Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
For me, mobile photography came to the fore a few years ago. During this time, I managed to sell first one fullframe camera, then the second one, because I realized that a good smartphone is enough for my tasks.
Mobile photography is fast and versatile. For me, this is the most important advantage: I can shoot more photos in a week with my mobile phone than I can with my camera, even if I take the latter with me. I can take or process photos at any time: in the subway, in queues, in traffic jams, in a cafe waiting for an order. This is a great advantage, allowing you to practice and grow a little bit every day.
Big photo, expensive cameras, and a full cycle of work (from charging the camera, cleaning flash drives, to developing bookmarks, retouching, and only after publishing) more and more become a privilege for passionate people. Not everyone has the opportunity and, most importantly, the desire to spend such an amount of time on desktop processing. The main indicator here is probably the buzz from the process: if you like to mess with it, then why change something.
I believe in the future of mobile photography and I am only happy that everyone is now a bit of a photographer. It seems to me that there is a trend to simplify photo creation (it is easier and faster to take good quality photos due to computational photography), auto-processing( there is already an application that automatically retouches faces, while preserving the texture of the original). Software bokeh is still bad, but I believe in the development of this technology. The main thing, as it seems to me now, is to focus on the idea — it doesn't matter what to create photos for, as long as there is something to tell about.
In general, mobile photography goes hand in hand with social media. So where they will develop there and mobile photo. It seems to me that the peak of this type of photography and devices is already close. Well, do not cram 8-9 cameras into it, you will get an inconvenient monster with a huge price and with the same inconvenient controls. Although there will be attempts, they will not bring positive results. And the demand from mobilophoto is primarily the placement of images from social networks. Someone will say the opposite, but this is his personal and private use of the phone. If you look at the statistics, we will see what mobile phones use for social networks. Yes, and the price and features of the device will be leveled for a huge number of users of these phones and photographers of these users are a small percentage.
Mobile photography will go hand in hand with progress in social networks. Consequently, where they will go there and mobilofoto. So far, mobile phones have replaced soap boxes and pushed them out of the market. Also, some fans will have enough mobile phones. Quantitatively, mobile phones will certainly displace cameras.
For a while, I used a camera that wasn't as fancy as the modern ones, but it wasn't very convenient to carry it around all the time, pull it out, show it in public, I saw something wrong with it. In general, I abandoned it in favor of the phone – it is always at hand, it is convenient to use, you do not need to press a bunch of buttons to set up a certain mode.
I also used phones before the appearance of fotik, but the quality was better on the first one, so I used it for a long time, but convenience played a role. Since then, I've only taken pictures on my phone.
Is there a future for mobile photography? There is, of course. While everyone is hurriedly buying hand-held photos/at a discount, some people are calmly taking pictures on their phone. The quality may, however, yield, but there is less fuss with this image – you don't need to upload it to a flash drive/computer in order to upload it to the Internet later. I have a blog that has a lot of albums. And all the photos, and there are 8 thousand of them, were taken on the phone. I made a photo, processed it, added more reality, colors, and everything is ready, you can fill it in.
The photo was taken from a height of just over 800 meters above sea level – not high, but also decent, and it would be more dangerous to drag a camera there than to climb yourself. Plus, it's extra weight – the device itself, lenses, charging, batteries…. no, the phone is simpler.
For me, a mobile photo is exactly what its name reflects. Mobile – fast, compact, and convenient. I took out my phone, took a photo, posted it, put it away, and didn't have more than a few minutes to talk about everything. Unfortunately, no smartphones or AI algorithms for post-processing can replace the quality of professional (and amateur) cameras, which is primarily due to the pixel size on the matrix. Mobile photography is good for uploading to the Internet (for example, for Instagram, which still compresses photos to 1 megapixel), but for compact semi-professional photography, mirrorless is more suitable.
Another thing is that, in my opinion, it is absolutely pointless to try to create a Swiss knife out of a smartphone by stuffing 42 megapixels into a 1/2 ” matrix (in fact, reducing the light sensitivity that has to be drawn out by oblique software methods, and increasing the noise that is removed by other oblique software methods), making 2, 3, 4+ cameras for software background blur (instead of optical, which is physically impossible, putting protruding lenses with an equivalent focal length like a TV set (or offering to buy a separate lens for the phone for $30, which turns it more into a door handle), or even creating thick, uncomfortable and just stupid camera phones like the Samsung Galaxy S4 zoom.
Personally, I assume that mobile photography in a few years will get over all this marketing movement with 48 MP and 48 cameras, and finally stop trying to compete with professional technology (which smartphones will never replace in all seriousness), reaching a plateau: we will have sufficiently clear and beautiful images for smartphones, the quality of which is quite enough for posting on the Internet. The attention of consumers and marketers is already gradually shifting from the main cameras to the front ones – or rather, to the framelessness of devices and the technology of sub-screen cameras, which Oppo and Xiaomi recently announced (and almost simultaneously).
I basically stopped shooting on the street with a camera, now I use it only for professional shooting. And so I shoot every “street dock” only on my phone. You can quickly catch the moment, without having to spend time setting it up. Most often, the subject doesn't even have time to notice what I'm photographing, so they don't have time to run over me for it or start playing something in the frame.
I sometimes even like the phone quality and flat image, but this has probably already turned from a side effect of mobile photography into a reception, so you should use it for its intended purpose. But a good picture for the sake of a good picture has long been boring for everyone, it seems to me that the further the technique and image quality develops, the less important it becomes. Now the content and form are more important, because only there can you remain non-banal.
Well, now there is clearly a trend for creators-non-professionals and amateurs who do something not for the sake of money, but simply because it is being done. And here mobile photography, of course, also gives a lot of new opportunities and a lot of new talents.
Naturally, I do-it's much more convenient than on a camera, since the smartphone is always at hand. If it's not a portrait shot, for example, then a mobile photo is a great alternative, because you can take a picture and share a masterpiece frame with the audience at the same time.
As one of the famous photographers said, the best camera is the one that you have with you. And now on the topic, I often shoot on the phone not only photos but also videos, the quality is certainly not the same as that of a professional camera, by the way, I am a professional photographer))but still very, very decent. Shooting on the phone has both pros and cons, but the development of phones does not stand still, if you have a sense of beauty, there is no difference on what you shoot, but there is only one thing that is the object of shooting))
Hello everyone I am a professional photographer and in my personal travels I have been shooting on my mobile phone for the last few years. This is easier, faster, and more convenient than carrying heavy bags with professional equipment. And despite the fact that the quality of the latest phone models is excellent, it doesn't make sense at all. In recent years, the direction of shooting on a mobile phone has grown significantly. And I think that this trend will continue to grow.
Of course we do) In our opinion, over the past 10-12 years, mobile cameras have advanced enough to make photos look no worse than those of a semi-professional camera. Modern software allows you not only to edit, but also to improve, automatically when shooting, the photo. But do not forget that some of the best photo cards are obtained through a full-format 35mm matrix, like the frame size of a photo tape, on professional cameras. Yes, and using the manual settings of the camera, you can get a fairly juicy picture or a beautiful frame for the exhibition.
In general, the future photo on a mobile phone or smartphone is already with us, and then more and better)