The UCR California Museum of photography recently hosted a chronology of digital cameras. “The End of Film, a Brief History of Digital Cameras, 1987-2009″
It included the 1987 Casio VS-101 .28 mp and ended with the Canon 5D Mark II. Should there have been an iPhone in there? Years from now, will iPhones be included in digital camera chronologies?
At first, I thought, it would be irritating to see an iPhone in a museum for photography. Granted, it is responsible for millions of photographers who would otherwise not take pictures, but what about it makes it particularly important over other camera phones?
Then I thought about the screen. The iPhones huge LCD screen truly advanced cell phone photography due to the large bright screen that provided a satisfying and intuitive platform to view images. The first of its kind to be popularly used. Furthermore, images can be instantly proliferated over the web. Consumer and DSLR cams are behind in this regard, only recently have there been wifi enabled digicams.
Although the process of snapping a DSLR pic and inkjetting is easy enough, with the iPhone, there is no need to even upload the image to a computer. Granted, the resolution is horrible, but the images look great on the screen, so in most cases, there is no need for a clearer lens or more pixels. I find myself sketching with the iPhone, or taking pictures as a form of notes.
In terms of a camera, I would not want the iPhone to sit next to the 5D Mark II. I agree with the decision to put the 5D at the end. For most professionals (journalists, commercial, events), the 5D is benchmark. But the iPhone should be viewed at least as a hyperbolic example of a camera phone and an important phenomenon in photography. Everyone can switch into photographer mode at all times. Images can be instantly viewed or even shared over the internet. The death of film also marks the death of the print. Devices like the iPhone make printing increasingly pointless for casual photographers.
