Moon along the path – iPhone
I’ve been pondering this blog post for a couple of days, since John made the comment:
I’ll be getting an iPhone in December, but I honestly can’t see me using for ‘serious’ photography, more for spur of the moment things, like taking a photo of a sofa in a furniture store or something like that.
This is not to pick on John’s opinion, to be sure. His comment just provided some food for thought for my brain to chew on for a couple of days. If I look back at the photos that I’ve taken this year, and by camera, it kind of breaks down like this:
- Nikon D300 – 4,361 (Peaceful Dragon Tournaments. Lots of 6 FPS shots)
- Leica M9 – 2,517
- iPhone – 1,310 (I thought it was only 500 but they get labeled differently when you use Hipstamatic)
- Nikon D90 – 950 – (A rental to use at the wedding)
- Canon S90 – 473
- Film – 328
We, as humans, love to categorize, classify, group, and try to understand the parameters of something … place it into neat little boxes of understanding. So, it is with that desire that I write this post and try to understand what is meant by ‘serious’.
As you can see, I use the iPhone a lot. As a matter of fact, had it not been for the wedding, it certainly would have been used more than the M9. Of course, this is because of convenience. I have it with me all of the time.
Every once in a while, this voice will pop up in my head and tell me that I ‘should’ be using something else to get the shots because, after all, the iPhone is ‘only’ a camera phone; however, if you lookout in the Twittersphere, you’ll see of number of photographers who’ve gone almost exclusively to the iPhone, such as Dixon Hamby.
So, that brings me to the question:
What is ‘serious’ photography?
Do you have to take the photograph with a certain type of camera, or does it go to intended usage? That is, if you are going to print it, then it can’t be done by a camera phone? I’ve printed a few of my iPhone shots and really like the results, so that can’t be it (for me).
Of course, if you’re working for a magazine or a client and they demand a certain resolution, then the camera certainly does count. I’m not espousing that all cameras will get the job done, for I certainly never photographed a basketball game with a camera phone, or a wedding, for that matter. 
All cameras are not created equally, but can they all produce ‘serious’ work, whatever that means?
Related Posts :
Another iPhone production :) I was reading this post by Paul Maxim, entitled: iPad Photogra ...
click for larger image My post the other day about aspect ratios centered around my experience ...
Mark! Hat's off to you! Thanks for recommending Hipstamatic Today is a rainy, cloudy day. A per ...
Mhm – first judgement should by the result, I think. The result is good if the tool is fit for the task, not more, not less. The wonder-tool that produces serious results by itself is not invented yet – if so, probably standards for serious would change again.
In my book ‘serious’ is somthing where the human brain is involved, on any level. Could be a gut reaction to a scene, could be elaborate thinking. Could be understandable to many or only to a small number. What probably doesn’t count is aiming at nothing specific, combining with a fart ilter (¢ Mike Johnston) and enlarging to wall size – unless you already have a name as an artist, or there is a concept as a basic.
But I could be wrong then…
What’s an iPhone? Never heard of it.
I have no idea how I would define ‘serious’ photography. I do know that I would not call myself a serious photographer but I am not sure why. Weird.
Whatever serious photography is I would agree that it has nothing to do with the equipment but may have more to do with attitude. It may even be fair to say that anyone who rules out any particular type of equipment (e.g. phones) as a means to achieving ‘serious’ photography automatically rules themselves out from being ‘serious’ photographers. Maybe, since that kind of belief would be at odds with the sort of attitude I would associate with a serious photographer.
And I am not sure if professionalism is any indicator either. I know of at least one pro photographer who I would only classify as a serious professional but not so much as a serious photographer (once again though I’m not sure why). On the other hand I know a couple of amateurs who live and breathe photography and are probably much more serious about photography than my pro friend.
There’s no doubt that for some, technical quality of an image would play a part in defining serious photography but without being able to answer the question succinctly I would say that serious photography has more to do with attitude and intent to convey something than anything else.
Good point about professionalism. I look at that as simply meaning that I earn 50% or more of my income through that source. Of course, people attach other meanings to it, such as quality; however, I’ve seen plenty of what I’d consider low quality work come from so-called professionals and they still make > 50% of their income from their photography.
