A Time & Place for Paparazzi?

This post is not intended to celebrate the paparazzi subculture, but instead to pose the question: if they were relegated to a time and a place, along with some constraints and a sense of rule and order, would their contributions be welcome? (Disclaimer: I am sorry to admit that I have been known to buy tabloids -- blame it on the long lines at the grocery store.) If not for the orderly, respectful conduct of the paparazzi (and barricades and security!) we see at events like the Golden Globes, we would not have the pleasure of seeing Angelina in her Atelier Versace gown on the red carpet.

Photo Credit: Tumblr / Photographer Unknown

The camera does not take pictures ...

... the photographer does!

And so goes the age old misconception that great imagery is based solely on the type of camera you have, when, in fact, a camera is just a tool that the photographer uses to capture images. "That camera takes great pictures!". (Think: Guns don't kill people, people do.) You do not need an expensive camera to take great photographs since I know plenty of people who own high end cameras and believe me, they are by no stretch of the imagination photographers nor amateurs. (They are, however, great consumers!)

Afterall, let's not forget the very affordable image making vehicles ... the Kodak Brownie, the Diana, and the Holga. So, in the spirit of this cartoon: the convenient and readily available camera-phone, here are a few shots I took with my cell phone. As you can see, I just disproved my theory -- these are not great pictures since the quality is lacking. But then, I didn't say anything about resolution. : )

I stand by the belief that a great photographer can create a great photograph with even, if necessary, a pinhole camera. (Let's just hope it isn't necessary.)





~~~ + ~~~
© K.L.Knief

"Here's lookin' at ya ..."

~~~ + ~~~
1) Marlon Brando & Katy Jurado, 1955
2) Lauren Bacall, Humphrey Bogart, & Marilyn Monroe, 1953
3) Sophia Loren & Jane Mansfield, 1957