've convinced photographers that my camera phone images are expensive camera images and the other way around. I could easily set you up and eventually, when you're deep enough and have enough rope, reel it in, but I won't.

These images aren't spectacular, but you don't need me to convince you, just look at the billions of great images on the web.

If you truly believe my point about these images is invalid, you've got a long, long way to go in photography -or a bung eye.
Something's wrong either way.

Read my original post again, it's neither incorrect or an exaggeration.

Most of my posts are to test photographers and I know exactly how they'll react most of the time, I know what emotive posts will come next, why, what type of person is posting etc.

Mar 3, 2021*permalink

KoolKool

well, you know, most time, we are just simple folks, contests like that we love, we in, we expect luck in our life :) i think those photos arent that special, but they got beautiful lucks!

Mar 4, 2021*permalink

Glad to see some people agree.

Some of them are also obviously much better images because the processing is well done.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

ibender

Really? This is how you spend your time? Modifying EXIF data to con strangers on the internet and, what, exactly? Show them the light about THE TRUTH OF LENSES or something? You're like the world's lamest cartoon villain.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

It's a few hundred people that do this, specifically for this niche research and it shows how lame you are, sir, given we are keen on the buying habits of what appears to be the majority of photography enthusiasts, collectively spending $500m+ p/a on gear they don't need.

You're probably one of the consumers that has convinced themselves a purchase is warranted, usually based on flimsy prerequisites or by marketing gimmicks.

I'm not saying you're wrong to purchase photo gear, I'm saying it's lame to question me about research into the buying habits that contribute to, sometimes almost $1bn p/a in revenue.

Again, you're going to be hard pressed with me, I'm not new at this.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

When bought by amateurs (=/=bad photographer) it's mainly because:
GAS
Inability to take a shot with the gear one has in "specialized" situations

usually the later is invoked to cover the former :)

Mar 4, 2021permalink

Its great when it gets people talking about GAS and such :)

Usually, to change exif we just write over an existing image taken with another camera/lens i.e. open image with exif data you want applied, paste image and save. Original exif stays attached.

The point is it's interesting, to some, how products and a hobby affects purchasing decisions and this site is one of the many that really encourages GAS.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

Garyster

@Melindra: I thought most of these were *fantastic* especially using mobile devices.

But what do I know... only been a full time wedding photographer for almost 2 decades - and among the top 10 busiest in the state.

I wish to be as special as you one day.

Mar 6, 2021*permalink

Malling

Melindra

Your point is?

Sure those photos have been replicated and made 1000 times before. But it’s also difficult not too, most things photography has already been taken, there aren’t that many new perspectives one can take that has not already been made, there aren’t many subject that has not been reported in one way or another (except for photojournalism and Drone photos perhaps). I have hardly come across a picture the last decade that did not resembles something I haven’t seen before, have I seen better version of this awards absolutely yes... but it doesn’t change the fact that these are perfectly fine...

Awards is a odd thing, I depends on the quality of the pictures of that year. Some year the winner won’t be in top 50 in another year, so take it with a pinch of salt. I have seen far worse winners with pro gear, just saying.

Mar 6, 2021*permalink

Malling

Melindra

The other thing is a different debate, our society is basically build on consumerism and materialism, it only work as long people buy things they don’t fundamentally need. A huge chunk of the world population would be without a job if it had not been for our “love” of possessions and the social status this can give us.

Do you need a computer, tv, a smartphone, a washing machine, No you don’t, all these items are superfluous, these are basically unnecessary an expensive items that we just like a camera doesn’t really need, and there is even less reason for an amateur to get pro equipment no matter if it’s for photographic equipment, tools, audio equipment etc. but it’s never stopped anyone and it means that development is at a more rapid pace as investors can get their investment back faster. Technology wice we would not be where we are to day had it not been for the average joes willingness to spend on things he didn’t need.

