A familiar adage says “the best camera is the one you have in your hand.” Usually this is an answer to the question about “what is the best camera?” And while some lenses and devices are better suited than others for a special situation, in the case of seizing the moment that presents itself, there is no time to consider which device to prepare and then compose a photo. Instead, it is whatever happens to be at hand that ends up recording the subject. In other words, it is not the machine but its operator that truly creates the picture. By this logic of “soft skills” that trump the hardware, it is worth considering what any particular person uses to photograph, and in toto what devices take a day’s exposures around the world, both by amateurs and professionals.
This aerial view is a framed enlargement of an apple orchard and cider mill business in west Michigan that hangs on the wall of the dining area and cafe of the shop. Reflected in the glass of the picture frame is the lighted donut case and kitchen area. This bifocal snapshot comes from an Ipod-Touch, an extremely small device of many apps that is similar to an I-phone without the cellphone tower service. The paper on which the aerial photo was printed has the lacquered, glossy surface hearkening to the 1970s or 1980s, long before digital facsimiles on memory cards were imagined. So while the snapshot is digital, the framed print is analog (film) photography of its time. As such this illustrates the subject of this article about differences in the photographing experience (and the resulting pictures) when using a camera versus when using a camera app included in a portable device like a smartphone or a tablet computer.
UBIQUITY. On photography sharing sites like Flickr.com or photography sites like Digital Photography Review it is not uncommon to see professionals, serious enthusiasts, and amateurs describe the passing years as a process of taking more and more pictures by smartphone than by dedicated cameras. There will always be situations when using a smartphone to record a scene with difficulty or by “making do” is in some way less satisfactorily than the result coming out of a camera. But for a large swath of daily picture-taking, having a slim picture-taking device in one’s pocket day or night means it seems natural to reach for it. That can easily be what a majority of one’s photos come from nowadays. On the other hand, going through one’s day with a dSLR or another dedicated camera at hand seems much less spontaneous and natural. It feels like something requiring deliberate decision and a commitment to carrying the weight around.
SHARING. The power of snapping a photo and then posting online or emailing to selected recipients has become a non-verbal way to socialize, reinforce relationships, and to make new friends and acquaintances rapidly and without geographic restrictions. Some digital cameras communicate with one’s cellphone in order to give wings to the pictures residing in a dedicated camera. But the extra step to go from camera to phone to sharing outlets means that far fewer snapshots (or carefully composed scenes) are shared from a camera than the ones that come natively from the phone itself.
CREATIVE CONTROL. In the realm of apps to extend the functions and user-control, smartphones have many more services and products to supplement the basic camera app than do the digital cameras that also may offer a few apps devised for the relatively small processor onboard (compared to the horsepower of current smartphones). “Right out of the box,” though, the camera app of a smartphone is intended as a Point-and-shoot experience. The user is meant to spend time sharing the image file rather than to dwell on the making of the image. More experienced or demanding users do find added features deeper into the menus, though: over-riding the exposure setting, locking the focus (or the exposure), forcing (or blocking) the flash, selecting a different focal length lens, and so on. Between the preset, basic snapshot defaults and the added controls for those who seek them, a large proportion of daily picture-taking gives satisfying results. For special purposes (e.g. night photography where exposure can be complicated, sports photography where speed can be complicated) or particular subjects, though, a secondary app for editing or for adjusting the camera’s standard controls is needed to scratch that particular itch.
Meanwhile, a purpose-built camera can take the form of Point-and-shoot with a few advanced-user controls, or it can take the form of a bigger and more feature-rich device with larger photo sensor than a smartphone has. As such, a beginner can rely on the factory settings to automatically record what the photographer aims at. An intermediate or advanced user can choose from semi-automated controls: set the shutter speed and the camera will calculate the corresponding aperture, ISO-sensitivity, and primary focus. Or select the aperture and the camera does the other settings. Set to manual, it is the photographer who does all those adjustments by hand: focus, frame, aperture, ISO, and shutter. And for interchangeable lens cameras, there is the added choice in what focal length to use — either a zoom lens ranging in angle of view, or individual lenses to choose from for wide, telephoto, or someplace in-between. In these ways, the degree of user-control versus camera control is one thing that distinguishes camera from smartphone apps.
DEDICATED DEVICE. Using the world of ebooks for illustration, there are several well-designed apps to use for ebook purchase, reading, and sharing with others. But there are dedicated ebook reading devices, too. Perhaps there is a mutual influence in which dedicated devices take ideas from the smartphone apps and vice versa, the app designers borrow some e-reader functions and features to keep their smartphone users happy, too. From the point of view of book lovers, perhaps the gold standard is the tactile interaction with ink on paper. Compared to print editions, the e-reader may be the best facsimile because there is little or no worry about notifications popping up, urges to check sports scores or weather conditions, and so on. A book is a book, period; a device for traveling to new places and experiences with little to distract from the relationship of eyes and hand to the page and with one’s imagination. E-readers offer something like this, too, with the additional perk of browsing, seeing a sample chapter, and purchasing for instant gratification. But the e-reading app on board a smartphone is competing for attention and screen space with other apps.
