If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Twitter to compete with Instagram by adding its own filters so your pristine photos of your cat look like crap   (bits.blogs.nytimes.com) divider line 59
    More: Interesting, cats  
•       •       •

794 clicks; posted to Geek » on 03 Nov 2012 at 1:57 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-03 02:04:48 PM
falsely-tinted photos will be among the markers for how stupid and easily mockable this era is.

And nobody will want to look at your pictures in a few years.

I bet quite a few people are already tired of them now.

Its cool when photos from the past have various tints, they were caused because of a photographic chemical process, plus aging.

Yours are intentionally messed with, to add an artificial cachet to them that only you think adds quality to the result. That is not cool and shows instead nothing but faddish following a dumb trend.

Enjoy your mood ring and pet rock status some day, hipstagrammers.
 
2012-11-03 02:25:39 PM

Generation_D: Its cool when photos from the past have various tints, they were caused because of a photographic chemical process, plus aging.

Yours are intentionally messed with, to add an artificial cachet to them that only you think adds quality to the result. That is not cool and shows instead nothing but faddish following a dumb trend.


THIS

It's like faded video game and comic t-shirts. It's designed to make it look like you were into Mario before everyone else. I got bought one recently as a present and I use it for gardening. I won't be seen out and about looking like a bandwagon-jumping douchebag.
 
2012-11-03 02:32:06 PM
Ehhhh... IDK about all of this flibbertyblab with the earlier commenters. I think it's cute and harmless; nobody is presenting these photos as actual vintage photos or trying to imply they were taken earlier than they actually were (so the t-shirt analogy is already pretty flawed). Many people have fun playing with their photos, and photo-alteration techniques have existed before-- before instagram, before photoshop, before digital cameras even. It's not as if this is a newly repulsive hobby; it's just easier for more people to play with in the digital age than it was previously.
 
2012-11-03 02:35:33 PM

Generation_D: Enjoy your mood ring and pet rock status some day, hipstagrammers.


farkeruk: I won't be seen out and about looking like a bandwagon-jumping douchebag.


03.images.fireden.net
 
2012-11-03 02:39:23 PM

Generation_D: falsely-tinted photos will be among the markers for how stupid and easily mockable this era is.

And nobody will want to look at your pictures in a few years.

I bet quite a few people are already tired of them now.

Its cool when photos from the past have various tints, they were caused because of a photographic chemical process, plus aging.

Yours are intentionally messed with, to add an artificial cachet to them that only you think adds quality to the result. That is not cool and shows instead nothing but faddish following a dumb trend.

Enjoy your mood ring and pet rock status some day, hipstagrammers.


Too hipster for hipstagram ^^^^^^
 
2012-11-03 02:40:31 PM

farkeruk: Generation_D: Its cool when photos from the past have various tints, they were caused because of a photographic chemical process, plus aging.

Yours are intentionally messed with, to add an artificial cachet to them that only you think adds quality to the result. That is not cool and shows instead nothing but faddish following a dumb trend.

THIS

It's like faded video game and comic t-shirts. It's designed to make it look like you were into Mario before everyone else. I got bought one recently as a present and I use it for gardening. I won't be seen out and about looking like a bandwagon-jumping douchebag.


That's not even a stick in your butt, I think it's an entire log.
 
2012-11-03 02:50:20 PM

Karne: farkeruk: Generation_D: Its cool when photos from the past have various tints, they were caused because of a photographic chemical process, plus aging.

Yours are intentionally messed with, to add an artificial cachet to them that only you think adds quality to the result. That is not cool and shows instead nothing but faddish following a dumb trend.

THIS

It's like faded video game and comic t-shirts. It's designed to make it look like you were into Mario before everyone else. I got bought one recently as a present and I use it for gardening. I won't be seen out and about looking like a bandwagon-jumping douchebag.

That's not even a stick in your butt, I think it's an entire log.


Heaven's, no-- he might get upset that the log is sepia-toned. ;)
 
2012-11-03 03:10:27 PM

epoch_destroi: Heaven's, no-- he might get upset that the log is sepia-toned. ;)


Look, if people want to wear that stuff it's up to them. I'm not stopping them, and in fact, I welcome the presence of such products on the market as it makes it much easier for me to detect phonies by just looking at them.
 
