Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Flickr Is Courting the Next Generation of Photographers

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the next-generation dept.

First time accepted submitter Molly McHugh writes Flickr Vice President Bernardo Hernandez explains how the beloved photo platform is targeting a new generation that's addicted to smartphones. “10 or 15 years ago it was expensive and complicated to explore the world of photography,” Hernandez said. "Very few people could afford that—[it is] no surprise the best photographers 20 years ago were older people. We believe all of that is changing with the mobile [photography] revolution."

4 of 97 comments (clear)

  1. Expensive and complicated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I bought my first 16mm camera for less than $10 (the flash cubes were more expensive!). B&W film was cheap, developing the negs was cheap too. I was 11 or so and that was the late 80s. You paid a lot more attention to ISO and shutter speed settings when you had to wait a week for a roll to be developed and find out which shots worked and which ones didn't. By the 90s in high school I could develop my own film, which really just took some minimal education.

    10 - 15 years ago you could get a decent 35mm for under $100 and photo development was cheap and common enough to fully automate at a kiosk in the mall

    SLR / DSLR prices have pretty much kept pace with the times.

    So what exactly was pricey about "exploring the world of photography"?

    1. Re:Expensive and complicated? by spire3661 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You are being purposefully obtuse. Not everyone had access to that kind of ongoing capital. A digital camera is a VERY different proposition than film. It is essentially a camera with unlimited film after the initial capital outlay. I know i waited until digital was ready before getting into photography because of this. All of the stuff you listed needs heavy infrastructure, time, deliveries, chemicals etc. With digital all you need is the camera, and a laptop to store them. 10-15 years ago was 1999-2003. I had taken well over 10,000 unique digital pictures by 2003 at a fraction of the cost of film.

      --
      Good-bye
  2. Antiquated features, disloyal to paying users by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Flickr made paying users regret paying for their service, since they suddenly gave away almost all of the premium features for free. Antiquated features aren't really updated (where's the password protected gallery?) and the forum/app that they have to request features is broken since months. At this sort of pricing/service, I'll get a VPS and use that for hosting my pictures before my subscription us up for renewal again...

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  3. Re:...the best photographers were older people... by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    All that experience can be accumulated hundreds of times faster in digital where you can see immediate results. Tomorrow's experts will be more expert than yesterday's experts, just as the 20th century saw huge leaps in athletic performance such as running and swimming races, weight lifting records, etc. There are also thousands of artists today that equal the top handful of masters of old times, it simply isn't acknowledge because it is subjective, and appreciation is inherently relative, in the same way people love 60's sports cars even though they are actually slow and poor-handling.

    Actually, there's something to be said about the "old way". Where it took days from when you took your photo to when you got it back.

    It meant you had to work at your shot - you had to compose it perfectly, get the exposure right and all the other stuff. Then click the frame.

    If you were good, you didn't take extra shots "just in case". You knew that after waiting the few days for the photo to come back, it'll be good.

    Today's digital camera? Just click away mindlessly until it comes out right. Trial and error. Just snap snap snap. You know the drill - after that trip you come back with 10,000 snaps, and then filter out through the whole lot to find the few that are keepers. Because the rest would be garbage.

    Which approach is better? Hard to tell. Though truth be told, equipment actually doesn't matter. National Geographic photographers have intentionally gone on trips equipped with nothing more than an iPhone and still take stunning photos using nothing more than the default camera app.