Similarly in the world of picture-taking with smartphone versus dedicated camera, the smartphone app is working at the same time the many other functions of the portable Internet and telecommunication device is running; or if not running, then only a tap away from running or replying to. The appeal of this arrangement is “one device to rule them all” (a roomful of old-school tools all-in-one: typewriter, calculator, flashlight, memo-recorder, phone, still camera, movie camera, etc, etc). The downside of this arrangement is fragmentation of attention, interest, motivation, memory, and so on. Perhaps in the majority of daily uses, convenience conquers all other arguments. One can carry a single lightweight device for perfectly serviceable snapshots and sometimes very professional purposes, too. For people with a more singular relationship with light and lens and memory and aspirations, though, a camera-by-design pairs best of all with one’s defined focus for engaging with the place or event. It is a self-contained way to interact with the surroundings visually.
TACTILE INVOLVEMENT. Adding dedicated dials and buttons to a flat screen smartphone would defeat the purpose of sliding smoothly into one’s pocket. So the touchscreen user-interface is the foundational user-experience of interacting with one’s device, whether doom scrolling, poking the keyboard image, doodling on a screen capture, or filling in forms. It seems to be a kind of engineering pun that digital devices are best operated by using one’s digits in a handheld framework. But while this tactile involvement is essential for taking smartphone photos (and then sharing and/or editing them), it is not the same physicality that comes from using a dedicated camera, even when more and more controls are coded onto the camera’s own touchscreen. Even when letting the camera make all decisions — apart from pointing toward the subject and framing what gets included or excluded in the composition — the person does finally to press a physical button to capture the scene. Where smartphones and cameras seem to copy each other, though, is by presenting at least two ways to release the shutter: tapping the spot on the touchscreen to capture the photo, or a physical button (smartphone volume up/down, say).
Holding a (usually) rectangular and bulkier camera differs from holding a smooth, thin, lightweight smartphone. Some buyers choose a supersized smartphone to fit their large hand or to accommodate their big fingers. But even in that case, sometimes the device slips from one’s grip. Handling a small, medium, or large (digital) camera is much less likely to slip because its shape offers several surface planes to cling to. In other words the camera is a “hand” experience while a smartphone is a “finger-tip” experience.
UPSHOT. Setting aside these observations about look and feel and results of smartphone photography versus camera photography, it might be nice to speculate how the body of work from famous photographers of the past might have differed if lightweight digital cameras were available as smartphone apps versus dedicated cameras. Brady & Co would bring back very different Civil War pictures. And Atget with his 40 pounds of glass-plates, tripod, lenses and camera would make more pictures of many more subjects around Paris. Cartier-Bresson’s love of geometry and the defining “decisive moment” could not abide the slight delay between tapping the screen and seeing the moment frozen. The vast body of work by the FSA documentary project in the Great Depression all around the USA could possibly have been composed and published by smartphone photographers. After all it is the eye to notice subjects as well as the technical familiarity with transcribing the real scene onto a 2-dimensional representation, no matter if the camera is sheet film, 35mm cassettes, or digital file that makes the image for viewers to ponder.
Turning from earlier photographic luminaries to the average enthusiast of 2024, what sort of guidelines or reference points could help when deciding to photograph with camera versus smartphone app? Each of the subheadings above offer suggestions about when the app makes more sense or the camera makes more sense: Ubiquity (smartphone is almost a constant companion), Sharing (snap then share for smartphone), Creative control (camera for more depth of menus and settings), Dedicated device (camera only has to be a camera; smartphone is everything in addition to camera), Tactile involvement (smartphones are more 1-dimensional slabs than the lumpy contours of camera).
For a person who cares most about the image as souvenir or catalyst for thought and sharing, then smartphone apps accomplish the purpose with least weight, least experience base, and maximum convenience. But for a person who cares most about the participation in making the image, as well as caring about the visual experience of its final luster or luminosity, then a camera is the heart of photography. The app is a facsimile trying to look and feel something like a camera — often to good effect. But if the camera itself is part of the pleasure, then an app is thin soup by comparison. In other words, if the act of photography is half the fun, then by all means only a camera of one kind or another will satisfy the person composing a 2-dimensional portrayal of a person, place or thing. But if the main point in aiming a lens is to grab something to share with others, then only the smartphone with enough antenna “service bars” available can fulfill the mission. As for the vast ground in-between “loving to handle a camera” and “snap and share” there is a lot in common between the one device and the other.
