6 Cellphone images in Time Magazine's "Best Photos of the Year"

Summary:
Expires:
References:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: University of British Columbia, Canada
Keywords:
Cc:

columbotrek writes:

They look bad even on a computer monitor. Imagine how small and lack
luster they would look printed on a high resolution media such as
photographic paper. That and transfer charges are why my cellphones do
not include the camera function.

True, the image quality tends to be awful. But when I got my current
phone (about a year ago), my carrier did not offer *any* multi-band GSM
phones without a camera. There were a couple of "bargain" phones
without cameras, but they would have been unusable in Europe. So I had
to get a camera. It's turned out to be useful a couple of times when I
wasn't carrying a real camera.

On the other hand, I've never paid any transfer charges. The phone will
happily transfer images to my computer using an ordinary mini-USB cable
and appropriate software.

Dave

"Dave Martindale" wrote in message
...

columbotrek writes:

They look bad even on a computer monitor. Imagine how small and lack
luster they would look printed on a high resolution media such as
photographic paper. That and transfer charges are why my cellphones do
not include the camera function.

However news seldom waits for a 1D mk.IIN and L glass to show up. The old
motto of photojournalism was f:8 and be there.