Pete Souza:
Throughout the year, I post photographs of my White House work on a regular basis to my Instagram, @PeteSouza.
Many followers have inquired about whether a certain photograph is taken with an iPhone or DSLR (digital single lens reflex camera). In choosing the photographs for my year on Instagram, I decided to select only iPhone photographs that were captured in the square format on an iPhone. For many purists, the square format was the original inspiration for Instagram. And I certainly admire those that continue to post only square photos taken with a smart phone.
I love these iPhone shots because it shows that, in the right lighting conditions, the iPhone can take shots every bit as good as a professional’s DSLR. It’s not the camera that is important. It’s the photographer and their view of the world.
nice instagram snapshots, but hardly any of them look like they were taken by a professional dslr – maybe like an entry level dslr with the crappy kit lens, stepped down.
still, you’re absolutely right, that it’s the photographer, that makes a good image. still, a dslr with a large chip and good lens just looks different.
Over the years I’ve shot with film, dSLRs and iPhones. A couple years ago I shot exclusively with an iPhone to see what it was like using one as my “regular” camera. Looking back at all my photographs, those that speak loudest and with impact, have had absolutely nothing to do with the camera used. dSLR, camera phone, point-n-shoot – they’re all good.
Strong photographs come from the photographer’s eye, imagination, life experiences, composition, understanding light, employing ambiguity/mystery and many other aspects to create images that help stir a viewer’s mind and imagination to release narrative (any narrative, not necessarily what the photographer had in mind). The camera itself makes little difference.
Why do photographers proclaim daily that it is about us and not the gear? Do chefs yell on rooftops that it is about them and not the stove? Photographers have a particularly high level of insecurity, fearing constantly that people do not respect their talent. Lest we forget, no photographer can ever take an image without a camera. But cameras can take photos, even good ones, without a photographer.
Nice pics. I like the “The Easter Bunny and a Secret Service agent.” in particular.
That is just it, anybody can be a photographer, what makes a great photographer is experience, not the best and greatest equipment. I have a close friend who happens to be a professional photographer. Sure, he has good cameras, but through out the years I have seen his work consistently get better. He is a really good wedding photographer, but it did not happen when he got the really expensive equipment. It took time and he has been at it for more than fifteen years, shooting almost every weekend. That said, I have taken and have seen fantastic photos taken with iPhones. The camera on the latest iPhone 6S is very impressive.
I can’t speak to your “proclaiming daily” assertion. Nor about others not respecting one’s talent.
But I suspect when photographers do raise the issue it’s to counter the relentless and competitive discussions on photography internet forums every day that photography is about gear and it’s acquisition. And with that the quest for “having the best” will somehow produce strong photographs. As if plopping a credit card down on the counter for the best lens or camera body is a shortcut to making strong photographs. For sure, if one’s photography is about technical attributes, say sharpness, then find the sharpest lens and make photos that communicate sharpness. As a viewer, those photos would likely not interest me much, if at all.
This is a generalization, but over the years I’ve found many who speak the loudest about photography being driven by gear seem to have photos that don’t say or communicate much. Those that are able to talk about photographs they’ve actually made and how they evoke and communicate to themselves and viewers seem to make good photographs. And with that, I’ve also noticed people who make strong photos talk little about specific gear.
Compare the number of internet forums where the discussion is about the latest or “best” gear to the number of forums that talk about photographs and how they communicate. It’s hugely lopsided.
Yes, a camera by itself can make photographs. And if one enjoys looking at photographs automatically captured without a photographer behind the lens, such as surveillance camera images, then by all means, carry on and enjoy them.
You forgot the other caveats: if you don’t need higher-resolution or the RAW digital negative or a telephoto lens. But all of those are extremely important in any professional photography context.
The truth is that iPhones are great snapshot cameras and we shouldn’t be surprised when pro photographers take great snapshots. Do not expect to replace a pro camera with an iPhone or get pro results with an iPhone. Expect to get great snapshots most of the time.
That is all very true, but there is still always a technical side to photography. As screens get bigger and higher-res and have better contrast, your photos will age and become obsolete based on their technical quality, not their artistic merit. The artifacts in an iPhone photo that you can’t see on an iPhone screen may ruin the same photo when displayed on an 8KTV, which is less than 10 years away. Higher contrast and brightness may make you wish you had a RAW so that you could essentially retake the photo for future screens.
Because most photographers never took the time to learn their tools. I do Photoshop work for them and they have no idea not only about the digital products they are creating, but also no idea about the camera. Maybe 1 in 100 knows the camera.
The main skill in photography is the social ass-kissing of the people who hire photographers. That is an important skill in many fields but it is way out of balance in photography.
I see what you did there.