ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

The iPhone has come to be one of the most popular and widely used cameras because of its ubiquity and the ease with which images can be uploaded directly to sites like Flickr, Facebook, and Twitter. The introduction of photography “apps,” like Hipstamatic or Instagram, adds layers of aesthetic capabilities not previously available within the camera. These capabilities have attracted artists seeking technologies for new media of artistic expression. Drawing on Becker’s theory of “art worlds,” this article describes the ways in which iPhone photographers, or iphoneographers, engage in the process of art world building. Through online ethnography and semistructured interviews, this study reveals the ways iphoneographers are creating, sharing, and critiquing their work. The practices of iphoneographers are not unlike those of artists engaged with new media throughout history, and indicate patterns of remediation. Through their activities, the iphoneography community is grappling with issues about the values, practices, aesthetics, and even aura of iphoneography, and in doing so, they are building and legitimating a new art world.
Content may be subject to copyright.
http://nms.sagepub.com/
New Media & Society
http://nms.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/06/05/1461444814538632
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/1461444814538632
published online 6 June 2014New Media Society
Megan Halpern and Lee Humphreys
Iphoneography as an emergent art world
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at:New Media & SocietyAdditional services and information for
http://nms.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://nms.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
What is This?
- Jun 6, 2014OnlineFirst Version of Record >>
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
new media & society
1 –20
© The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1461444814538632
nms.sagepub.com
Iphoneography as an emergent
art world
Megan Halpern and Lee Humphreys
Cornell University, USA
Abstract
The iPhone has come to be one of the most popular and widely used cameras because
of its ubiquity and the ease with which images can be uploaded directly to sites like
Flickr, Facebook, and Twitter. The introduction of photography “apps,” like Hipstamatic
or Instagram, adds layers of aesthetic capabilities not previously available within the
camera. These capabilities have attracted artists seeking technologies for new media of
artistic expression. Drawing on Becker’s theory of “art worlds,” this article describes
the ways in which iPhone photographers, or iphoneographers, engage in the process
of art world building. Through online ethnography and semistructured interviews,
this study reveals the ways iphoneographers are creating, sharing, and critiquing their
work. The practices of iphoneographers are not unlike those of artists engaged with
new media throughout history, and indicate patterns of remediation. Through their
activities, the iphoneography community is grappling with issues about the values,
practices, aesthetics, and even aura of iphoneography, and in doing so, they are building
and legitimating a new art world.
Keywords
Art worlds, aura, legitimation, remediation, iphoneography
While mobile phone photography has been prevalent for some time (Davies, 2007; Ito,
2003; Kindberg et al., 2005; Nightingale, 2007; Villi, 2007), the introduction of smart-
phones and their countless photography apps has changed the field of cameraphone pho-
tography in several important ways. First, the ability of the phone to share images on the
Internet or via email, makes it a significantly faster, more convenient tool for distributing
Corresponding author:
Megan Halpern, Department of Communication, Cornell University, 301 Kennedy Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853,
USA.
Email: mkh46@cornell.edu
538632NMS0010.1177/1461444814538632New Media & SocietyHalpern and Humphreys
research-article2014
Article
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
2 new media & society
photography than traditional cameraphones. In 2010, the most popular camera among
Flickr users was the iPhone 3G (Grobart, 2010). The Internet capabilities of smartphones
significantly lower the barriers to the sharing of photography through social media
because one can directly send images to the web through the handheld device. Second,
as compared to earlier cameraphones, smartphone app capabilities make it not only a
means of photo taking and photo sharing, but also a means of photo editing. This stage
of the production process is an important step for many digital photographers. The addi-
tional use of apps to both shoot and edit the photos further differentiates smartphones,
and the iPhone more specifically, from earlier cameraphones because users have access
to hundreds of apps that create unique looks or mimic old film styles. As a user inter-
viewed for a New York Times article put it, “I have 40 photo apps on my iPhone—it’s like
having 40 different cameras with you all the time” (Grobart, 2010). The ubiquity of the
phone, the convenience of image sharing, and the world of apps have provided the tools
by which groups of smartphone users are engaging in emerging social practices that raise
old questions about photography, technology, and art.
