Would you spend $180 for a course teaching you how to use your iPhone camera? Now you can. It’s a real class at Kensington and Chelsea colleges in London, where professor Richard Gray teaches students how to use the simple smartphone camera.
Is the class a great opportunity for budding photographers to hone their skills on inexpensive equipment, or a case of higher education pandering to the masses?
Not surprisingly, some polarized opinions on the subject cropped up around the Digital Trends offices, so we posed the question to camera reviewer Molly McHugh and mobile reviewer Jeffrey Van Camp:
Molly |
I’ll be the first to admit that the best camera you have is the one with you — but that doesn’t mean you should make the iPhone your one and only camera, nor think you can use it to learn how to be a photographer. If it’s your on-the-go camera of choice, that’s completely understandable, but beginning your experience with a camera phone is setting the bar incredibly low. Sure, it can best many point-and-shoots on specs, but you will get no sense of how to use manual controls. And while the digital camera form factor might be evolving, it doesn’t end at the iPhone – or any camera phone for that matter. There are basic principles of manual photography as we know it that I believe are important enough to carry over in that evolution.
It’s extremely limiting to begin your photography education with a device that doesn’t allow you set ISO and has no sort of burst mode, among other things. It’s setting us up for a world of photographic mediocrity. Want proof? Let’s get a photo taken with the iPhone and one with a DSLR, blow them up to 8×10 and see which you like better.
If you bought an iPhone 4S, or will be first in line to get the Nokia PureView 808, by all means continue to flood Instagram with your photos. The lines between manual photography and “iPhoneography” have been blurred enough – and a college course dedicated to this isn’t going to help matters.
Jeff |
Molly, you’re crazy. This is fantastic. When I took a photography class in college, we had to shell out more than $200 to loan a camera and purchase supplies after that. And the cameras we learned on were already outdated by DSLR standards. Some people can’t afford that.
You don’t need a DSLR to learn how to be a photographer. Learning photography is learning how to see the world differently and find magic in the ordinary. You can learn about leading lines, shot composition, framing, the triangle rule, portraits, cropping, post production, and a ton of other fundamentals of photography with an iPhone or a good smartphone. No, you can’t zoom as well, change the depth of field, or mess with the shutter speed, but why in hell do you need to learn all of that in an introductory course anyway?
Since there’s a much lower barrier for entry for a class like this, more people can learn the fundamentals of photography and possibly appreciate them. It will likely inspire more people to take the next step and dive into photography as a passion or career. It’s inspiring to see colleges thinking about how to help kids learn in forward-thinking ways with less expense. It might serve many people more to know a bit of photography (and some fantastic apps) than none at all.
Molly |
You’re making my argument for me: Why have an iPhoneography course when it’s so simple?
Why would you lay down money to figure out how to use one button? It’s beyond me why a classroom of students needs someone to tell them how to use Instagram or Camera+. These apps are built for the lowest common denominator — every update announcement from these companies is overrun with the phrase “easy to use.” There’s no need for a class to learn how to use these. The very idea behind them is to make ordinary — and in many cases, unartistic — photos look better and more professional than they actually are.
Photography, in its truest form, is a skill — and a difficult one to master at that. I completely disagree that smartphones are inspiring people to become more serious about photography. In fact, I think it’s having the opposite effect: People who used to bring their cameras with them are instead relying on their phones. The result is inarguably worse photos — no matter how many filter or panorama apps you download, the images still can’t compete with the quality from some cameras that are even cheaper than some smartphones.
So it’s fine to take your camera phone pictures and use apps to your heart’s content, but we’re already forsaking photography enough, and a class is only going to reinforce that.
Jeff |
Well you won’t find me defending teaching Instagram filters for a semester, but it’s okay to spend a day on some apps, sure. Yeah they’re stupid and silly, but so are many of the fancy functions on some DSLRs.
I feel like you’re glossing over the importance of learning the fundamentals of photography. Learning photography on a smartphone doesn’t have to be just about using stupid apps. I’m sure the majority of such a course (if it’s a good one) would be about learning composition and things that really matter. I don’t think that these skills come naturally. They take practice and instruction, like any good skill. People don’t take photography classes just to learn how to operate a DSLR. (Why bother? It comes with a manual.) They come to learn how to photograph. And with your line of reasoning, why do we go to any classes at all, ever? You can find anything on the Internet, right?