2012-11-03 03:13:22 PM
so sorry. IMHO twitter is a world of dooshbags and photography in general is 98% suck, the panacea of no-talent dickheads unable to master a paintbrush. yes photography has its place and its talented types, and they are very few. twitter is just pathetic, my dogs poo has more going for it.
 
2012-11-03 03:17:37 PM
Its like this:

All photographs are is a copy of a real event.

If its a copy without alteration, using the best technology of the time, then its like looking through a clear window.

If its instagrammed or other stuff, the "artist" is trying to put their own statement into the process.

If that statement is unique or individual built up over years of work, then great.

If that statement is I paid $ .99 for my app to fiddle with the color tones .. then the photo is just more junk like everyone else's junk.

Why I compared it to pet rocks and mood rings. Its a fad.

Except in 20 years we'll all be stuck looking at the results of this fad whenever anyone wants to remember the 2010's, it'll be sort of cringe worthy as a historical body of work.

And your kids will mock you for it, heh.
 
2012-11-03 03:20:06 PM
I have Instagram on my phone. I try to stay away from the cheesy effects. I've found that the faux-HDR effect is a quick and easy way to compensate for the camera's deficiencies. It'll bring out details in shadows that are lost because the camera is fooled by a bright light source and reduces exposure. Sometimes the effect gets garishly cartoonish, but a black-white filter will cut that crap out and you end up with a nice, contrasty BW image.

i.imgur.com

I won't for a second think that a phone+Instagram would ever replace a "real" camera, but I can't lug around a DSLR everywhere I go. It's free and fun. I don't think it's bad in and of itself.
 
2012-11-03 03:22:52 PM

Generation_D: falsely-tinted photos will be among the markers for how stupid and easily mockable this era is.

And nobody will want to look at your pictures in a few years.

I bet quite a few people are already tired of them now.

Its cool when photos from the past have various tints, they were caused because of a photographic chemical process, plus aging.

Yours are intentionally messed with, to add an artificial cachet to them that only you think adds quality to the result. That is not cool and shows instead nothing but faddish following a dumb trend.

Enjoy your mood ring and pet rock status some day, hipstagrammers.


ok, ill bite.

i love instagram photos. when i first saw them, my first impression was that this idea was made by a child of the 70s or 80s, for children of the 70s and 80s. it is evocative of old family photos from that era - from the square dimensions that are like old polaroids to the off color tints that accompanied bad film, or getting your films poorly developed, or just general poor quality of photos that result from not being able to see them immediately after (unlike digicams).

and is it a surprise people are fascinated with history and want to imitate it, if only to create a false sense of nostalgia?

oh, and btw,do you feel the same about b&w photos? how about sepia tinted ones? are people who use them pretentious douchebags?
 
2012-11-03 03:31:52 PM

farkeruk: epoch_destroi: Heaven's, no-- he might get upset that the log is sepia-toned. ;)

Look, if people want to wear that stuff it's up to them. I'm not stopping them, and in fact, I welcome the presence of such products on the market as it makes it much easier for me to detect phonies by just looking at them.


Yes. Because you're so farking hardcore, am I right? You're all 'I'm going to go out of my way to buy consumer goods and then GARDEN IN THEM biatchES. That's right, I'm showing my disdain for things you like by getting mildly sweaty and grubby.'

How about you stop forming your self identity around what other people do, and by extension how cool you are for not doing it, and just fark off and do things you like?

Cause not doing stuff cause other people are doesn't sound hipsterish at all..

/nothing compares to the 80's
/deliberately clashing neon colors, flock of seagulls hair, etc.
 
2012-11-03 03:39:57 PM

thisiszombocom: Generation_D: falsely-tinted photos will be among the markers for how stupid and easily mockable this era is.

And nobody will want to look at your pictures in a few years.

I bet quite a few people are already tired of them now.

Its cool when photos from the past have various tints, they were caused because of a photographic chemical process, plus aging.

Yours are intentionally messed with, to add an artificial cachet to them that only you think adds quality to the result. That is not cool and shows instead nothing but faddish following a dumb trend.