I would agree, too, that it has little to do with the equipment, but a lot to do with attitude. I think that the dictionary definition might come close:
If this is so, then I’d have to say that my photography is not all that serious.
I mostly respond to external stimuli and don’t give it much deep reflection.
I agree with Markus, it’s the result that matters. Your photographs are a part of you and they represent your artistic vision. So it’s the photographer that has to be the judge of the “seriousness” of his own work. That said, I understand John’s point completely. He wants every photograph to be as good as he can possibly make it. That’s why photographers buy the equipment we buy. That’s why I don’t understand the reliance on the iPhone when you have the S90 (a far better camera that the iPhone) as the convenience camera. Heck, even the M9 is small enough to carry around conveniently. Any artist has to make do with the tools he has and I admit the results from the iPhone are pretty good for what it is (a phone with a camera inside) but it’s a toy in this company of cameras that you have. But toys are fun and that’s part of photography too. I think you answered your own question about “serious” photography when you got out the big guns for the important event (the wedding), even going to the expense of renting equipment.
But as Marcus said, i could be wrong too.
Ken: I don’t that I have a reliance on the iPhone, per se, but I do find it handy, interesting, and flexible. I can get shots with it that I can’t get with the other cameras. It’s part of the overall arsenal, so to speak. Regarding convenience, it’s left up to the individual to decide what is convenient and what is not. I find the iPhone ultimately convenient, the S90, pretty close, but when I have the iPhone in my pocket, why have another small brick in my pocket as well. The M9, I’d have to carry over my shoulder, which is not so convenient. It all depends on who you are and what you find convenient.
As for serious: I don’t know if I really answered the question. I use the right tool for the job. D300 is uniquely suited to sports. I can’t get the frame rate with the iPhone, nor the proper focal length, etc. The M9. Fantastic all around camera.
In the end, perhaps I’d say that I enjoy all of my photography, regardless of the camera, so I’m still not sure what ‘serious’ means.
Hi, Paul,
I’m guessing that “serious photography” is photography that the photographer takes seriously. It sure doesn’t have anything to do with the equipment. The quickest proof of that is Ansel Adams. Like his work or not, no one can dispute the fact that he was a serious photographer. He used everything from 8×10 to SX-70, happily. And made great photographs with whatever format he chose. And you can bet he’d have added an iphone (or something similar) to his repertoire in a heart beat. The equipment is just a set of tools.
And I hope no one’s going to say that Adams couldn’t have taken, for example, his shot of Half Dome with an iphone. Of course he couldn’t. At least, not that particular photograph. Nope. He’d have done something different. And probably just as arresting.
Stephen
Stephen: I think that we are on the same page. Your last paragraph says it all.
The discussion of what constitutes ‘serious’ equipment is certainly an open-ended one. With digital photography in a constant state of change, the definition has to malleable. Be nimble or be left behind. At least for now. Who knows, my definition may change once I get the iPhone. It may be more inclusive. But when I go out with a specific subject in mind will I be happy with just an iPhone? No, I’ll grab my Nikon D7000 – every time. I’ve taken some beautiful shots with my Lumix p&s, but that’s the camera I have with me most of the time when the D7000 is at home. But even that camera I won’t use when it’s time to get ‘serious’.
I think what it boils down to is a personal definition – if you take serious photos with an iPhone, you’re right. If you don’t think the iPhone (or p&s or micro 4/3rd) can be a serious camera – right again (though I’d disagree, especially with the micro 4/3rds cameras). And then there are those folks who consider the camera you have with you as a serious camera – what ever it may be.
Thanks,
John
I agree with several commenters that the definition of “serious” is very subjective but reflects the intention and attitude of the photographer regardless of the equipment used. If I make a pinhole camera out of an oatmeal box to shoot landscapes is that less “serious” than shooting with a 4×5 view camera? As long as the result satisfies my vision both are equally “serious.” I think any attempt to go beyond a simple snapshot can be considered “serious” but the degree of seriousness can have a wide range of possibilities and is dictated by the approach and not the equipment.
In my mind “professionalism” refers more to business practices than the process of making photographs. A photographer can have “professional” practices and not sell a thing, and successful artists can earn a living from their photography with (or in spite of) terrible business practices. A person can be a serious photographer with no thought of making money or having professional business practices.
The fact that we are all talking about it tells me that in some form or another we are all Serious Photographers!”