Mar 6, 2021permalink

ViMa

@Melindra, you really did make my day, albeit 3 days after you actually posted these hilarious statements. Picturing you in your mom's basement down there in Australia, pretending to be some sort of deep analyst of people's needs by changing EXIF data and coming up with misguided and pointless conclusions about the world. So ahead of your times. I really do hope you also have that typical unkempt beard of your equals.

Reading your posts on DPR is quite enjoyable. Please do keep at it. Some of us have bad days and reading these just helps us so much.

Mar 9, 2021permalink

I love you 😘

Mar 9, 2021permalink

AstroStan

They look like often repeated themes and compositions. But I guess if it was good then, it must be good now. I suppose that's a validation of current phone cameras because such mimicry couldn't have been done with an old flip-phone.

Mar 2, 2021*permalink

whitelens

Wow, a photo competition for lazy people!

Mar 2, 2021permalink

dw2001

As in if something is hard it's inherently good. Well that's a laugh!

Mar 5, 2021permalink

Curtis80

@whitelens Lazy? Don't think so. There's a new generation, born in the millenium we live in now, and more used to the electronic stuff that's all around them.

Mar 8, 2021permalink

Mister J

Good stuff. Using a standard camera has felt like a trip to the past for several years now.
That's mainly I guess because my Phone is 'always in my pocket,' but also the onboard editing that I can do there and then.
A decently-edited iP image is good for A3-size printing, so images are perfectly viable for my online gallery.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

mxx

Oh, those happy times of years gone by when one could take a close-up of a bird a hundred feet away! Alas those pleasures long gone now.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

It's so refreshing to see the results of a photography competition and like all the entries :-D

Mar 2, 2021permalink

Patrick Dodds

I admire people who are able to get decent images from their phones. I have never been able to and have stopped trying.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

santamonica812

Loved the Street Photography image and the winning Inle Lake image.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

backayonder

Well if I could be content with just using a phone to take photographs with I could save thousands of $$$$.
But alas I can't.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

some people just don't get why people spend money
my programmer colleagues go fishing for the process, not for the soup
some of those fishing rods get quite expensive - lots more than our "stick and line with a feather and hook" from back when I was a kid.

Mar 4, 2021permalink

Tom_A

Pretty good series. Image quality is good enough as well.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

Here's the proof of "The best camera for the job is the one you've got with you." Especially appreciated the message of the #BLM one.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

Meh not really, never once did I see something that caught my eye and pulled out my phone because I didn't have a camera. If I'm not out specifically doing photography I don't reach for any camera or phone.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

Tom_A

Well, Red, it seems from the gallery thar you might miss plenty an opportunity.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

Nope as I really don't want to be taking photos unless I'm actually out to do photography.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

Tom_A

You not wanting to take pictures doesn’t mean that you didn’t miss opportunities.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

Who cares if I missed opportunities, if I'm out actually doing photography I have no desire to shoot anything or even be bothered to take my phone out of my pocket.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

santamonica812

Red, you're saying that you have no interest in taking photos other than when you head out specifically for that purpose. Fair enough. Tom pointed out that this means that you miss tons of photographic opportunities. Also, fair enough. Both statements can be true (and, obviously, ARE true, in your case). :-)

Mar 2, 2021permalink

@santamonica812

Yes and no. I could say if I'm at work or sleeping I'm missing out on photo opportunities.

When I'm out to do actually photography my brain is in search mode and I look at the world differently as I'm visualizing if something might make a good photo subject.

If I'm not actually doing photography I'm out to do what I need to for the day or just enjoying being with friends or if I'm hiking. There are times when I'm hiking or in the trails and I'm there to exercise or actually enjoy the hike and nothing else.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

snapa

@RED, If you get a very recent cell phone, you would be able to equal your images with your m4/3rd system, according to you gallery. If your want better IQ, get a bigger sensor system, at least APS-C.
What camera are you using now, is it within the last 3-5 years old? If not, the latest cell phone cameras are taking very good picture now, js.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