Enjoy your mood ring and pet rock status some day, hipstagrammers.

ok, ill bite.

i love instagram photos. when i first saw them, my first impression was that this idea was made by a child of the 70s or 80s, for children of the 70s and 80s. it is evocative of old family photos from that era - from the square dimensions that are like old polaroids to the off color tints that accompanied bad film, or getting your films poorly developed, or just general poor quality of photos that result from not being able to see them immediately after (unlike digicams).

and is it a surprise people are fascinated with history and want to imitate it, if only to create a false sense of nostalgia?

oh, and btw,do you feel the same about b&w photos? how about sepia tinted ones? are people who use them pretentious douchebags?


I explained that above.

If you are a trained eye artist manipulating images, the result is interesting.

If on the other hand you are just changing photos because pre sets on an app does it, how is that adding anything interesting? it is adding historical context -- a bunch of people all downloaded and used the same photo filters on their phone cameras in 2011 and 2012.

So it does have history, but it isn't adding to the photograph -- these cameras already take pretty good photos. now they take pretty good photos that look like they're crappy old polaroids.

hows that an improvement?
 
2012-11-03 03:49:25 PM

thisiszombocom: i love instagram photos. when i first saw them, my first impression was that this idea was made by a child of the 70s or 80s, for children of the 70s and 80s. it is evocative of old family photos from that era - from the square dimensions that are like old polaroids to the off color tints that accompanied bad film, or getting your films poorly developed, or just general poor quality of photos that result from not being able to see them immediately after (unlike digicams).

and is it a surprise people are fascinated with history and want to imitate it, if only to create a false sense of nostalgia?


But don't you find that a little odd? People changing their memories to be in a different era to when they actually took place? I can pick up a photo from the 90s from a party and it all comes back to me, because everything down to the tones of people's skins or the colour of a jumper reminds me of the age they were and the time we lived.
 
2012-11-03 03:51:03 PM
At the very least, it's nice that people are taking a little bit time to look around at their world instead of only staring their little phones.
 
2012-11-03 04:01:42 PM
buntz: .

[03.images.fireden.net image 582x625]

Don't you mean:

img9.imageshack.us
 
2012-11-03 04:15:32 PM
I unabashedly love Instagram! Suck it, haters. Pictures say a 1000 words.... Most of my good friends live hundreds if not thousands of miles away from me. I love that I can still get glimpses into their lives and see the scenery they are seeing, the people they are with, the projects they are working on, the meals they are proud of making. I love my Holga but it's expensive to buy film and develop it... meanwhile Instagram is free and has the same desired affect.

I still have a Facebook account but it annoys me more and more. Half of the content is an ad. I don't care who "likes" Target. I don't care what game you are playing. I don't care who you are voting for. I don't care what articles you read.

Instagram has more of a human touch to it. No ads. Just peeks into the lives of other people.
 
2012-11-03 04:17:56 PM

buntz: 03.images.fireden.net


Anyone notice that every time someone posts this picture, it's never accompanied by an actual defense of their opinion? It's almost like dumb people use memes to obfuscate the fact they don't have an actual, intelligent thought process.

Gaboo: img9.imageshack.us


Perfect.
 
2012-11-03 04:22:24 PM

KrispyKritter: so sorry. IMHO twitter is a world of dooshbags and photography in general is 98% suck, the panacea of no-talent dickheads unable to master a paintbrush. yes photography has its place and its talented types, and they are very few. twitter is just pathetic, my dogs poo has more going for it.


Preach on brother!! You could take a great photo by pure chance. It just takes a click.

Good luck painting something even decent with no skills.
 
2012-11-03 04:25:21 PM

arghyematey: I unabashedly love Instagram! Suck it, haters. Pictures say a 1000 words.... Most of my good friends live hundreds if not thousands of miles away from me. I love that I can still get glimpses into their lives and see the scenery they are seeing, the people they are with, the projects they are working on, the meals they are proud of making. I love my Holga but it's expensive to buy film and develop it... meanwhile Instagram is free and has the same desired affect.

I still have a Facebook account but it annoys me more and more. Half of the content is an ad. I don't care who "likes" Target. I don't care what game you are playing. I don't care who you are voting for. I don't care what articles you read.

Instagram has more of a human touch to it. No ads. Just peeks into the lives of other people.


You know Facebook owns Instagram, right?
 
