It's not the camera, blah blah blah...

elven

http://www.lifewithlg.com/dev/lg-events-views-from-a-cell

I just can't get over thinking, why wouldn't she use at least a P&S, or something that could allow slightly bigger prints? The whole phone camera thing just smacks of marketing hype.

Or am I being hypocritical, after falling in love with the Holga...?

Roen

Monet introduced Impressionism, Cezanne introduced Cubism, and now Patrice Elmi introduces abstract photos using a whole new medium...the LG cell phone

Ehhhh I think I'll give it a skip. Don't get me wrong, there are some great graphic shots there. But.......realistically camera phones are only going to be used (in this country anyway) for taking pictures of pissed up bell ends faffing about some pub or club. By pissed up bell ends.

prox

The fact that it's tied into a particular brand of mobile phone makes it feel a bit too much like advertising to me.

Low-res digital cameras interest me a lot as a medium though, and I've been playing around with the Quicktake cameras Apple sold in the mid nineties. The fact that they cost over a grand apiece when new yet only manage eight shots at 640x480 [Quicktake 100] is pretty resonant on its own, but they're also pretty fun toys for a mac geek and as good a reason as any to keep a well-specced Quadra around - the software only works on pre OS 9.1.

Some examples:











Some of the prints are quite fun, they're 1.6" x 2.1" at 300dpi. Magnifying glass not supplied.

elven

Ooh, those car shots are lovely

I wonder, if the old school photographers turned their nose up at the grain you'd get with enlargments of 35mm negs - in fact I know the LF guys still do, but do you think we'll ever come to terms with bad quality (in a technical way) low res, high noise digital pictures? Think we'll develop camera sensors to the extent that there's no noise, and we'll get all nostalgic about it and try to emulate it, like we do with film grain?

And...

Bell ends, hehe. Sorry.

prox

I think they'll find a place, much like super-8 does in a world of DV: you can choose to post-process to achieve an emulation of a look, or use the tool that provides that look inherently.

I think every camera system has a particular timbre, for want of a better word. The challenge then lies in finding the subject matter and treatment that harmonise with that camera. It may seem like a kazoo symphony to some but that shouldn't take from the value of the endeavour.

There's a powerful commentary on the nature of technological advance, for one - hence the images of aging cars.

440Hz

prox wrote:

I've been playing around with the Quicktake cameras Apple sold in the mid nineties. The fact that they cost over a grand apiece when new yet only manage eight shots at 640x480 [Quicktake 100] is pretty resonant on its own, but they're also pretty fun toys for a mac geek

jealous++


those car shots are super!! really great stuff.

Interesting thread Julie, another one that requires some level of brain use Im trying to think of a good reply to formulate my thoughts on this into something meaningful but im just after a 4 hr long meeting (legal meeting) and my head is fried. I think i'll mull this over and reply later on!!

thebaz

Hey Prox , love the 2nd, 3rd and 4th shots , excellent for such a low res camera -- just goes to show that mega pixels ain't everything , and you don't need a great camera for great photos !!
i remember the first digital camera i saw at the turn of the century , and the quality was pretty crap , my first 2 mega pixel olympus was like a big step

thebaz

i actually like the concept behind the exhibition --

and like this quote :-

"in a world which is frequently in too much of a hurry to notice the astonishing potential to be found in the everyday universe in which they exist."

elven

That concept is pretty much behind what I think of as being my approach to photography. I think it goes beyond the medium of capture, although using something like a cameraphone does allow you to shoot at any time, rather than when you'd normally carry a camera. You'd prolly feel less awkward pointing a nokia at something a little unusual than a 350D...

Slightly OT, but related to old technology, it kind of reminds me of that episode of Firefly where they try to steal the first ever laser gun, hehe...

daedalus2097

Are those the output of the camera prox? Or were they post processed? Like them a lot by the way If that's the actual output of the QuickTake, I'd reckon it's better than any phone pictures I've seen, even if the resolution isn't up to it. There's a lot more to it than megapixels - the optics and quality of the processing electronics would be far better in an Apple camera than a Nokia camera I reckon, even if it's only 640x480.

Have a 2MP camera on my phone, and I'd be happier if I could buy a phone with all the other features less the camera - it'd be smaller and lighter and so on... Though it has found a lot of use taking photos of beer in various pubs all over Europe

magicbastarder

daedalus2097 wrote:

If that's the actual output of the QuickTake, I'd reckon it's better than any phone pictures I've seen, even if the resolution isn't up to it.

agreed. cameraphone resolution is purely a marketing tool.

leinsterman

Well as some of you know where I work I could be accused of bias ... but when I did a photo shoot for a SonyEricsson launch event their clear expectation was that I would turn up with a DSLR, the even rented some L lenses for me ... and this included the launch of their Cyber-Shot range of camera phones ...

I have been involved in promotional activities with SonyEricsson in the past when "good quality" 2MPix plus phone were first launched ... what we did was give the camera phone to some very well known (famous) photographers in the UK and challenge them to produce appealing results ... they came up with some great stuff ... sadly I can't find the link to the site ... the entire purpose of this promo activity was to show the rest of us punters what can be done with the camera phone ...

With all the debate over camera kit lately ... it does no harm to challenge yourself with the most basic kit every now and again (as Jools demonstrated with the Holga) ... Oddly enough I was thinking only yesterday of suggesting making the photochallenge into a camera phone challenge some time just to see what people can achieve when contstrained by equipment capability ... I think this would be both interesting and rewarding ...

PaulieC

purely a marketing exercise dressed up as an artistic endeavour, which sucks so much it's making me angry:mad: :mad: .