The rise of smartphone photography with apps has brought about concerns for the
artistic form of photography in some circles. For example, one debate about such apps
garnered national attention when “A Grunt’s Life,” a series of photographs depicting sol-
diers’ lives in Afghanistan (featured in Dao, 2010), was shot with the Hipstamatic app and
won third place in the Picture Of the Year international (POYi) contest. Some members of
the photojournalism world were up in arms, calling the decision the “death of photojour-
nalism” (Buchanan, 2011; Chip Litherland, 2011). Winter (2011), the artist who shot the
images, defended his work, saying, “I will always stand behind these photographs and am
confident in my decision that this was the right tool to tell this particular story.” The deci-
sion, he said, comes down to aesthetics and content. Moreover, this example demonstrates
the tensions surrounding the intersection of photography, art, and iPhones.
This study sought to explore this emerging culture of iphoneography, a community of
people who use the iPhone and its various photo apps to create, edit, and distribute pho-
tographic art. Using Becker’s (2008) concept of art worlds, we understand iphoneogra-
phy as an emergent community of actors who produce, consume, and legitimate artistic
expressions. We aim to situate iphoneography in larger debates about art, media, and
social practices to provide empirical evidence for what Sheller (2012) calls, “mobile
mediality” or the ability of mobile media to “produce new relations of people to space,
community, interaction and community” (p. 1). We argue that the practices surrounding
iphoneography represent important moves in the sociology of visual media. As iphone-
ographers define, engage, and debate the artistic merits and characteristics of iphoneog-
raphy, they reveal long-standing debates about the interplay between photography,
technology, and art.
Background
Remediation
Iphoneography is only a recent development in a long history of confluence between
media, culture, and technology. While the medium itself is new and draws on new tech-
nologies, the practice is part of larger pattern of the use and reuse in visual media. In this
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 3
sense, iphoneography is one of many examples of the ways that new media are in con-
versation with their predecessors through the process of remediation (Bolter and Grusin,
1999). New forms of media adopt, adapt, and, ostensibly, improve upon media from
which they evolved; as such, they are not independent of their predecessors. Rather, they
are constantly in conversation with their predecessors. Both the new medium and the old
participate in this conversation as a method of legitimation. Remediation is not limited
to new or digital media; Bolter and Grusin (1999) argue that all media are forms of
remediation:
What remains strong in our culture today is the conviction that technology itself progresses
through reform: that technology reforms itself. In our terms, new technologies of representation
proceed by reforming or remediating earlier ones, while earlier technologies are struggling to
maintain their legitimacy by remediating newer ones. (p. 19)
Remediation is made up of what Bolter and Grusin (1999) call the twin logics of imme-
diacy and hypermediacy (p. 21). To aim for immediacy is to attempt to erase the medium
altogether and to create a seamless illusion of reality. Hypermediacy might be described
as the other side of the same coin, drawing attention to the media with which the viewer
is engaged and creating a sense of hyper awareness of the medium itself. The lens of
remediation helps to place iphoneography in historical and cultural context by drawing
attention to the conversation between iphoneography and photography, as well as other
visual media.
Historical developments in photography have not only changed the technical features
and apparatuses possible for image capture, but also raise ongoing questions about profes-
sional and artistic authority as well as the essence of art itself. Early battles were fought
over the nature of photography as an art form, and these are echoed in the debates that
surround the use of instant photography, digital photography, digital photo editing (the use
of Photoshop), and so on (Price and Wells, 2000). For example, technological develop-
ments throughout the late 19th and early 20th centuries shifted photography from a pro-
fessional craft into a mass amateur activity. In particular, George Eastman of Eastman
Kodak is credited with fundamentally transforming photography from a professional to an
amateur industry (Jenkins, 1975). Prior to Eastman’s advancements, the professional pho-
tographer needed technical skills to both take photographs as well as produce the photo-
graphs. According to Jenkins, the most significant contribution of Eastman is that he was
the first to de-couple photo taking from the production process with his advent of the
amateur Kodak camera and roll film. Thus, the person who took the photo was no longer
the same individual who had to develop and print the photo. Those technical production
skills could be outsourced. Analogous technological shifts can be seen in the development
of iphoneography. The iPhone re-couples the processes of photo taking, editing, and pro-
ducing into one mass market device. The technological capabilities of the smartphone do
not necessitate additional steps or systems in the photography process.