2012-11-03 04:43:41 PM

Mike_LowELL: buntz: 03.images.fireden.net

Anyone notice that every time someone posts this picture, it's never accompanied by an actual defense of their opinion? It's almost like dumb people use memes to obfuscate the fact they don't have an actual, intelligent thought process.

Gaboo: img9.imageshack.us

Perfect.


that's funny MiKe, because people above and below that post gave reasoned arguments ;) that you didn't address ;)
 
2012-11-03 04:44:46 PM

arghyematey: Pictures say a 1000 words.... Most of my good friends live hundreds if not thousands of miles away from me.


I'm in a very similar situation, but...

I love that I can still get glimpses into their lives and see the scenery they are seeing, the people they are with, the projects they are working on, the meals they are proud of making. I love my Holga but it's expensive to buy film and develop it... meanwhile Instagram is free and has the same desired affect.

I can take excellent pictures with my Droid 4, or if I'm feeling really fancy, with my Nikon D3100. With the Droid, I can share directly to Facebook, as well as to any other service that has an appropriately-designed Android app. With the Nikon, I need to copy the photo from an SD card to my computer and then upload from a computer, but while it involves more steps than pressing "Share" on my phone, it's not hard at all, and furthermore I can quickly adjust the white-balance et al. if I need to before uploading.

How would Instagram make that any better?
 
2012-11-03 04:46:39 PM

arghyematey: Pictures say a 1000 words....


Really, because most of the photos can be summed up in one word: poser.

/Do your friends like it when you visually lie to them?
 
2012-11-03 04:48:49 PM

EngineerAU: /Do your friends like it when you visually lie to them?


img706.imageshack.us
 
2012-11-03 04:50:49 PM

rocky_howard: arghyematey: I unabashedly love Instagram! Suck it, haters. Pictures say a 1000 words.... Most of my good friends live hundreds if not thousands of miles away from me. I love that I can still get glimpses into their lives and see the scenery they are seeing, the people they are with, the projects they are working on, the meals they are proud of making. I love my Holga but it's expensive to buy film and develop it... meanwhile Instagram is free and has the same desired affect.

I still have a Facebook account but it annoys me more and more. Half of the content is an ad. I don't care who "likes" Target. I don't care what game you are playing. I don't care who you are voting for. I don't care what articles you read.

Instagram has more of a human touch to it. No ads. Just peeks into the lives of other people.

You know Facebook owns Instagram, right?


That doesn't affect that I like Instagram more than Facebook. I like Newcastle but I don't particularly like Heineken, which owns Newcastle. Instagram and Facebook are different services just like Newcastle and Heineken are different beers.
 
2012-11-03 05:25:21 PM

epoch_destroi: Anyone notice that every time someone posts this picture, it's never accompanied by an actual defense of their opinion? It's almost like dumb people use memes to obfuscate the fact they don't have an actual, intelligent thought process.


Can't figure it out? Ok. A lot of people seem to get angry when other people enjoy something they don't.
The same type of people that rant & rave about "today's" music and how bad it is and it's not good, like "back in MY day"
I always assumed the meme spoke for itself. It's a representation of how angry people seem to get over a difference of opinion. Especially a difference of opinion that in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter. And it's amusing to some people to see people get SO angry over it.

This isn't a discussion of religion, or politics. It's nothing that affects anyone other than their own personal enjoyment of something.

So instead of saying "Personally, I'm not a fan of how those photos look however if you like them, more power to you" they attack a stranger, or a whole group of people by saying "Enjoy your mood ring and pet rock status some day, hipstagrammers" and "I won't be seen out and about looking like a bandwagon-jumping douchebag"

Does that make it clear to you? 

/and yes, I know you, I bit anyway
 
2012-11-03 05:45:35 PM
enkei: I won't for a second think that a phone+Instagram would ever replace a "real" camera, but I can't lug around a DSLR everywhere I go

Which is why I have two point and shoots as well (one is waterproof, but takes lower quality pictures than the other one).

'm Really thinking of getting a second DSLR body now that canon dropped prices a ton last month, gotta go full frame this time. Unfortunately, that also means ditching my digital only lenses.

// As for instagram, I don't get it. As a collection of photographic effects, it's not technically impressive. And as a photo sharing site, it's immensely lackluster and short on features.

