It really depends on how you view Instagram. Editors who rely solely on Instagram should look for other career options for their short sightedness.
This topic has multiple layers and shouldn't just be isolated to Instagram. It's an app at the end of the day that allows sharing. It's what Flickr should have thought of, or at least Kodak or even Polaroid. Heck, similarly this could even be compared to whether photography should be an artform versus painting or drawing? I think that discussion still exists even with the camera being over 150 years old. Within the subject of photography, the same discussion could be had as well across the multiple mediums - glass plates vs film, film vs polaroid, film vs digital (how many times have we heard the last one!?!?!?).
I think it all comes back down to whether images captured on a mobile should be deemed as art or a viable tool for image recording. On the surface, it does the job. No one can dispute that. It remains to be seen for longevity and posterity however. I've seen some great photos on Instagram and equally rubbish photos captured on cameras worth much more, most being my own
. Will we ever see large format, fine art prints made using Instagram? Sure maybe for small prints, but for larger prints we probably need to wait for technology to catch up.
Would someone hire a wedding photographer who uses their mobile and uploads them to Instagram? Probably not. Equally for important shoots like editorials, I highly doubt it for the time being. That would make for an interesting social experiment, pun slightly intended.
For Hurricane Sandy, the BBC also did the same with asking for user submitted photos. An interesting thing was half the time the editors kept asking if the image was taken by the submitter and whether they could publish it with attributes on the site. It adds more work for the editors and I'm sure there will be questions asked whether it's worth it. User Generated Content (UGC) is here, solely for the purpose of getting the readers to submit and have a share of ownership, having the feeling of contributed something (yes this is very subjective!), then they'll tell their friends and family that their photo was on a global news site. This increases traffic to their site and allows the publications to generate the necessary ad revenue, etc. The ABC were doing this in a way, with Mr Edwin Maher and his weather forecasts. Viewers could submit their photos of areas around Australia and one would be selected for that night for the weather forecast, with name attributed. It was a way to get others to watch the news and "contribute".
What's interesting to see is that the camera companies are starting to look at how to include the social sharing aspect within the camera itself. We've seen this happen with DSLRs now with the ability to do in camera editing of the JPGs. With the in camera editing, should these be
too? Similar with video being shoehorned into DSLR bodies. That's opening up another avenue to the discussion topic as well.
Personally, I use it as a visual scrapbook for things I see and want to record when I don't have my other gear with me. I don't rely solely on it. If I see a prospective location, I'll capture it on the phone then go back to the same spot with my other gear.
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:37 pm
Yeah, that too.