Theorizing photography
The massification of photo taking and making that technology has facilitated over the
last 100 years has been noted by many scholars (e.g. Benjamin, 1972; Bourdieu, 1996;
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
4 new media & society
Sontag, 2001). While the technological elements of photography influence the photogra-
pher and image, Flusser (1983) argues there is also a magic to photography that allows
us to eternally return to the world depicted. This magical element is also related to one of
the key tensions that arises in photography and visual media concerning the notion of
aura. Benjamin (2001) defines aura as that which evokes an artwork’s (or natural object’s)
uniqueness and permanence. Though Benjamin (1972) grants that some early photo-
graphs possess aura, he argues that most reproducible visual media like photography or
film cannot embody aura, but at best simulate it, “The photographers in the period after
1880 saw their task in simulating that aura through all the arts of retouching” (p. 209).
But Benjamin’s writing on aura is somewhat ambiguous, and some have suggested that
aura is not a quality of artifact per se, but a state which the viewer of an artifact experi-
ences (Bolter et al., 2006), or that it, in the case of photography, it is the subject of the
photograph that possesses this magical quality (Crimp, 1980).
Bolter et al. (2006) re-examine Benjamin’s concept of aura in the context of virtual
and mixed reality. They suggest that digital images can work with analog images and live
action, and that these complex relationships offer opportunities for auratic expressions.
Aura is not dead with reproducible visual media, they claim, but rather, is constantly lost
and found again, existing in a permanent state of crisis:
We become aware of aura in art through a rivalry or interplay of new and traditional media
forms. What Benjamin characterizes as the decay of aura in photography and film is simply an
expression of this interplay in the late 19th and first half of the 20th centuries. (p. 32)
Visual media artists today can continue to explore auratic expressions, though now it
might be one of any number of aims in various artistic forms of expression, rather than
the ideal artistic goal.
Art world as social world
The cultural significance of photography has not been dictated by technological advance-
ments alone, but also shaped by its evolving social practice (Wells, 2000). Bourdieu’s
study of photography revealed photography as a process of “collective identity forma-
tion” (Bourdieu, 1996; Gonzalez, 1992), where photography became a way of integrat-
ing families and of indexing family occasions like weddings and holidays. However,
Bourdieu (1996) identifies other kinds of photographic practices beyond this ritualized
use. More specifically, some photographers rejected the symbolic norms of photography
and formed camera clubs to help them establish a new practice (Castel and Schnapper,
1996). Members of these clubs, mostly men, focused on either aesthetics or on the tech-
nology of photography rather than its ritual social function. The goal for these clubs was
to legitimate their work as valuable cultural products through their superior knowledge
of the technical. Thus, passionate photographers developed a collective technological
aesthetic, which in turn bestowed legitimacy on them as photographers (Bourdieu, 1996).
Similar questions regarding artistic authority and technological expertise arise with
iphoneography. In particular, with the purchase and potential integration of Instagram (a
social photo app that allows users to upload and share photos easily, and incorporates a
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 5
series of filters that change the appearance of the photos) into Facebook, the need for
iphoneographers to distinguish themselves from the ordinary Facebook users arises.
Thus, this article explores the processes of iPhone users who seek to legitimate them-
selves and their photographic practices, like Bourdieu’s (1996) members of camera clubs
did 50 years ago.
The process of legitimation is indicative of the formation of a new art world (Becker,
2008). Becker defines an art world as the patterns of collective activity surrounding the
production of a specific form of artistic expression (Becker, 2008; Van Maanen, 2010).
It is important to note that Becker’s conception of art worlds, as opposed to Danto’s
(1964) art world, specifically makes room for multiple social worlds, each with their own
rules, roles, and patters, and that legitimate forms of art in one such world may not
belong in another. Situating artistic expression such as iphoneography within an art
world framework forces us look beyond the technical system that makes art possible and
to explore the various actors, activities, and structures that legitimate those who self-
identify as artists, or more specifically, iphoneographers.
Therefore, this study explores the emerging iphoneography art world through its prac-
tices and discourse. In particular, we were guided by four related research questions. First,
how do those who self-identify as iphoneographers come to define their artistic practice?
Second, what are the characteristics of their artistic expression? Third, how does the ipho-
neography community articulate and shape the boundaries of their artistic expression?
And finally, what are the legitimating factors or characteristics of iphoneography?