I don't get why someone thought it was worth a billion dollars (my best guess is that they just wanted the eyeballs). After the sale announcement, I shuffled over to see what all of the fuss was about and I was underwhelmed. I could gather a handful of programmers from downstairs and produce the technical side of instagram in just a few days.
 
2012-11-03 05:49:41 PM

lordargent: enkei: I won't for a second think that a phone+Instagram would ever replace a "real" camera, but I can't lug around a DSLR everywhere I go

Which is why I have two point and shoots as well (one is waterproof, but takes lower quality pictures than the other one).

'm Really thinking of getting a second DSLR body now that canon dropped prices a ton last month, gotta go full frame this time. Unfortunately, that also means ditching my digital only lenses.

// As for instagram, I don't get it. As a collection of photographic effects, it's not technically impressive. And as a photo sharing site, it's immensely lackluster and short on features.

I don't get why someone thought it was worth a billion dollars (my best guess is that they just wanted the eyeballs). After the sale announcement, I shuffled over to see what all of the fuss was about and I was underwhelmed. I could gather a handful of programmers from downstairs and produce the technical side of instagram in just a few days.


Uh, you know Instagram was exactly that, right? When FB acquired them, they were only 13 employees. It was effectively someone grabbing a handful of programmers from downstairs.
 
2012-11-03 05:56:25 PM

epoch_destroi: that's funny MiKe, because people above and below that post gave reasoned arguments ;) that you didn't address ;)


That's because photography is hardly my area of expertise, and this discussion thread would gain nothing if I was to comment on it. However, I am an expert on "stopliking.jpg", and provided my input on it, choosing my words as to make sure I asserted no other authority in this thread.
 
2012-11-03 05:58:23 PM

anfrind: arghyematey: Pictures say a 1000 words.... Most of my good friends live hundreds if not thousands of miles away from me.

I'm in a very similar situation, but...

I love that I can still get glimpses into their lives and see the scenery they are seeing, the people they are with, the projects they are working on, the meals they are proud of making. I love my Holga but it's expensive to buy film and develop it... meanwhile Instagram is free and has the same desired affect.

I can take excellent pictures with my Droid 4, or if I'm feeling really fancy, with my Nikon D3100. With the Droid, I can share directly to Facebook, as well as to any other service that has an appropriately-designed Android app. With the Nikon, I need to copy the photo from an SD card to my computer and then upload from a computer, but while it involves more steps than pressing "Share" on my phone, it's not hard at all, and furthermore I can quickly adjust the white-balance et al. if I need to before uploading.

How would Instagram make that any better?


I didn't say Instagram made anything better- I just said that I love it. My more artistic friends are the ones that are more likely to use it... and I like that. And I have a Droid- I use it to take pictures through the Instagram app. Point, shoot, add a filter (or don't), click- it's up on my Instagram feed. There is the option to put it up on your Facebook wall, too... I just don't do it. I figure if people want to see my quasi-artsy photos, they can follow me on Instagram.

I can see why a lot of photographers wouldn't like Instagram. Is it cheating? Yeah, kind of. But I'm not pretending to have any real talent in photography, just having fun with it with like-minded friends. Kind of like sharing doodles. Nothing life changing... just kind of like Facebook but without so much clutter.
 
2012-11-03 06:17:52 PM
rocky_howard: Uh, you know Instagram was exactly that, right? When FB acquired them, they were only 13 employees. It was effectively someone grabbing a handful of programmers from downstairs.

Well yeah, looking at it technically, that's all I would assume it would take.

So the real question is, why the hell did it become so popular? Just because it does it in the phone?

Do they even allow you to do any manipulation from the web site itself?

Couldn't the entire thing just be done as a web site geared toward mobile devices?

// whatever happened to Kai's Power Tools?
 
2012-11-03 06:20:06 PM
sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net
 
2012-11-03 06:23:46 PM
I guess I just don't "get" Instagram. Is that all it does, have filters that make your pictures look old?
 
2012-11-03 06:25:51 PM

buntz: epoch_destroi: Anyone notice that every time someone posts this picture, it's never accompanied by an actual defense of their opinion? It's almost like dumb people use memes to obfuscate the fact they don't have an actual, intelligent thought process.