@snapa in good light, maybe.. but I've got images at night, with and without flash, that no phone can match. Even m43 has the DoF rolloff dignity that digital fokeh just can't match. Back when Ceremony was still a thing, my m43 pics jumped out while the phone pics-even brand new iPhones and Samsungs-looked mush by comparison. A 6x crop factor is still a lot more than a 2x crop factor and, as FF types love to remind us various crop sensor shooters.. there's just no substitute for a bigger sensor. :-) And also better optics. Will take E-M10 IV with Pana 20mm f1.7 over a phone any day or night.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

@snapa which gallery? Doubt it, a phone could never even come close to some of the night club photos or videos I have done even mh a7s was struggling.. Besides the point my comment wasnt referring to image quality but having a camera on you all the time which I have no desire to do or even be bothered to take a photo when I'm actually not out doing photography.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

And unlike a phone which will become a useless brick in three years (after becoming progressively more slow and bogged down) when its vendor stops updating it, the real camera will still work just as the day it was new.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

@Mr Bolton

Also I'd rather spend the $1100 required for a "premium" phone on gas to drive to places to do photography. Since were here, I doubt any of these images were done on a spur when out and about on the town or fluke, the people were there to do photography.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

Exactly! This is why my phone is crap and my cameras are awesome. Well, awesome to me, anyway :-)

Mar 3, 2021permalink

ewelch

So Red, nobody should. We should all be like you? Why do people have to be so negative in expressing their disdain for things they personally don't appreciate.

I got Ansel Adams' book "Yosemite and the Range of Light" for Christmas in 1984, and it changed my life and I pursued photography as a profession. My brother simply said, "Where's the color?"

Mar 3, 2021permalink

@ewelch

Where did I say everyone should do the same as me? Same goes for the OP stating here's the proof...

Mar 3, 2021permalink

KodaChrome25

I liked the last one 'Late Night'

Mar 1, 2021permalink

Great example of making Lo-Fi work to your advantage! In this case, the gritty grain adds to the effect.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

Karroly

My preferred one.

Mar 6, 2021permalink

tobyone

Just today I am waiting for a doctors appointment in a hospital on the banks of the Mississippi River. Looked out the window eleven stories up, saw a beautiful scene of a tug and barge in the fog. Only the tops visible because of fog. Took out, iPhone framed it up and knew the wide angle coverage would not work. Needed about 105 mm lens to do the scene justice.

Mar 1, 2021permalink

Spread those fingers and make a digitally interpolated image. Yeah, it’s pixelated, but on my 5.5” iPhone screen it probably would’ve looked great!

Mar 1, 2021permalink

Thoughts R Us

Well, without the iPhone the OP may have not gotten any image. And given that most look at photos on a small electronic screen, usually smartphone or tablet, if an image will work on that canvas then great.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

Peter1976

Toby, so what are you trying to say? That a wide angle lens is not suitable for each situation? Not really surprising ;). There are phones with a dedicated tele lens btw.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

good excuse to upgrade to one of the newer multi-camera phones ;-)

Mar 2, 2021permalink

AsterAstraAsteria

Only a dedicated telephoto lens may do the scene justice… ‘tele’ lens from phones have entrance pupil no larger than the main camera, and this its resolution potential is as little as the main one. It only does better in terms of IS and being closer to theoretical limits.
And the diffraction limit of 50mm f18 or maybe 100mm f36 is not very encouraging.

Mar 6, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

@AsterAstraAsteria But that's the whole point. All the tech talk is irrelevant. Most of today's photos are viewed on phones, and phones are so well atuned to that requirement that all the photographer needs to do is concentrate on the only things that really matter - location, content and timing. In most cases the tech side of it takes care of itself in these automated times. And phones continue to get better. I doubt they'll ever close the gap, but most times the gap doesn't matter anyway.

Mar 6, 2021permalink

AsterAstraAsteria

@jkjond I doubt many would settle for the thumbnail quality photos as shown here, had there been a same photo taken by a camera. Phone cameras has a characteristic size below which little feature remains, and that look discourage viewers to click and enlarge. Yet a thumbnail downsampled from a high resolution image does not show this phenomenon.

