Cameras all have a pretty solid set of features and design elements that appeal to a wide range of users. But, for the most part, pretty much all of them lack a set of features that would make them all a lot more powerful and enjoyable to use.
Here on PetaPixel, the focus is often how people use cameras to create beautiful art, capture incredible moments, and document important events. However, sometimes there's an intersection between camera technology and ethics that is just as important, if less visually interesting.
I remember when I first became a professional photographer and I was devouring advice from those further along in the path than me. People talked about personal photography projects and how important they were. They were important for developing your skills and getting noticed and setting yourself apart, but in my experience, there’s something more important.
When I made images documenting the mourning period after the passing of Queen Elizabeth II there was a complexity to the situation that I wanted to convey. I wrote about navigating different manifestations of grief, as well as that grief in the context of the wider political relationship between the deceased and the citizens of the UK.
After wondering why the Imaging Resource (IR) was seeing so few updates recently, a number of people noticed that it seemed to have vanished from the internet as of sometime last Friday, May 5. Had another "OG" photo review website bitten the dust?
The Nikon Z8 is exciting, not only because it’s a very capable camera, but also because it represents a major paradigm shift in the camera industry.
If you are not responsible for the meaning behind your photographs then who is?
Long-time Sony executive Shigeki Ishizuka recently gave an interview in which he candidly spoke about early developments in the imaging division and how the flip to mirrorless was part of a longer-term plan to unsettle the camera market. Was this really a clever strategy or a re-writing of history to fit the narrative?
Hey, photographers: don’t be discouraged if you can’t afford the latest and greatest gear out there. You may be surprised by what you can do with modest gear.
When Nikon announced the new Z 400mm f/2.8 TC lens, lots of people asked if I was going to buy one. My answer? “No way, I’d be crazy to spend $14,000 on one lens.” So I guess I’m crazy, because now I have one. Here’s what happened that changed my mind.
Yesterday, ethicist Kwame Anthony Appiah published his response to a parent of the bride's question: would it be ethical to digitally alter the hair color of a guest at the wedding? Appiah argues yes, but I think that answer misses the mark.
When it rains, it pours. Recent controversies have shown that photography competitions, even large, prestigious ones, are woefully unprepared for the ongoing artificial intelligence (AI) revolution.
The monochrome digital camera is an odd beast - something talked about in revered terms - with echoes reverberating from those hallowed Leica halls because it is only Leica that had dipped its toe in the proverbial monochrome waters... until now.
Artificial intelligence images have the potential to misinform the future. For the first time in the technological present, we are on the cusp of a life-and-art-altering explosion of intentionally created dis-informational imagery.
The alarm on my phone sounds at 4 am. For a few bleary seconds I think, this can’t be right…but then it hits me: I have a plane to catch. Not only me, but my wife, our four kids, and my mother-in-law need to cram ourselves and all our bags into the minivan and be on the road by 4:45 am. We are headed to St. Louis for my last photography conference of the year: Shutterfest.
Last week, PetaPixel broke the news about an artist refusing a prize after his AI image won a major photo contest and since then major publications have followed up on the story, creating a firestorm.
Video editors are flocking to DaVinci Resolve in droves, marking a major paradigm shift in the editing landscape that we haven't seen since the dreadful launch of Final Cut Pro X drove users to Adobe Premiere Pro.
We've all seen the images surfacing online of portraits with seven fingers on one hand and two left feet. Recently, the internet has been inundated by imagery coming from prompted artificial intelligence programs such as Midjourney, Jasper, and DALL-E. The world has been captivated by the potential these new neural networks bring to the creative space.
Innovation from Canon got me into photography, but sadly Canon and its competitors lost their way.
I, like so many others, have spent years of my life attempting to make it easier to be informed about cameras and imaging technology. But despite this, I and those like me have failed in our goal to educate Gen Z.
I recently wrote about the importance of discourse on the ethics around photography, where I offered my perspective on why rules and doctrines around decision making can diminish your ability to stand behind your work, justify your decisions, and really take responsibility and ownership over your vision.
What Canon says and does is important to the camera industry because it is so dominant across large swathes of the sector. And as a publicly listed company, it is required to publish both its financial results and business strategy going forward. Canon recently updated its medium-term strategy, so where does it see itself in five years' time? In one word: dominant. More importantly, what does this say about the future for everyone else?
Last week, Levi Strauss was heavily criticized for its decision to start using digital models generated by artificial intelligence (AI) instead of using that investment to hire more real people, especially since it was done under the guise of "diversity."
Last week, Adobe made waves by announcing the beta release of its new text-to-image generative artificial intelligence (AI) model, Firefly. Adobe says its new platform wasn't built using stolen images, but rather, as Adobe boasts, Firefly has been trained using Adobe Stock images, openly licensed content, and public domain content.
Some years ago I wrote about the (now fairly obvious seeming) perspective of photography as a process of grounded, present awareness in order to achieve a result.
How I feel about losing DPReview is difficult to put to words. The brand has been a mainstay since I took up a camera and the space that they leave now is one that I don't think will ever be properly filled again.
For some reason wedding photography isn’t a well-respected genre in the photography industry. I have no idea why that is when it’s so physically, creatively, and technically demanding. But I do have a lot of ideas about why wedding photography should garner more respect.
Photography, like every art form, is subjective. As such, anything we create is open to criticism, whether we like it or not. When criticism is given with the best of intentions, it can lead to growth.
Photography is a visual art, and as with most art forms, there are no rigid rules or formulas that guarantee a captivating image. However, there are certain key elements that often contribute to an image's impact and appeal.
Seeing is believing. This concise rhetoric goes a long way to explain the power of photography. Where a statistic can reduce an entire country to a few numbers a photograph can bypass the mind and head directly to the heart via the eyes. Emotional, heartbreaking eyewitness testimony is just another block of text compared to the medium which makes the viewer themselves an eyewitness to whatever the photographer wanted to show them.