Some of the coolest photographs are black and whites from the 1930s and other eras. They didn’t have DSLR cameras. They only had their knowledge of how to compose a great shot. Some photographers waited hours or days to get the shot they wanted, because they only had one chance. DSLRs are just a technology, much like smartphones. There’s no reason why kids can’t learn the basics on a smartphone. In 10 years, it’s likely that phones and DSLRs will be completely different than they are today anyway. In a basic introductory course, it’s not always the tech that matters. It’s the skills learned.
Molly |
My point is you’re spending money on something that middle schoolers can accomplish with finesse (sans classes) and, you won’t learn the requisite skills to become a good photographer.
If anything, what you get from using a smartphone and accompanying apps hurt your ability to find subject material. That terrible snapshot of a garbage can isn’t art — until you throw a filter and blur effect over it! And don’t give me that crap about “art being all around us,” I’m not buying it. These things are for one thing: fun. Not honing your craft or refining a skill.
Your point that you can learn everything you need to from a DSLR manual shows you don’t have a great grasp on using one (Which in fact, I know to be true. You’re welcome for all those photos I took with my DSLR for you at CES. Yeah, I went there). Yes, they are intricate and extensive gadgets, but there’s a reason photographers freak out when Nikon and Canon release more and more capable devices: because they can do more and they can do better. Learning how to manipulate these machines means you’re willing to put in the time to create images that best mimic what the human eye sees — and that is a difficult thing to do and something that deserves more attention.
For hobbyists a smartphone may be “good enough,” but don’t think that learning photography from an 8-megapixel camera without an optical zoom is an education. Taking that path most certainly does not lead elsewhere. What part of tapping a screen translates to aperture or shutter piority? None. These aren’t related skills. You can’t just give what should be a hobby an educational or trade status. It infers that someday someone could employ themselves as an iPhonegrapher — and that’s upsetting.
Jeff |
That statement about a manual was a joke. If you’re going to argue that it’s super easy to learn the basics of photography on your own, then I can tell you that it is just as easy to buy a DSLR and learn what aperture and shutter speed do. You can learn anything alone if you want. I happen to think there’s plenty that students could enjoy learning on the cameras that they are going to have in their pockets every day. Not everyone is a photography wizard like you apparently were in the 7th grade. Even the basics require teaching. Nobody is taking this class thinking that they’re going to get a job in iPhoneography, but at least they’ll know what their phones are capable of, or not capable of.
Smartphones, laptops, tablets… all these technologies (and others) are making it possible for everyone to create content that, sure, isn’t Oscar-worthy, but isn’t half bad either. Home video cameras haven’t ruined cinema. Just as it will always be important to learn how to use professional tools like a DSLR, it’s also vital that we learn the capability of the devices we can actually afford.
The majority of photography lessons I learned apply beyond one piece of technology. One of these days, smartphones will begin to get variable shutter speeds and apertures too, but I don’t think it’s setting anybody back to learn more about the device that will be a part of photography in the future, whether you like it or not. Smartphones aren’t going away. They will have cameras. The more people who learn how to use them, the better
I work for a brand new stock photo agency which accepts iPhone images because it’s not the kit that matters – it’s the content. You can take amazing images with the iPhone and there are many great apps that mimic the features of traditional cameras. No one is saying that traditional photography isn’t a genuine skill but many top professional photographers use them alongside their other kit and Annie Leibovitz recommended the new iPhone 4S as “the snapshot camera of today”. At pocketstock.com we want to sell good content regardless of the medium used.
Ok, lets just say I agree with Jeff. First up, a camera does not a good photograph make.
I teach mobile photo workshops, a live projection of my iPhone with ProCamera launched is a far easier way to show people how to expose, focus and compose than trying to explain it on individual DSLRs. There is no one-touch app shooting in my class, students are shown how to take back control from the phone, not rely on it. Editing is done on Snapseed and Filterstorm and covers the same basic image adjustment concepts as Photoshop.
An 8×10 iPhone 4S image will look almost identical to a DSLR if taken at a similar focal length. I’ve seen iPhone prints of all different sizes on gallery walls and surprise, surprise, I’ve seen these same images sell as fine art and even be acquired into gallery collections.
If you have feet, or wheels, you don’t need an optical zoom.
Max, I’m not laughing and neither are a number of professional photographers (Damon Winter, Chase Jarvis, Nick Moir, David Alan Harvey) who use mobile phones as part of repertoire.
Steve, I disagree, photography has not lost its character, it has found its democratic, participatory voice.
Indeed. I’ve seen many horrible pictures taken with great cameras. A manual zoom and manual settings are quite useful to have, but they are amenities.
