6 Cellphone images in Time Magazine's "Best Photos of the Year"

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by timeOday, Dec 16, 2005.

  1. timeOday

    timeOday Guest


    #20 of 24 is a tiling of 6 images from the London underground bombing.
    The shots were captured on cellphones in near darkness.

    I guess it goes to show that interesting or important subject matter
    trumps other aspects of image quality.
    timeOday, Dec 16, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. timeOday

    Paul Heslop Guest

    or that the press are only interested in subject matter and quality is
    Paul Heslop, Dec 16, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. timeOday

    Paul Heslop Guest

    doh! ignore me, I'm not well :O(
    Paul Heslop, Dec 16, 2005
  4. I would not have it any other way.
    Joseph Meehan, Dec 16, 2005
  5. timeOday

    ~~NoMad~~ Guest

    Best Photos? Disgusting!

    Portraying the Horrors of being Human as the Best We Can Do?

    Yep, that is the Liberal Media at their Best Work!

    Gasp! No Hope there!

    ~~NoMad~~, Dec 16, 2005
  6. timeOday

    RobG Guest

    This brings to mind a 6.00 pm news program I saw some months ago. After 1/2
    hour of racial violence, horrific injuries, military action, vehicle
    accidents, natural disasters and such, all shown in vivid living colour,
    the news closed with a (humourous) report on a fashion show. The reason for
    the report? A model had had a 'wardrobe malfunction', and one (count 'em),
    just one nipple had popped out to say hello for a brief moment (the model
    was awake to the lack of modesty imposed by her 'dress' and fixed it PDQ).
    Not that you could see said nipple - it was all pixellated out. What's the
    problem, you say. Maybe some would find a nipple on public TV quite
    shocking, and so it should be rendered invisible, but I sat there and
    thought about it.

    What a world we live in, where it's quite OK to expose the kiddies to man's
    inhumanity to man (in vivid living colour), but a brief glimpse of what is
    no more than a feeding mechanism for a baby (and yes, I am aware of the
    erotic side of nipples, too), is too provoking to allow us to see, or
    indeed to expose the kiddies to. I know which I'd rather my children had
    seen. I can explain nipples.

    A sad state of affairs, indeed.

    RobG, Dec 16, 2005
  7. BINGO!
    Randall Ainsworth, Dec 16, 2005
  8. I have to agree.
    Joseph Meehan, Dec 16, 2005
  9. timeOday

    Iraxl Enb Guest

    Iraxl Enb, Dec 16, 2005
  10. timeOday

    timeOday Guest

    You know, I feel the same way. They call it "Best Photos of the Year,"
    but every single one is about disaster. I think it would be more
    evenhanded if they showed us some beauty as well. It's true there were
    a shocking number of natural disaster deaths this year, but in between
    millions of beautiful moments they could have included in "Best Photos."
    timeOday, Dec 16, 2005
  11. timeOday

    GregS Guest

    I have a small collection of Time-Life stuff, and its all about documentary
    or viewing people , places, or things. You know, a picture is
    worth a thousand words.

    GregS, Dec 16, 2005
  12. timeOday

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Time is liberal?!?
    Ray Fischer, Dec 16, 2005
  13. timeOday

    Rich Guest

    Don't be surprised if Time, a magazine thinning faster than Ron
    Howard's hair, had a full-page ad for Nokia in it.
    Rich, Dec 17, 2005
  14. Rob,

    you have to replace the word "world" with "country" though. In
    other parts of the world nakedness is not taboo.

    Hans-Georg Michna, Dec 17, 2005
  15. timeOday

    spo Guest

    I agree. This also reminds me of a photo I once saw of the executed
    French murderer, Henri Landru. He had been guillotined, and his naked
    body was pictured lying on a slab, with his head standing upright on its
    neck, next to his shoulder.
    Presumably not to offend anyone, his genitals had been obscured by a
    carefully placed cloth.
    spo, Dec 17, 2005
  16. timeOday

    columbotrek Guest

    Those cell phone images remind me of capturing images with toy cameras.
    They look bad even on a computer monitor. Imagine how small and lack
    luster they would look printed on a high resolution media such as
    photographic paper. That and transfer charges are why my cellphones do
    not include the camera function. Others are more useful to me.
    columbotrek, Dec 19, 2005
  17. timeOday

    SimonLW Guest

    Well, if it weren't for the phones, there would be no images. Common folk
    don't haul cameras around, but they usually have their cellphones and many
    of them have cameras built in. While they are hardly for fine art
    photography, they will likely be capturing many unexpected events.

    Of course, the press can't be everywere, but a picture is worth a thousand
    words and they will use any shot even if it is digitized from a crappy
    SimonLW, Dec 19, 2005
  18. Do they still make phones without camera?
    =?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=, Dec 19, 2005
  19. timeOday

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Cell phones with up to 5mp sensors are now available (for a high price).
    They even include optical zoom on some models. It is true that most
    of the camera functions on very inexpensive cell phones are crap, but
    some people seem to find them useful. I have a cell phone with a
    camera, but so far the only use I have for it is to snap a picture of a
    person to link to their number so that their face comes up on the phone
    when they call.... Pleasant, but it doesn't improve the utility of the

    But there was the quick-thinking teen who captured the license number of
    a van a guy tried to pull him into....
    Ron Hunter, Dec 20, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.