Vintage photos vs electronic images

I personally prefer using electronic images because i feel that you can get a better image. While you can get more style points for a cool vintage photo, i prefer high quality images. I think that people should choose which they like though.

My style

One recurring style in my works is nature. I enjoy taking pictures of nature and admiring the beauty. A picture may outlast nature. With the way we destroy nature, pictures of nautre may become more sought out. I will enjoy my pictures of nature for a long long time.

Edited and Saturated

I do not edit or saturate my pictures. I do not think that i will end up remembering these years as overly vibrant and i hope that my children don't come to look at the past as too colorful. I don't think it will be overedited to me, but for some people it may be that way.

You just never know how your photos might be needed

I would definitely be willing to share my photos. I would want to find the perpetrator and bring them to justice. In my opinion you should try every way to catch the person who does something like this. People like this are not mentally stable and could cause even more death. I would gladly show my photos to the FBI, and if they wanted my help in any other way i would gladly bring that dude to justice.

How far is too far?

I think that going too far is the worst thing the paparazzi can do. How do i define too far though? Well when a person can't leave their house or restaurante without being surrounded by the paparazzi is way too far. Another problem is that their children become bothered by the paparazzi. Some kids don't get to have a semblance of a regular childhood because their parent is too famous.

If i were a celebrity i would definitely protect my child. I would have an underground parking garage only accessible to me and my family so that when i left work i would be in a car already and they wouldn't be able to get any pictures.

Is anything private anymore?

I believe to an extent things are private, but it really depends on who you are. I for one do not own a facebook, twitter, tumblr, digg, myspace, or any other social networks (though i don't think i did delete my old myspace). I would say that i have a fair amount of privacy, but if you have social networks you tend to post things that are irrelevant or that nobody cares about. These posts can range from creepy to things you should've kept private. I also believe fame has lots of effect on privacy. Famous people get very little privacy. An example of this is during the filming of the Harry Potter movies, Daniel Radcliffe would always have paparazzi waiting just outside of the film building waiting to take his picture. He got so tired of it that he decided to play a practical joke. Every day after filming Daniel would leave the set but make sure to grab his special jacket. He would exit the building in the same jacket every day so any pictures the paparazzi would take would make it look like they were all taken in one day. This is an extreme case of privacy deprivation, but i think to a lesser extent people are making their lives less private.

Is instagram revolutionizing photohraphy or causing its demise?

I have never used instagram and likely never will. Regardless of the fact that i have never used it, i still have some pretty strong opinions about it as well as some preconceived notions. I first of all have been lead to believe through constant surfing of the internet that half of the photos on instagram are what people had for lunch. I know it isn't true, but I also know that this used to be quite the thing to do. I don't like the thought of a program like instagram where you can slap a filter on an average photo and if you get the right filter it could be considered good. It causes a misconception that someone is actually a good photographer when they really might just be average.
I will say that instagram has done a few good things, one of those things being opened many people up to photography. With smartphones becoming more available, and in most cases dominant over other phones, people use apps like instagram. The increased quality from the cameras is also a good breakthrough that helped to interest people in photography. I think instagram opened the door for many people to enjoy photography but i think many people use instagram far too often. I think used in moderation it is alright, but some people don't know when to stop.

A photo never lies

Many photos are taken daily, and many photos are uploaded online daily. The main problem with this lies the computer, the medium for pictures to get from a camera to being online. Most people will take photos from their camera and upload them to their computer and then post them online. The problem is that once on a computer, a person can do anything with that photo. Photographs can be accurate at times, or maybe the camera malfunctioned or the photographer took a bad picture. So a photo can be accurate or inaccurate due to human flaws and design flaws. What adds another layer into this mix is computers. Computers are full of programs that allow you to edit photographs. Due to this, a person can simply touch up a picture, or edit a picture in an attempt to cause panic. Due to the variety of ways a picture can be changed, i would conclude a picture can lie due to a person. This can cause many people to come to the wrong conclusion.

My favorite photographer

My favorite photographer would be Jeff Twiss. I enjoy his take at modeling photography with a sometimes gruesome twist. He has many good pictures that have great contrast and really make you rethink things. Go check him out!
http://jefftwiss.photoshelter.com/gallery/Portraits/G0000AAj0kIeM02U/

naming photos

I do not think that a photo necessarily needs a name. I believe though that it is up to the artist who took the picture. I don't believe i could come up with names for half of the pictures i take, but i might come up with a few. I think that pictures can evoke an emotion and that they don't necessarily need a name.

Best Photo Shoot EVER!

Well if i were to go anywhere in the world, and money were no object, the obvious choice for me is Japan. I really think that if it were possible to love a country, this is the one i would choose. I am interested in not only the culture, but the everyday life. I feel that by just walking down a crowded street in Tokyo or an empty street in Akita i could come up with dozens if not hundreds of amazing pictures. From day to day life, to festivals, i think that people in Japan lead very interesting lives. The people are very shy, but when you become friends, you really open up with Japanese people, and learn more about their culture than you could've before.

Camera vs Smartphone

I would personally choose a camera. While a smartphone is much more portable, it doesn't have the same quality. Smartphones are getting better in their quality, but they still offer very few features. You cannot change shutter speed or aperture, and the all around quality of the picture is just on a completely different level from a camera. A camera may not be the most portable, but if you are a dedicated photographer you would take it with you wherever you went regardless of how portable it was. It also offers so many more features than a smartphone, and these features outweigh the few negatives a camera has.

The photo i wish i had taken

One day i was driving to school and it was very foggy. There was a great effect because it was just beginning to brighten up before school. I was parking my car and noticed in a field that i could see a few just within the fog, and i saw the silhouettes of more crows further back. I feel that this picture would have been a very good picture. I sadly didn't have my camera on me but it was very creepy in the half-light that i could just barely see black birds against the white fog.

Man v Machine

Cameras are a great tool for us to use. We use them to remember a great time in our life, to make art, or it just may be a hobby. Regardless of what you use a camera for, you take the photo. Man made the camera and the camera does record the image, but were it not for man there would be no camera. Even so we do have cameras and we make the picture. You think and take time before you take a photo, and that lets you make a better picture. While a camera records the image, without a photographer behind the camera then the amazing images that have been brought into existence may not be here.

Auto setting is crap

I don't think that automatic settings are very good. With the technological advances that we are making today, you would think that they could make it a "smart" setting. Today we have advanced far in the fields of artificial technology and yet we can't get a camera to adjust the settings automatically to take a decent picture. I prefer using manual settings but none of the cameras I have actually have manual settings. This makes me irritated that we can't have a "smart" camera. We can have a car that drives itself but we don't have a camera that can adjust itself decently.

Cameras from my youth

When i was young, my older sisters greatly influenced me in photography. They always showed me cool pictures they had taken, and told me how fun photography class was. I was especially interested in photography when i saw old pictures of family members from many years ago. I liked the thought of looking back in time and remembering.
My first camera was a digital camera that actually had belonged to my mom. She passed it down to me and i still use it. It has a long history of family vacations, and it shows. Whenever you hold the camera you can see it has been through a lot and occasionally you find sand in it.
That is how i was interested in photography.