Can't figure it out? Ok. A lot of people seem to get angry when other people enjoy something they don't.
The same type of people that rant & rave about "today's" music and how bad it is and it's not good, like "back in MY day"
I always assumed the meme spoke for itself. It's a representation of how angry people seem to get over a difference of opinion. Especially a difference of opinion that in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter. And it's amusing to some people to see people get SO angry over it.

This isn't a discussion of religion, or politics. It's nothing that affects anyone other than their own personal enjoyment of something.

So instead of saying "Personally, I'm not a fan of how those photos look however if you like them, more power to you" they attack a stranger, or a whole group of people by saying "Enjoy your mood ring and pet rock status some day, hipstagrammers" and "I won't be seen out and about looking like a bandwagon-jumping douchebag"

Does that make it clear to you? 

/and yes, I know you, I bit anyway


hey asshole, i was agreeing with you.
 
2012-11-03 06:34:44 PM
arghyematey: I can take excellent pictures with my Droid 4, or if I'm feeling really fancy, with my Nikon D3100. With the Droid, I can share directly to Facebook,

The facebook app also allows you to share directly to facebook ;P

I guess the overall point is that if photo sharing is your goal, there were already plenty of ^better ways to do that before instagram. (Picasa, Flickr, Photobucket). So why did instagram become popular to the point where someone was willing to buy it for a billion dollars?

I mean, looking back to 2005. Yahoo bought flickr for $35 million. I know it's been 7 years but come on, a billion for instagram? REALLY?

// ok, it only cost ~$750 million due to stock price shifts, but still, really?

// I need to stop writing engineering applications and focus on image filters, that's where the money really is.
 
2012-11-03 06:38:48 PM

epoch_destroi: hey asshole, i was agreeing with you.


Ha ha, sorry, I responsed to Mike_LowELL using your response instead of his initial troll! My bad!

Can we be BFFs again?
 
2012-11-03 06:48:16 PM
Can someone explain the "OMG, you can share photos directly to Facebook" boner? Because, and I know this sounds crazy, you can share photos directly to Facebook RIGHT FROM FACEBOOK.
 
2012-11-03 07:01:24 PM

lordargent:
So the real question is, why the hell did it become so popular? Just because it does it in the phone?

Do they even allow you to do any manipulation from the web site itself?

Couldn't the entire thing just be done as a web site geared toward mobile devices?

// whatever happened to Kai's Power Tools?



Honestly?

iPhone + Hipsters

It created a critical mass of users committed to the service that gave the impression of being a cool club to belong to.
Other iPhone users started to join.
Since it was exclusive for iPhone, the iPhone users, being smug bastards as they are, started mocking the other brand users and having little in-jokes that only Instagram users would get and having interaction only Instagrams users would have. It was the gated community that kept the plebes away.
Like a dam, water pressure built up on the non-iPhone side and when Instagram opened the flood gates by releasing an Android version, 30 million users joined right away.


Facebook then took noticed and said "holy shiat!" and bought it because Facebook main feature is sharing photos and Instagram was growing greatly that space.
 
2012-11-03 07:19:23 PM
I don't get instagram (garbage in, garbage out) but i still wish i had thought of it
 
2012-11-03 07:23:16 PM
Instagram is like ricing out cars, or growing a beard. Congratulations, you "like" it. It's still just a crappy camera pic/Civic/double chin.
 
2012-11-03 07:33:51 PM

buntz: Ha ha, sorry, I responsed to Mike_LowELL using your response instead of his initial troll! My bad!


Step 1: Post meme which, by nature of being a generalized rebuttal, is inherently inflammatory.
Step 2: Get called out for it.
Step 3: Accuse the person who called you out by labeling him a troll.

See what's wrong with this?
 
2012-11-03 07:44:04 PM

Gaboo: Can someone explain the "OMG, you can share photos directly to Facebook" boner? Because, and I know this sounds crazy, you can share photos directly to Facebook RIGHT FROM FACEBOOK.


Facebook mobile, at least for iCrap, does not allow uploading photos. You have to use either the FB app, and allow them even more of your precious data, or some other app, for same thing. Instagram was worth a huge chunk of change for the same reason FB was; it's data mining left on all the time on the phone.

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Instagram is like ricing out cars, or growing a beard. Congratulations, you "like" it. It's still just a crappy camera pic/Civic/double chin.