Interesting premise. Do cheap and affordable guitars inspire future rockstars or dumb down pop music?
My perspective on this is that iPhonography is fine, because good is still good despite the tool and crap is still crap.
I’m currently in pre-production for a feature-length film being shot and edit entirely on an iPhone. This is my first film, but I’m a video professional with an Emmy for motion graphics, a top 10 AdAge.com commercial and work for HBO, ABC, GMC, Reebok, Vermont Teddy Bear, among others. I could have used a big HD camera with tens of thousands in lenses and filters, but I’m shooting A New England Love Story on an iPhone to show that consumer tools can compete with Hollywood and to inspire other young filmmakers. Feel free to Google or Facebook search for the movie. You’ll see the teaser, shot and edited only with an iPhone, gives you the feel of what to expect.
Jeff, if you don’t think a photographer needs to learn about depth of field or shutter speed in an introductory photo class, then you most certainly have no idea about photography. Yes, you don’t “need a DSLR to learn how to be a photographer,” but you need a camera with manuel settings, and that begins with shutter speed and ISO settings.
Do I see any issue with these classes? Not really. Anyone that is serious in the craft looks at this and just laughs. But for the casual snap shooter that has money to blow? Whatever, it’s their money. But let’s not call something like this serious or makes someone understand photography.
Merit in a college-level “iPhoneography” course? Sure. But what does is mean to be a truly excellent photographer these days? There are so many ways to shape and manipulate an image to bend it to a user’s aesthetic tastes. True Art is more than convenience. Photography has lost some of its character with the advent of the smartphone camera.
Molly has obviously never taken a photography course or she took a bad one. Photography is not about the technical aspects of the device on it’s own, but about color, composition, contrast, content. I’ve taught web design classes where students were more concerned about learning HTML code or Flash timelines with little thought for the gird, hierarchy of information. I’ve suggested that web design classes begin with a semester using just pen, paper and a ruler. I’m not a photography teacher but I’d think they’d force students to use iPhones first. Then, once they have a handle on composition, contrast, color and content, let them graduate to more complicated devices.
I have a unique perspective on this since I’m a video professional but I’m shooting a feature length film on an iPhone. There will be no Photoshop, Final Cut, After Effects, Macbook, Canon, RED or other pro tools in the mix. All of the filming and editing is being done with just an iPhone. Now, I’ve done dozens of commercials and video projects for little companies like HBO, ABC, NBC, Disney, Reebok, Vermont Teddy Bear. A piece I did for Comcast SportsNet won an Emmy, the 10 second commercial I did some years ago for Decathlon Sports was one of the top 10 commercials the year it was out. I could rent or buy tens of thousands of dollars in film hardware and software just like other indie and major motion pictures, but how many of those are even any good? How many millions are spent on production for films that absolutely suck?
I’m out to prove that if you have a good story (which I’m hoping I do), good acting and directing, you’ll get a good film. As for using an iPhone; it’s HD, it’s easy to shoot, it’s what I already own.
I’m sure “purists”, which are mostly people with good equipment that think that a healthy gear budget somehow sets them above any others, will rail against this. But, if “professional” photography is only for those with a big financial commitment, how many photographers would we have? At some point all artists start with less than quality equipment.
If you’re interested in following my progress, I’ve posted a teaser on our website along with some videos of test shooting and iPhone accessory reviews of stuff I’ll be using to shoot: http://nelovestory.tumblr.com/about
I like the teaser and I completely agree with you. I could have used much more time on the basics.
Regardless of the merit of a class on smartphoneography, I think there is no way you can discount the overall art form. And not just iPhone, Android, too.
I’ve taken some of my favorite pics on my Droid x and they look amazing.
And as far as basic principals go, they apply no matter what type of device you’re using. I truly think high-end cameras will soon look and function more like today’s smartphones, anyway, complete with all the functions of a DSLR AND tons of amazing apps.
Not that my argument needs more defending, but I actually spoke with a professional photographer named Meeno this week and he thought the idea of this course is great and also thought smartphones have been fantastic for photography. He said smartphones and point and shoots before them have lead to a great resurgency and democratization of photography which has been fantastic. He agreed that smartphones aren’t quite there yet but said though they can’t do all the fancy things of a DSLR, they are getting much better at phototgraphys other mission which is to capture moments. The journalistic side of it. He also share how he wished that professional cameras would adopt some of smart phones best features like connectivity and big detailed touchable screens and laid out a cool vision for a snap on zoom lens. Fun guy to talk with.