I think it'd be more interesting if you made a camera that took verifiably fake photos that were guaranteed to be nothing like what you pointed it at.
Roc Camera
221–230 of 491 posts
Re: Roc Camera
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think reputation gets you that far alone, we already live in a world where misinformation spreads like wildfire through follower counts and page ranks. The problem is quality takes time, and therefore loses relevance. We need a way to break people out of their own human nature and reward delayed gratification by teaching critical thinking skills and promoting thoughtfulness. I sadly don't see an exciting tech…
Why can't posting a verifiably true image create as much or more instant gratification as sending a fake one? It will probably be more gratifying, once everyone is sending fake ones and yours is the only real one (if people can know that).
Lies are just better at reproducing themselves than truth.
Re: Roc Camera
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also used to be really (really really) into photography. Personally, I’ve stopped taking pictures because of the stigma around a camera. Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. When someone can take thousands of pictures an hour, and upload them all to some social media site to be permanently stored… idk it’s shifted from a way to capture a moment t…
People feel like there's some man in a dark room somewhere looking at each and every image posted everywhere with evil intent. A friend of mine delivers for Amazon. They have to take pictures of every package delivered. Sometimes the customer is there when they arrive and he asks them to hold the package for him while he takes the photo of the package. Most of them turn away or hold the package far away so they aren'…
> People feel like there's some man in a dark room somewhere looking at each and every image posted everywhere with evil intent.
Yeah when there's precedent for people doing exactly that the feeling is justified. How many times have we heard of [facebook employees/police/...] abusing their powers to stalk their [exes/wives/love interests/'enemies'/...]. With the amount of face detection and cataloguing being done today, it's never been easier on a technical level. The only protection we have is 'trust us we aren't doing it bro', which doesn't get you very far.
Re: Roc Camera
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also used to be really (really really) into photography. Personally, I’ve stopped taking pictures because of the stigma around a camera. Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. When someone can take thousands of pictures an hour, and upload them all to some social media site to be permanently stored… idk it’s shifted from a way to capture a moment t…
The concept of «public» has changed. About 15-20 years ago I attended a lot of car events (races, shows) where I took lots of photos. Mostly of moving cars, but also a lot of closeups of race car drivers using a long lens. For about a year more than half the photos published in a very niche car publication were by me. The magazine had a few thousand subscribers. And to this day I still see some drivers use my shots o…
I find the combination of "pictures of strangers" and "our right to take pictures" rather concerning. I have a different perspective, as I am blind. But I was always uncomfortable with having a picture taken of me by basically a stranger. And that feeling didn't just come with social media. It always was there. I disagree that you have a "right" to take pictures of strangers. IMO, you shouldn't have that right. It is probably different depending on what juristiction you are in. But my personal opinion is, that this attitude is rather selfish. In my perfect world, taking pictures of strangers without their consent should be illegal.
Re: Roc Camera
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is a market for a well made camera like the Fuji X-Half. That product has for its specs a ridiculous price point of €750..
But you don't buy it for the specs, you buy it for the experience. It topped sales charts when it was launched. If I had more time to spend on photography, or if I was younger, or if it was a little cheaper I'd have bought it myself. I suspect more will follow the X-Half, because it gets orientation right. Most images are viewed today in portrait mode, and half-frame is the right format for that.
The people who buy these cameras would probably be better served by upgrading their phones. Phones are good enough cameras for this use and they are infinitely better at processing.
As a long time hobbyist photographer I can understand buying cameras because they have a certain appeal. But I have to say that I honestly do not understand why someone would spend lots of money and then not want to take advantage of the technology offered.
I think shooting to JPEG and using film profiles is kind of pointless. If you want to shoot film, shoot film. Imagine you have taken a really good picture, but it’ll always look worse than it could because you threw away most of the data and applied some look to it that will date it.
I do understand that a lot of people think these cameras are worth buying. And that they are selling well. But I can’t understand why.
Re: Roc Camera
#226To me it sounds like someone is trying to create a problem and sell it to me.
Who needs to create images with proof of reality?
Re: Roc Camera
#227I used to be really (really really) into photography. I respect anyone working hard on a physical product, but this misses the mark on every front I can think of. The real issue that photographers grapple with, emotionally and financially, is that pictures have become so thoroughly commodified that nobody assigns them cultural value anymore. They are the thumbnail you see before the short video clip starts playing. N…
This might have immediate application in certain business sectors, such as real estate and insurance.
Yes but it is a hard sell, arguably too hard, and the product pitch, which is away from these applications, is the right one. They are not promising to be 'blockchain two' with hypothetical business use cases.
Imagine going to the solicitors with lots of documents that they need copies of. If they are making scans themselves then that is all the proof they need. If an assistant has copied that important certificate, then that copy is all that is needed for normal legal services. The Roc Camera would not be helpful in this regard, even if it had some magic means of scanning A4 pages.
In a serious solicitor interaction there will be forms that need to be signed and witnessed. These important documents then need to go in the post. In theory, the client could just whip out their Roc Camera and... But who is going to buy a Roc Camera when a stamp will do the job?
Maybe you might if you have a lot of photos to take for 'evidence', for example, of the condition of a house before work is done, or after it is done. However, nobody is asking for this so there is no compulsion to get the Roc Camera when the camera on your phone suffices for the needs of the real world.
Re: Roc Camera
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also used to be really (really really) into photography. Personally, I’ve stopped taking pictures because of the stigma around a camera. Everyone, me more than most, doesn’t want their picture taken, or to be in the background of other photos. When someone can take thousands of pictures an hour, and upload them all to some social media site to be permanently stored… idk it’s shifted from a way to capture a moment t…
That's odd, and to reassure you I would say that I personally would rather see somebody with a physical camera. That way I know I can avoid the area they're photographing if I don't want to be shot or just be aware I'm going to be in a photo otherwise. It also makes me (rightly or wrongly) think the photo will be uploaded somewhere a bit higher than an Instagram / Facebook feed (my wife used to put DSLR photos on Ins…
Instagram isn't for sharing photos, it's for sharing a curated, artificial view into your life. Photos are just the medium, it's not meant for art.
Re: Roc Camera
#229If you do photography for your own pleasure and not for the sake of likes, gratification or public opinion you can use whatever hardware or software it’s alright.
Re: Roc Camera
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
Check Ali for "shitty" minature key-ring C-thru packaged cameras that look just like this "3D printed toy with some cute software", going for $4.00, not $400!
Please, stop! I've been strugling to fight the urge to by a "Kodak Charmera" for a month now, don't tempt me again!
If you buy one, you won't be tempted anymore.