Case and approach
To examine the phenomenon of iphoneography, we chose an interpretive qualitative
methodological approach because we were interested in exploring the social practices of
iphoneography as an art world (Lofland et al., 2006). We identified the iphoneography
community on Twitter, Flickr, and on blogs and web sites associated with iphoneogra-
phy. In particular, two iphoneography sites stood out because of the level of user activity
and large number of the users: Pixels and Hipstamatic.
The primary site through which recruitment began, Pixels: The Art of the IPhone, or
pixelsatanexhibition.com, is curated by Knox Bronson. Pixels primarily operates as an
online gallery that publishes images created and edited solely on the iPhone, but Bronson
has also organized several brick-and-mortar (physical) shows in association with Apple,
and has published magazines. We also reached out to Hipstamatic users through the
Hipstamatic Facebook page and Flickr groups. Hipstamatic is one of the most popular
iPhone photography apps in the app store (Ha, 2010; Madrigal, 2010; O’Grady, 2010).
We chose these two initial points of contact because they had quite different models and
potentially quite different audiences/users.
We began by approaching the site administrators, frequent posters, Facebook fans,
and Twitter followers associated with the sites. In total, we conducted 20 in-depth semi-
structured interviews with those who self-identify as iphoneographers. Fifteen of the
people we interviewed were either connected to the Pixels site or recruited through
Twitter re-tweets from connections made through Pixels. These informants tended to be
connected through multiple means. For example, one iphoneographer submitted images
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
6 new media & society
to Pixels, but also had his own web site devoted to interviewing other iphoneographers.
Other participants submit some of their images to several other iphoneography sites like
Pixels, or participate in other online as well as brick-and-mortar gallery showings of
iPhone images. Some of the participants first saw each other’s work on Pixels, but then
followed each other on Twitter and Flickr. This kind of overlap was not uncommon,
providing an intricate web of informants who were all involved to a different degree. The
benefit of such a sample is that it provides a view of the emerging iphoneography com-
munity from diverse perspectives.
We also recruited and interviewed five iphoneographers through the Hipstamatic
Facebook page and Flickr group.1 Interviews with the Hipstamatic users helped balance
the perspective offered by the iphoneography community on Pixel, and give an indica-
tion of other communities that are developing through the social use of the iPhone cam-
era and photography apps. The participants we recruited specifically through Hipstamatic
were quite loyal to the specific app (one took on the pseudonym of Hipstachick on
Facebook and on her blog) as opposed to the community affiliated with Pixels, who
tended to use multiple apps. While some of the 15 iphoneographers recruited through
Pixels also used Hipstamatic and entered in the Hipstamatic contests as a part of their
iphoneography, it was one of many tools with which they created and shared their images,
unlike the five devoted Hipstamatic participants.
In addition to the interviews, which provide insight into the ways people interpret
their own iPhone images, the communities to which they belong, and the work of others,
for about 6 months we actively engaged in participant observation of the online iphone-
ography community. We considered the web sites, Twitter feeds, Flickr groups, and
Facebook pages associated with the community to help develop a picture of how these
users engage in the process of iphoneography as well as how they interact with one
another.
Drawing on both the interviews and participant observation, we can begin to under-
stand iphoneography. Specifically, we explore iphoneography as a social practice as well
as an emergent art world in the process of legitimation.
The practice of iphoneography
The iphoneographers in this study had fairly different ideas about how to engage in ipho-
neography, but their basic assumptions about what makes something iphoneography
were quite similar. The primary rule for iphoneography is that images are taken and
processed on an iPhone. According to one participant Gareth,
I think the idea of shot and edited on the iPhone—because never before did we have a device
that could do that … To be able to go to the store, download a new camera app or a new effect
app and therefore to completely change the output of your capture device—we’ve never had
that before, technically. And to be able to publish them and connect with social media through
that same device, I think that is groundbreaking in terms of our relationship to photography.
According to the iphoneographers we interviewed, several aspects of the iPhone were
valuable to them as artists, and these characteristics have come to define the practice of
iphoneography. They also valued their ability to easily do everything from the same
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 7
device: they could take pictures, process them, and upload them all in the same place at
the same time. Finally, they indicated that the ability to manipulate the images manually
(in some instances literally, with their hands and fingers) was an important part of their
practice.