I'm glad you think so. It's not like my buddies use Instagram to share pics of their newborns or anything else important and cool. It's all ricers and duckfaces. It's just a farking picture app, get over yourself for farks sake.
 
2012-11-03 07:46:40 PM

Yankees Team Gynecologist: Instagram is like ricing out cars, or growing a beard. Congratulations, you "like" it. It's still just a crappy camera pic/Civic/double chin.


You should see my regular chin.
 
2012-11-03 08:05:36 PM
kroonermanblack: I'm glad you think so. It's not like my buddies use Instagram to share pics of their newborns or anything else important and cool. It's all ricers and duckfaces. It's just a farking picture app, get over yourself for farks sake.

But what made you choose instragram over any of the other choices (with more features) that were already available? That's what I'm trying to figure out.

I go to the instragram home page, and it just directs me to download the mobile app. I don't see anything describing what sets them apart from other photo sharing sites/apps (IE, why use them instead of flickr which has been out since 2004?). I can't even see a way to get sample galleries, do they even have galleries?

My experience with photos that have been shared with me from instagram is that the site itself sucks (note that I'm not even talking about filters here). And the people who share those photos with me are sending them through facebook anyway (so why didn't they just take the photo and send via the facebook app?)

Meanwhile, go to the flickr home page, and it's obvious what they do.

As far as I can tell, instagram is just a middleman that lets you manipulate your photos before posting them on a social media site (be that facebook, or the instagram site itself).

// maybe I'm just too techie/photog to get it.
 
2012-11-03 08:28:11 PM

lordargent: arghyematey: I can take excellent pictures with my Droid 4, or if I'm feeling really fancy, with my Nikon D3100. With the Droid, I can share directly to Facebook,


The part you quoted was from my original reply to him.

The facebook app also allows you to share directly to facebook ;P

True. From my Droid, if I take a photo that's worth sharing, I can pick it out from my gallery, select "Share", and then select whatever service I want to use to share it (usually GMail or Facebook). The only third-party app I need to do that is the one for the service I'm using, and depending on the circumstances it may not be a third-party app at all.

As I understand it, however, it's not that simple on an iPhone, since iOS severely limits sharing of data between apps. Which might make an all-in-one app like Instagram more appealing on that platform.

I guess the overall point is that if photo sharing is your goal, there were already plenty of ^better ways to do that before instagram. (Picasa, Flickr, Photobucket). So why did instagram become popular to the point where someone was willing to buy it for a billion dollars?

I mean, looking back to 2005. Yahoo bought flickr for $35 million. I know it's been 7 years but come on, a billion for instagram? REALLY?

// ok, it only cost ~$750 million due to stock price shifts, but still, really?

// I need to stop writing engineering applications and focus on image filters, that's where the money really is.


I didn't follow the early history of photo apps for smartphones very closely, but was there really anything better early on? Flickr was popular for years, but stagnated after Yahoo bought them and last I heard their iPhone app is still awful.

I completely agree that one billion dollars is a ridiculous price tag for Instagram, however.
 
2012-11-03 08:40:35 PM
I guess the appeal is an immediate gratification of faux time travel to the future and the past simultaneously, seeking the experience that a record of our lives should age, when we know a digital image will never age.

Some of my digital images are old enough now that it does feel weird to look at them and see an image that hasn't aged. Looking at old, digital family photos is a new experience. It's a little unsettling.
 
2012-11-03 08:53:49 PM

thisiszombocom: i love instagram photos. when i first saw them, my first impression was that this idea was made by a child of the 70s or 80s, for children of the 70s and 80s. it is evocative of old family photos from that era - from the square dimensions that are like old polaroids to the off color tints that accompanied bad film, or getting your films poorly developed, or just general poor quality of photos that result from not being able to see them immediately after (unlike digicams).

and is it a surprise people are fascinated with history and want to imitate it, if only to create a false sense of nostalgia?

oh, and btw,do you feel the same about b&w photos? how about sepia tinted ones? are people who use them pretentious douchebags?


This. It's not even a false sense of nostalgia. The items themselves might not be from this era of time but that doesn't make the nostalgia any less real.

