|
Forums >
General Industry >
cell phones replacing photographers?!?
i suspect that MANY shooters will become like the blacksmiths of henry fords day...while yes, they were indeed talented, and can put out a great piece of artwork forged from steel, the fact is that the demand for studio shooter is dwindling and the budget restraints of even the big corportions have culled the pool of commercial shooters...why pay for someones overhead when my new sony razor mp3 player phone can let me see the moment and send it immediately to friends around the globe. Feb 02 06 05:40 pm Link round one Feb 02 06 05:42 pm Link exactly. Feb 02 06 05:42 pm Link U R totally such a tr0ll. But U R right!!! Guys like me with our cell phone cameras are gonna like totally eat up the fashion industry with our 'edgy' imagery and 'fuzzy cyber look' that you get with those phixed-phocus cell phone camera lenses. Then all the so-called "professional" photographrs will be mowing my lawn for a living and I will be like "hey Israel Colon, you forgot to weed-whack around the birdbath! no tip for you!" I did my last shoot with Angie (that's what I call my pal Angelina Jolie) with my Nokia camera phone and the results speak for themselves! Check my portfolio out! You can't touch me! GWC! Feb 02 06 05:44 pm Link you know what pisses me off. I can buy a cell phone that takes photos, show's movies, surf's the internet, plays mp3's, tells me stock info, holds more contacts than I'll ever know, plays video games, calculates tips percentages. But the fucking thing can't get a signal half the time to make a damned Phone call. Feb 02 06 05:45 pm Link i am keeping it real...are we not allowed to speak of the state of our beloved industry??? Feb 02 06 05:45 pm Link David Moyle wrote: You have to love technology. Feb 02 06 05:47 pm Link Although I do see many folks running around with these new 1 megapixel phones snapping shots here and there and sending them to thier friends. I have yet to see anything of the quality and imagination on anyones cell phones posted up here on the site. I from time to time hate the fact that my camera's are so big that I can not use them at b-day parties and x-mas functions, but I never planned on having any models coming over on those days anyway. I think that for the simple everyday snapshot the cell phone camera is great, or those kodak moments that happen on a whim, but seriously when it comes to family portraits, fashion ads and model portfolios, I don't think the cell phones will cut it. Let me know if I am wrong and I will take my Canon 1DS and sell it for a few of those new LG phones. Feb 02 06 05:48 pm Link David Moyle wrote: You know what I'm thinkin? I payed $200 for this thing and it doesn't even have a flash!??! What bullshit! You know the time when I want to take a pic is of me and my friends drunk at the club and all you can see is a black blur!! Feb 02 06 05:48 pm Link adrienne of Zswana wrote: Damn straight! Stupid junk! Feb 02 06 05:49 pm Link David Moyle wrote: dang...i read that as "stupid drunk"...i should not have drank that third tecate. Feb 02 06 05:51 pm Link I know what you mean about that damn signal problem. I have the same issue, all this technology and it still is crap. Having a camera on my phone has proved to be no use, sure it is great to snap a shot of my friend picking his nose and sending it to his girlfriend, but that is about all it can do. And as of this date I have yet to make a dime on any of those photos. Feb 02 06 05:53 pm Link BCG wrote: Why stop at 3, go to 4 and just imagine the crap you'll start. Feb 02 06 05:53 pm Link GWC wrote: A troll fur sure dude... and about Isreal cleanin your birdbath... wait in line Gdub... we got him booked for washin down the tractors, spreadin fertilizer and cleanin the bathrooms... Ur freakin birds can wait... Feb 02 06 05:55 pm Link Oh my goodness, that Angelina image so rocks! You should join The Crazy Club thread because you my friend are definately crazy!!! GWC wrote: Feb 02 06 05:59 pm Link David Moyle wrote: You mean it's kind of like a laptop with a slow processor, no memory, a handful of applications, a tiny screen, sucky keyboard, no USB/firewire and a tiny hard disk that you have to pay by the minute to use? Feb 02 06 06:00 pm Link Select Models wrote: i am a photographic prophet...and a damn handsome one at that...