Ubiquity
iPhones, like all mobile phones, are almost always carried with or on people. This is one of
its most important attributes as a camera. The adage that the best camera is the one that is
with you has become a mantra of iphoneographers like Chase Jarvis, and it was even
repeated at an Apple event to reveal the iPhone 4S. Informants in this study frequently
discussed their ability to use the iPhone to take pictures under almost any circumstances.
For Dan, this meant taking images of the same mill pond each day and processing them to
be something new. For Andy, this meant turning a morning ritual of a walk on the beach
into a way to know the beach and creatures that inhabit it through photography. For others,
like Kimberly, this meant taking pictures of the mundane, of things you would not have
thought of photographing before, simply because you had your phone with you at all times.
For Dixon and Gareth, it meant being able to take pictures on the street without making
subjects uncomfortable or, at times, even aware that they were being photographed.
This ubiquity served the dual purposes of convenience for the iphoneographers and of
inconspicuousness to potential subjects. Both of these purposes ultimately aim to restore
immediacy to the photography by removing attention to the medium itself, and, instead,
directly relating to the subject matter. Immediacy is evoked by the choice of subject mat-
ter that is part of everyday life or routine. Immediacy is also evoked by the minimization
of the barrier between the photographer and her/his human subjects. Damon Winter, the
photographer who used Hipstamatic to shoot soldiers in Afghanistan, remarked that the
soldiers were more at ease with him when he was taking their picture with his phone than
when he used his large DSLR cameras. The immediacy achieved through the ubiquity
the phone offers is one part of the dual logics of remediation.
Sharing
Many of the participants cited easy publishing of photos as one of the things that made
the iPhone a “revolutionary” tool for photography. Since most iphoneographers share
their images from the iPhone rather than uploading to a computer first, convenience in
uploading is a very important to them, in fact, some said they would not participate in a
site that did not facilitate online sharing. The methods by which iphoneographers share
their work have implications for how the community is constructed as well as the articu-
lated boundaries of what is valued. Although multiple tools are available, most iphone-
ographers whom we interviewed and on the web sites we explored upload to Flickr,
Tumblr, or their own blog, which then triggers a tweet with a link to the image to their
followers on Twitter. The Hipstamatic users we interviewed used Facebook more often
than the other iphoneographers. Many described a hierarchy in terms of uploading: they
would upload all of their work to a personal blog or Flickr feed and select images to
tweet, and then, of those, they may choose some submit to curated sites or contests.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
8 new media & society
Dan considered Twitter “the center of the iphoneography world.” It is a place where
anyone “can comment on photos within seconds of upload.” Since, at the time these
interviews were conducted, Twitter posts were simple 140-character texts, iphoneogra-
phers would post a link to an image hosted somewhere else, usually Flickr, Tumblr, or a
personal blog.
Feedback is an important part of sharing within the iphoneography community. Once
an image is uploaded, there are several ways for others to provide feedback. Many felt
that in order to receive feedback, they were obliged to give feedback to others. On
Tumblr or Flickr, it is easy to click a small star or heart to “fav” an image. On Flickr and
on some blogs it is also easy to leave comments. For many iphoneographers, the pre-
ferred method for giving feedback is to re-tweet one another’s images; however, some
said that due to the high volume of tweets and re-tweets of images, this system was no
longer practical.
The use of twitter further emphasizes the ubiquitous nature of iphoneography. Not
only does the iPhone’s ubiquity allow for the aesthetic capturing of public space, but the
immediate social sharing of it turns the conversation about the iphoneography into a
“real time” conversation. Through this conversation, the different aesthetics described in
the next section become legitimate practices for groups, or subworlds, of iphoneogra-
phers, rather than for individuals.
The artist’s hand
The third key practice of iphoneography is the manipulation of photographs through
apps or what we call the presence and visualization of the artist’s hand in the iphoneo-
graphic image. Just as analog photographers used darkroom techniques to “interrupt”
perfect images (Benjamin, 1972), some iphoneographers use apps to introduce new char-
acteristics to images, or re-introduce characteristics that were once inherent in the pro-
cesses of earlier photography. By doing this, they call attention to or hypermediate
(Bolter and Grusin, 1999) the iphoneographic art. There are several methods of image
manipulation, some of which are contentious among iphoneographers.
