I had to laugh a couple days ago when I saw a blog post entitled “Why I really, really hate Instagram.” Instagram is a very simple iPhone photo-sharing app. Before you upload your photo, you can apply an image filter to give it a retro or artistic look. The author hates Instagram because it encourages the use of filters to “destroy” the image quality of your photos (by removing digital information from them).
While I understand the author’s point from a technical perspective – I believe his angst (“Stop deliberately destroying your own memories.”) is completely misplaced.
I love Instagram because it motivates me to take more pictures. I think the artistic degradation makes it safer to experiment and take photos of mundane things, while cultivating an artistic eye. I’m not trying and be a professional photographer. These photos are artistic expression (not to mention memories) that I wouldn’t have otherwise taken and saved. For me, more pictures (even crappy ones) are better than fewer pictures.
Knowing that some small audience is looking at the photos I take is also a huge motivator. To an extent, the “internet famous” dynamic is at play (I get an emotional boost when people like my pics), but also a small app like this creates an important social contract among its users. You know what you post will be public. You know it is OK to experiment creatively. And importantly, your audience knows what to expect. You don’t have to ask yourself all the questions you ask yourself before you share a photo on Facebook. I imagine this is why some people have loved flickr for years.
So, ranting against filtering photos is like a musician who calls Garage Band an unworthy tool for making music. One person’s art killer is another person’s art enabler. Creating and sharing are two huge forces for good, so shut up.
Very well said. The part of the original blog post that really rubbed me the wrong way was the idea that somehow the “data” of the photographs is the bits that are saved to the hard drive (or flash memory, or web service as appropriate). The really important “data” in photos are the memories they recall and the feelings they engender in the viewer. To the extent that Instagram is able to better do those things, it is actually preserving more data, not less, even if there are fewer bits associated with the actual photo.
Instagram is one of my favorite photo sharing place . all the service easy and simple
I too love instragram. I have received an iPhone which is gift from my husband. One of his christmas gift ideas last year. The application itself enhances the photos. Which you can manipulate make it look sepia etc. It does interfere to the rules in photography. They are totally different thing. The art of taking picture and capturing its emotional aspect is the hardest part of having a good photo that people appreciates.
Instagram sounds like an interesting app, I think I’ll give a go.
I agree with you Adam. People have their own way in expressing their creativity, and i see no wrong in Instagram. It is still preserve memory. Quoted from Adam,” Even crappy ones are better than fewer pictures”. Thanks for the thought.
“The author hates Instagram because it encourages the use of photographic filters to “destroy” the image quality of your photos (by removing digital information from them).”
I also don’t agree to him. Editing photos digitally improves their quality rather than destroying it.
I really agree with “Pop art.” Every person has their own way to express their creativity.