Like it or not, photographic features are indications of their time and as such carry the social trappings of their eras. Whether it's a photo that looks like it's from the 80s, or the 60s, or the 1910s, we collectively understand on some level the signifying that comes with these filters and we imbue (what we perceive as) the values and memories of these eras onto the photographs.

Furthermore, these filters create what appears to many as a more tactile, "real" experience, that helps to counteract the perceived coldness of ever-more-accurate technology. This happens with all new technological advances, which is why every few years the world goes in cycles where at one pendulum end we exclaim, "The future is bright and shiny and awesome and I love technology!", while at the other end we cry, "The future is cold and inhospitable and technology is emotionless and alienating!" Cultural devices like these filters allow us to use technology to create better, faster, smaller photographs, while coloring them with a sense of the warm and the hand-made.

Even if it's only a veneer, it makes us feel better.
 
2012-11-03 09:07:02 PM

austerity101: This. It's not even a false sense of nostalgia. The items themselves might not be from this era of time but that doesn't make the nostalgia any less real.

Like it or not, photographic features are indications of their time and as such carry the social trappings of their eras. Whether it's a photo that looks like it's from the 80s, or the 60s, or the 1910s, we collectively understand on some level the signifying that comes with these filters and we imbue (what we perceive as) the values and memories of these eras onto the photographs.

Furthermore, these filters create what appears to many as a more tactile, "real" experience, that helps to counteract the perceived coldness of ever-more-accurate technology. This happens with all new technological advances, which is why every few years the world goes in cycles where at one pendulum end we exclaim, "The future is bright and shiny and awesome and I love technology!", while at the other end we cry, "The future is cold and inhospitable and technology is emotionless and alienating!" Cultural devices like these filters allow us to use technology to create better, faster, smaller photographs, while coloring them with a sense of the warm and the hand-made.

Even if it's only a veneer, it makes us feel better.


---

Sure...just like how that rear spoiler provides no useful downforce for that FWD Civic, but it makes the kid "feel better."

Speak for yourself--not all of us fall for crap like this. If you do, that's fine, just realize it for what it is, and spare us the indignation about the ridicule. Yes, Instagrammers/ricers/WWE fans/etc. should be allowed to enjoy the silly things they enjoy, but don't act surprised that it's made fun of on the internet. That suggests you think your thing is somehow above the others.
 
2012-11-03 09:29:16 PM

Yankees Team Gynecologist: austerity101: This. It's not even a false sense of nostalgia. The items themselves might not be from this era of time but that doesn't make the nostalgia any less real.

Like it or not, photographic features are indications of their time and as such carry the social trappings of their eras. Whether it's a photo that looks like it's from the 80s, or the 60s, or the 1910s, we collectively understand on some level the signifying that comes with these filters and we imbue (what we perceive as) the values and memories of these eras onto the photographs.

Furthermore, these filters create what appears to many as a more tactile, "real" experience, that helps to counteract the perceived coldness of ever-more-accurate technology. This happens with all new technological advances, which is why every few years the world goes in cycles where at one pendulum end we exclaim, "The future is bright and shiny and awesome and I love technology!", while at the other end we cry, "The future is cold and inhospitable and technology is emotionless and alienating!" Cultural devices like these filters allow us to use technology to create better, faster, smaller photographs, while coloring them with a sense of the warm and the hand-made.

Even if it's only a veneer, it makes us feel better.

---

Sure...just like how that rear spoiler provides no useful downforce for that FWD Civic, but it makes the kid "feel better."

Speak for yourself--not all of us fall for crap like this. If you do, that's fine, just realize it for what it is, and spare us the indignation about the ridicule. Yes, Instagrammers/ricers/WWE fans/etc. should be allowed to enjoy the silly things they enjoy, but don't act surprised that it's made fun of on the internet. That suggests you think your thing is somehow above the others.


I ridiculed no one, and my comments suggested nothing of me thinking "my thing" is somehow above the others. I don't even know what "my thing" is in this case.

I'm just tired of people dismissing things as, "Oh, it's just hipsters doing bad things that they ironically love," because it's so much more than that and there are actual social explanations for things like Instagram.

You don't have to like it, but it shows great ignorance to dismiss its legitimacy simply because you don't like it. It's not about "falling for" anything. It's not like these photos are fooling anyone, and if you think that's the point then you're wildly misguided.

/For the record, I don't even use Instagram.
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report