*just check out my avatar*...but you may call me what you will, but i would be happy to share P&L reports with anyone here. Feb 02 06 06:02 pm Link Feb 02 06 06:05 pm Link digital_tmax wrote: the world just became a gwc Feb 02 06 06:07 pm Link David Moyle wrote: I'm laughing my ass off at that because it's so TRUE!!! Feb 02 06 06:09 pm Link Damn, I can so NOT keep up with technology, I didn't even think I was going to live the day to see a camera phone when I was a youngin. Now they are talking about putting chips in our body to access our medical records. What they heck, where's the aliens? digital_tmax wrote: Feb 02 06 06:11 pm Link David Moyle wrote: I knew you and I had some common ground we could bitch about! Feb 02 06 06:11 pm Link BCG wrote: Dude... all I have is 'profit reports'... losses are for trolls and those who need writeoffs... Feb 02 06 06:17 pm Link Select Models wrote: you dont have paper waste??? Feb 02 06 06:21 pm Link digital_tmax wrote: But can I call someone on the stupid piece of crap? Feb 02 06 06:21 pm Link Alan from Aavian Prod wrote: See, I'm not completely unreasonable! Feb 02 06 06:22 pm Link Well, your original premise, " cell phones replacing photographers" is a tad misleading. With the current technology, you still need someone to operate the cell phone. "Give someone a violin, and they own a violin. Give someone a camera, and they are a photographer." I can't remember if that quote is from someone here on MM or another forum. Add to it perhaps a line like, "Give someone a modern cell-phone and they are a photographer, vidiographer, and DJ." It's too bad that their ringtone is still so friggin' irritating. (OK.. yes, I DO use a polyphonic version of 'Sandstorm') There was an artist here in South Australia who had a show of his camera phone images when he visited the US. The prints were all about the size of a playing card, mounted with very professional beveled triple matte. Hey, there was a 'SOLD' sticker on the title card of many of the images. Maybe that was part of the art, I don't know. The brochure had words like 'refreshing' and yes, even 'edgy' The truth is, once we get the government to implant microchips in our heads, everything our eye can see will be recorded, and we'll be able to make images by merely looking at something. Camera phone users are soon going to lament the state of the art. Feb 02 06 06:25 pm Link Marcus J. Ranum wrote: Exactly! Feb 02 06 06:25 pm Link David Moyle wrote: which prompts the qwestion...can the public indeed tell the difference???...of course WE value our skills and can differinciate (sp?) between snap shot and photogragh, but to the consumer, who is trained in instant gratification, can not. Feb 02 06 06:29 pm Link BCG wrote: You still can't take a good family portrait and blow it up to 24x36. Feb 02 06 06:33 pm Link David Moyle wrote: which now prompts the qwestion how much longer will kodak be around?!? Feb 02 06 06:35 pm Link I think Allen is correct. Cell phone cameras are the modern equivalent of the Kodak Instamatic. Nobody undermined the professional photography industry of the previous millennium with pocket film cameras. Feb 02 06 06:38 pm Link David Moyle wrote: LOL. This reminds several years ago when NASA had the spacecraft that went to Jupiter. They remote controlled it from here. Jay Leno commented on this and said it amazed him how that equipment could be contolled by remote millions of miles away and he couldn't get his cordless phone to work in his own backyard. LOL Feb 02 06 06:44 pm Link BCG wrote: Size and Quality come to mind. Feb 02 06 06:45 pm Link BCG wrote: BCG's got a good point... Ten years ago I made a nice chunk of change drawing and painting... Nowadays if you hope to remain competitive as a commercial artist you have to go digital. When I do work in the video game, animation, and film industries I don't even waste time with pencil, paper, and paint anymore - I just draw and paint directly into the computer. I don't know if commercial photography is at this point yet (or already past it for that matter).. But about 4 years ago I had come to the conclusion that I must adapt or make a fraction of what I make now... Then again it's always good to have a few luddites around - makes it easier for the rest of us to get higher pay... Feb 02 06 06:46 pm Link The Art of CIP wrote: I Illustrated a children's book last year directly into the computer. It's kinda cool though, you can break apart illustrations and use them in different ways. Changing your mind is easier. Feb 02 06 06:48 pm Link BCG wrote: As long as they keep making digital cameras that can compete. Feb 02 06 06:49 pm Link The Art of CIP wrote: one of the most insightfull replies i have ever read. Feb 02 06 06:51 pm Link BCG wrote: IRS... ROTFLMAO... dude... all the $$$$$$$$$$$$$ is in foreign films, Swiss banks and off-shore accounts. Dont make me educate you on how to play the game... Feb 02 06 07:01 pm Link Select Models wrote: i do know how to look good for the banks but broke to the irs...i have a photographic empire here in the lone star state...and i have had applications from many former "studio" owners wanting to shoot for me. Feb 02 06 07:13 pm Link |