Mar 6, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

@AsterAstraAsteria true, the larger you make a print the more the quality matters. But that's a part of my point, few photos need to be enlarged to pixel busting sizes to enjoy the content, especially when so many are viewed briefly on a phone screen anyway. The current generation of multi camera phones will easily make 10x8 prints, no doubt larger. The quality of all the entries in this competition is fine for the viewing I've made of them, and I'm sure they'd reproduce just fine in a mid size coffee table book, but wouldn't stand the close scrutiny of an Ansel Adems museum print. I'm not on the verge of throwing my big cameras away, but there will come the day where I'll switch over to 100% phone and not miss the big old beast.

Mar 6, 2021*permalink

themountainphotographer

PAH! I could make all those photos using a DSLR and Photoshop!

Mar 1, 2021permalink

Where's my Coolpix point n shoot?!

Mar 2, 2021permalink

GinoSVK

So many competitions stated only for mobile phones, which is just an artificial restriction, after all, photography is photography, no matter what tool we use.

Mar 1, 2021permalink

A9RIII

Probably backed by some "phone" brands :-)

Mar 1, 2021permalink

Tell the Open Forum people that. Ha!

Mar 1, 2021permalink

Mister J

Agree with your thought, but it's good to see differentiation, if only to show that phones can generate meaningful images.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

mxx

I think we need a similar competition for DSLRs. Apparently only mirrorless can take decent pictures these days. Oh, wait, most winning photographs are still taken by DSLRs!

Mar 2, 2021*permalink

@GinoSVK
My thought exactly!
We've reached a moment when phones make perfectly good photos - why differentiate?
Also, don't get me started on the price!

Mar 4, 2021*permalink

winkalman

Seeing great smartphone images is always a little bittersweet for me. It triggers my weird phobia that I will someday capture a truly great image on a smartphone and will then immediately regret not having a decent quality version from a proper camera. Like it'll be the best photo I've ever taken or will ever take but it'll be some grainy overprocessed mess that I can never create a stunning large print of because I was too lazy to carry a decent camera.

Mar 1, 2021permalink

sssanti

I would not regret taking a truly great image with a phone. It would be better than having no image because a did not have a better camera or capturing a great quality image with no merit.
Today's phones may give you better image quality than what you see in 35 mm film in the early 1900's from admired street photographers.

Mar 1, 2021permalink

Most of us view it on our phones. Nothing lost here!

Mar 1, 2021permalink

winkalman

"It would be better than having no image because a did not have a better camera"

That's the thing, I DO have a better camera. Unfortunately, my smartphone has made me lazier about actually bringing it along though.

Mar 3, 2021permalink

winkalman

"Most of us view it on our phones."

I really hope that isn't true for the dpreview crowd; if it were, why bother caring about camera tech at all?

Mar 3, 2021permalink

AsterAstraAsteria

That’s not phobia, that’s real terror :(
I once traveled with someone who carried Powershots and Cybershots. We exchanged our full-res files after the journey and the sheer lack of real detail in my iPhone files was appalling. Swore I’d never waste a breathtaking scenery again.
It was the age of iPhone 5’s but still, f16+ equiv is f16+ equiv. No escape from physics

Mar 6, 2021permalink

Mariano Pacifico

#3 "smoking woman" shouldn't win. Smoking is not good. It makes me not breath (#11) beyond reasonable doubt

Mar 1, 2021*permalink

GRUBERND

You are trying to oppress other people by applying your view on them.

PS: Holi festival is just as bad for your health.

Mar 1, 2021*permalink

Peter1976

@Mariano, so you prefere only beautiful lalaland photos? There are competitions for that, I am sure! Me, I prefere sometimes photos that show the cruel reality of life, it helps to get the whole picture.

Mar 2, 2021permalink

dqnielg

Photographing something doesn't mean that you're endorsing that thing.

Do war journalists need to have all their awards revoked because "war is not good"?

Mar 2, 2021permalink

midlingphotographer

Proof that you can tell a good story and make an interesting picture with any camera. The accessibility of technology & art mediums is a truly wonderful thing

Mar 1, 2021permalink