Some images are created using filters that can be determined beforehand (as in
Hipstamatic) or applied afterward (in apps like Tiffen’s Photo FX and Instagram). These
filters are selected and then automatically applied over the entire image. Other apps
allow for manual manipulation of images using hands and fingers (see Figure 1).
Some informants described iphoneography as painting on their photographs. For
them, the tactile feeling of manipulation through app-ing with the iPhone’s touchscreen
was much more like painting or sculpting than analog picture-taking with a camera. “It
allows me to be more of an artist than a photographer,” Jody said of working with apps
on the iPhone. For these informants, apps literally re-introduce the hand of the artist, thus
re-creating aura within their iphoneography. App-ing within the iphoneography commu-
nity allows for the introduction of the human touch into the digital production of photog-
raphy, thus re-introducing aura into the photographs. In an era of permanent aura crisis,
the apped image becomes a means through which artists can feel like they are introduc-
ing originality and authenticity into their digital art.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 9
The aesthetics of iphoneography
The iphoneographers we spoke with had widely different processes and ideas about
iphoneography, but in spite of these differences, their basic assumptions about what it
meant to engage in iphoneography were quite similar. The primary rule for iphoneogra-
phy is that images are taken and processed on an iPhone. Some participants drew a strong
distinction between iphoneography and photography. According to Knox, the curator of
pixelsatanexhibition.com, “the medium is defined by the device.” For Knox, this meant
that the product should not look like traditional photography, but should have its own
aesthetic. In the same conversation he said, “If you really want to do photography, get a
camera.” Other participants drew a similar line regarding the technical distinction
between iphoneography and photography, but saw less of an aesthetic distinction. The
difference between iphoneography and not iphoneography was complicated by the intro-
duction of the iPad, as well as the role iPhones might play in traditional photography.
One participant, Gareth, initially posted only photos taken and edited with an iPhone on
his blog, but after some time, he did a series, which he edited both on his laptop and on
the iPhone and compared:
Gareth: In some cases the ones which I produced on my iPhone had a nicer
aesthetic to them than ones which I made—which I played with on my
Mac. But sometimes it was the other way round as well … when I set
up my iPhone blog the point was that everything was shot and edited
and published from my iPhone.
Figure 1. Edgar Cuevas @edicaves.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
10 new media & society
Interviewer: So making that transition, is that where you leave the realm of iphone-
ography and enter the realm of …?
GARETH: Photography, yes … I also think that sometimes it is a good camera,
and you can just use it as a capture device … That is the crossover
between iphoneography and just ordinary photography.
Although most participants agreed that the title of iphoneography was reserved for
iPhone images that were not processed at all or that were processed only using the phone,
they had differing but equally strong opinions about how and when to app. Their indi-
vidual philosophies about the art of iphoneography fell into three categories, or three
aesthetics. Although we discuss each separately, it is important to note that while some
iphoneographers adhered to a specific aesthetic, some dabbled in two or all three
approaches to iphoneography, and some might have strong elements from more than one
approach in a single image.
The “Apped” aesthetic
The motto on the top right corner of the Pixels web site is “app that bitch ’till it sings.”
This invitation to heavily alter the raw images follows the line of thought that iphoneog-
raphy is something separate from photography, and the aesthetic that individual iphone-
ographers develop for themselves should also be quite different from more realist
photography. See Figures 1 and 2 for very different images that both belong to the apped,
or art aesthetic. Regardless of the degree of app-ing, all participants agreed that the initial
image must be strong. Within this apped aesthetic, the initial photograph alone does not
determine the whole image’s value.
An example of the apped aesthetic is what are called remixes or re-visualizations.
Often made from nudes, which, as Jody explained, are harder to come by, the remixes are
raw images taken by one iphoneographer and apped by another. When remixing images,
both names appear in the credit. The apped aesthetic draws on hypermediacy not only to
call forth the photograph as a medium to be refashioned and critiqued but also gesture
toward other media, like collage and digital art, to draw attention to the medium itself, to
showcase the varied ways images taken and shared on an iPhone can be manipulated
with that iPhone.
The aesthetics of nostalgia
Many apps, including Hipstamatic, mimic old film styles. Images created using these
apps often evoke a feeling of nostalgia among both iphoneographers and other users.