Don't even get me onto the subject of celebrity endorsements :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

kmick

I think its more about guerilla photo taking. You can take a picture of anyone or anything just by pretending to look at your phone (and turning off the picture noise he he he). I have got some absolutely cracking shots in which the quality is cack but the 'life' in the picture is evident. You could never get that shot with an SLR. Now if I could only figure how to get them off the camera...

thebaz

kmick wrote:

I think its more about guerilla photo taking. You can take a picture of anyone or anything just by pretending to look at your phone (and turning off the picture noise he he he). I have got some absolutely cracking shots in which the quality is cack but the 'life' in the picture is evident. You could never get that shot with an SLR. Now if I could only figure how to get them off the camera...

I'm more and more going with this guerilla attitude , and my slr is getting left behind more and more, pulling out a slr makes people extremly wary, hostile and unatural, and the magic and reality of life ,for me, can be captured more easily with a disguised p & s, not a mobile phone mind you !

leinsterman

thebaz wrote:

I'm more and more going with this guerilla attitude , and my slr is getting left behind more and more, pulling out a slr makes people extremly wary, hostile and unatural, and the magic and reality of life ,for me, can be captured more easily with a disguised p & s, not a mobile phone mind you !

Well you'd be surprised what can be achieved with a DSLR and a telephoto ... but as you say many people are uncomfortable around photographers in the street ... Although I often find if you just ask people's permission and show them an example of what you are doing (maybe even pre-loading it into your memory card) ... they are OK and very often revert to doing what they were doing and ignoring you ... which is ideal ...

I was watching a DVD of the Fergus Bourke documentary (thanks Elven!!) originally shown on RTE ... He has some very striking images of children playing etc etc. ... sadly this kind of street photography is not longer possible because of concerns over the motivation of the photographer ...

Kit plays a role ... but the real skill is probably getting the most out of its limitations ...

thebaz

leinsterman wrote:

Well you'd be surprised what can be achieved with a DSLR and a telephoto ... but as you say many people are uncomfortable around photographers in the street ... Although I often find if you just ask people's permission and show them an example of what you are doing (maybe even pre-loading it into your memory card) ... they are OK and very often revert to doing what they were doing and ignoring you ... which is ideal ...

I was watching a DVD of the Fergus Bourke documentary (thanks Elven!!) originally shown on RTE ... He has some very striking images of children playing etc etc. ... sadly this kind of street photography is not longer possible because of concerns over the motivation of the photographer ...

Kit plays a role ... but the real skill is probably getting the most out of its limitations ...

agree , and that Fergus Bourke documentary is the business , and agree its a pity about photographing kids, i have kids myself and regret that the horrid habits of a small few , have ruined something special for the masses. Cause kids make great photographs of life, that seam to get misintrepted by a perverse few.

mikeanywhere

elven wrote:

Slightly OT, but related to old technology, it kind of reminds me of that episode of Firefly where they try to steal the first ever laser gun, hehe...

The classics are always the best, shame they never continued with it

leinsterman wrote:

... what we did was give the camera phone to some very well known (famous) photographers in the UK and challenge them to produce appealing results ... they came up with some great stuff ... sadly I can't find the link to the site ... the entire purpose of this promo activity was to show the rest of us punters what can be done with the camera phone ...

I have to totally agree there Simon. A little while back, one of the Galway Camera Club regulars did a presentation on various shots around Galway. Some of the shots were defo very spontanious, where the subject was as mentioned earlier, unaware and therefore less prone to be awkward or put on that non sophisticated usual "when is he/she going to finish taking shots" kinda syndrome.

Best thing was the last image of the presentation was his Nokia mobi which he took all the images.

daedalus2097

Hmmm... Sounds like a good idea, would definitely be interested in seeing what you guys can come up with with just a camera phone. Like I said, mine has really only been used to capture glasses of unusual beers and only once or twice when I've found myself without a camera but didn't wanna miss the shot. When I look at those couple of pictures on the computer though I just kick myself for not having a camera on me at the time

magicbastarder

prox wrote:

only manage eight shots at 640x480

was that taken in two runs, or at a res less than 640x480? i think i count more than eight shots.

PaulieC

kmick wrote:

I think its more about guerilla photo taking. You can take a picture of anyone or anything just by pretending to look at your phone (and turning off the picture noise he he he). I have got some absolutely cracking shots in which the quality is cack but the 'life' in the picture is evident. You could never get that shot with an SLR. Now if I could only figure how to get them off the camera...

I don't see it. It's corporate sponsored. Why else is the web site called LifeWithLG ? Why use an LG phone and mention it everywhere on the page.

The artistic endeavour as an idea is a good one and I agree with many of the replies on the idea that a small phone allows you capture a lot more candid shots than an SLR, but that fact that it's a large moble phone manufacturer pushing it turns me off the whole thing. It's just an expensive ad.

elven

I think she started doing the cameraphone thing on her own, then LG decided to sponsor her. I don't think it was quite so contrived as some would suggest. If you look her up, and find her own websites she doesn't plaster the name of the phone all over it - that site is the phone site, not the photographer's, so of course it's all about LG...!

PaulieC

I stand corrected!

prox

daedalus2097 wrote:

Are those the output of the camera prox? Or were they post processed? Like them a lot by the way

Cheers. They're exactly as downloaded from the camera. There's not a lot of pixels there to process to begin with...

magicbastarder wrote:

was that taken in two runs, or at a res less than 640x480? i think i count more than eight shots.

The panoramas are taken on a Quicktake 200 [aka Fuji DS-7], which can cram a whopping 24 shots onto its 2MB smartmedia card. I'd love to get a few 4MB cards for it but for various [Roland-related] reasons they still fetch a premium on eBay - $50 is pretty typical, but I've seen them go for up to $80. The Quicktake 200s are often purchased just for the included memory cards.