Figures 3 and 4 could be considered examples of nostalgic images. The aesthetics of
nostalgia have been understood as “a socio-cultural response to forms of discontinuity,
claiming a vision of stability and authenticity in some conceptual ‘golden age’” (Grainge,
2000: 28). When asked about the nostalgia factor, some iphoneographers indicated it
held a strong emotional connection:
It’s just kind of an emotional thing, its like, I know its crazy, because its like here we’ve got all
these tools and all these cameras and this software … and then we get the biggest kick by taking
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 11
the top of the line up to the minute digital cameras and processing images to look like they’re
30, 40, 50 years old. For me it’s just kind of, I dunno … For me, when I apply a look like that
to an image, I’m doing it to invoke an emotional response, a nostalgic response in myself and
hopefully the person who views it. (Marty)
Evoking nostalgia both for themselves and in their viewers was important to many
iphoneographers in this study, especially Hipstamatic users. Mario, the community
director for Hipstamatic, said they designed the app with nostalgia in mind:
Part of what made those old cameras so great was that it had a plastic lens and that there was an
emotion attached … If you just use the regular iPhone camera, or any mobile camera, what you
get is a digital representation of what you are looking at. And that’s fine, but there doesn’t seem
to be like an emotional attachment to it.
Similarly, Reto, an iphoneographer who was driving across country and documenting his
journey using Hipstamatic, purposefully wanted the nostalgic aesthetic for his photos
because it reminded him of his youth:
For my generation, this is kind of the pictures that we grew up with … I just, you know, with
all of the digital technology we yearn for the originality, for the old time-y feeling … I just think
it’s what we’re after in the end. I don’t think too clean and HD is speaking to us, in a way.
The emotional connection to nostalgia seemed to be based on imperfections conspicu-
ously missing in digital images, and while many of the informants who spoke of
Figure 2. Kimberly Post.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
12 new media & society
nostalgia talked about their work as artists, much of the conversation turned to emotional
attachments that stemmed from the social and ritual uses of the camera. While some
iphoneographers were quick to dismiss such images as nostalgic rather than artistic,
iphoneographers who experimented with this style were making artistic choices to do so.
For them, creating an image that evokes the feeling of a childhood snapshot is as valid an
artistic choice as layering two images together and masking parts of them to create a new
landscape, a technique used by Patrick.
The nostalgic aesthetic is the most hotly contested of the three categories described in
this article. The interplay between the hypermedia of app-ing the images to introduce
what might even be called false aura (or less authentic aura) is matched by the immedi-
acy these iphoneographers attempt to introduce into the images by evoking the analog
medium of photography, with all of its imperfections. But the immediacy these iphone-
ographers aim for is not the immediacy of the subject in the photograph, but the analog
photo itself.
Ubiquitous photography as an aesthetic
At the other end of the spectrum from the apped aesthetic, we found iphoneogra-
phers who believe the photo should come through and the apps should merely
enhance the photographic image. As Gareth noted above, he believes the line
Figure 3. Jennifer Molley Wilson also known as Hipstachick.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 13
between iphoneography and photography is quite a thin one. He also finds the cam-
era on the phone invaluable as a tool without the apps, in part because he is able to
capture photographs he would not otherwise be able to take. Iphoneographers whose
aesthetic leanings move toward the photograph are often wary of over-app-ing, sug-
gesting that most uses of apps that create retro effects or art effects are “cheesy.”
For these participants, the defining legitimating characteristic is not app-ing per se,
but, instead, the defining characteristic of iphoneography is the experience of using
the iPhone camera in public. For these iphoneographers, the ubiquity and mobility
of the iPhone fundamentally are part of an aesthetic which privileges public space.
These iphoneographers, like Bourdieu’s amateur photographers, also value the limi-
tations of the iPhone camera, and the artistic and technical skills needed to over-
come these limitations. See Figure 5 for examples of this aesthetic.
While this kind of iphoneography does not app photographs to the point where they
look like a different medium, it does use apps to transform images to black and white, to
adjust color balance, contrast, brightness, and clarity, and it does so on the phone. Often,
the goal of these images favors the logic of immediacy, not only in the traditional sense
in which the photograph attempts to draw the viewer into the photograph rather than to
draw attention to the medium itself, but also in the sense that these images are meant to
evoke photography; that is, to erase evidence that they are iphoneography rather than
photography.
Figure 4. Dan Wilde.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
14 new media & society
Legitimating iphoneography
While the primary rule of iphoneography (that each image is taken and edited on an
iPhone) remains the same for each of these aesthetics, each privileges different aspect of
this rule, and each draws out different aspects of remediation, and each deals differently
with the concept or crisis of aura. Within our sample, perspectives on the aesthetics of
app-ing were wide ranging. Artists and curators whose sensibilities tend toward abstrac-
tion and app-ing have mixed opinions about retro filters like those found in Hipstamatic,
and those who embrace these apps value the added constraints as well as the aesthetic
they provide. Jennifer said,
My whole artistic thing is that I photograph objects as they are found. I never rearrange
anything; it is photographed as it is, and so that kind of carries over into the Hipstamatic. It’s
what’s been given to me; it’s what’s been placed in my path.
Jennifer prefers the Hipstamatic app because it is another constraint that defines her aes-
thetic. One must choose the Hipstamatic filter before one takes the photo, rather than
changing or modifying the image after it has been taken. Andrew echoed her sentiment,
describing Hipstamatic shots as more pure because of their close relationship to film
cameras. For both Andrew and Jennifer, the idea of carefully considering a shot forced
them to think through their decisions about composition as well as their “film and lens”
choices:
Figure 5. Gareth Bourne.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 15
That’s what makes it, not better, but a little more pure. Because, um, it’s the same as if you were
using a film camera, you pretty much have to trust what you’re looking at and see how the
composition is gonna be in your head; what it might look like when it’s taken, you have to trust
your skills.
Although iphoneographers may differ in their aesthetic choices regarding apps and com-
position, they are all deliberate in ways they go about their choices. Such deliberation
and articulation of aesthetic help to build a legitimate art practice. For the iphoneogra-
phers with whom we interacted, the work of legitimating iphoneography as an artistic
medium was hugely important. Many iphoneographers were participating in gallery
shows online and offline, and several were also organizing such shows. Jim organized a
gallery show in Washington, DC, with the express purpose of legitimating iphoneogra-
phy within the larger art community:
The whole thing, for me, was to legitimate the art form … The weekend after opening,
right, there were people that were trickling in throughout the weekend kind of checking
everything out, and you know I wouldn’t tell them at first that all the photos were from a
mobile phone. I’d wait till we walked around and show them each persons’ panel and
we’d get to the end, and I’d go, oh by the way these were taken with an iPhone, and their
jaw dropped … So that was the whole thing for me, you know, getting the art community
to be involved now.
Like other iphoneographers, Jim sought to use recognizable artistic practices, like a
traditional show in a gallery, as a means of bringing iphoneography into a more legiti-
mate and acceptable artistic form. Some of the iphoneographers we interviewed also
created hardcover books of their photos or used online galleries as a means of legitimat-
ing their work as art. While these kinds of practices worked to legitimate iphoneography
within the broader art community, iphoneographers also had to differentiate and legiti-
mate themselves from the more casual iPhone camera user. This kind of legitimating
work primarily occurred by discussing apps and commenting on each other’s images
through Twitter, blogs, and online galleries.
A large part of what defines iphoneography has to do with what are perceived as
legitimate practices. Confining iphoneography to images taken and processed on the
phone sets a level of rigor: in particular, this defining constraint helps to build the legiti-
macy. While photo taking, editing, and sharing can all be considered conveniences of the
iPhone, the constraints of the small screen, limited inputs, and pre-defined apps also
constrain artistic expression. It is with technological and artistic talent that iphoneogra-
phers are able to overcome these constraints to produce visually and aesthetically appeal-
ing images. Working within the community-defined constraints of the iPhone was also
important to legitimate iphoneography as an art form.
As part of the legitimating process, iphoneographers also actively engage in discus-
sions about kind of app-ing, how much app-ing, and the goals of app-ing through blogs,
comments, and responses on Twitter. For example, one of the most hotly contested dis-
cussions in the iphoneography community is the use of Hipstamatic. We first began to
understand this debate through postings on the subject from the authors of two of the
most popular blogs devoted to iphoneography, Lifeinlofi.com and iphoneography.com.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
16 new media & society
The two often cross-post app reviews and other relevant posts, and when the author of
iphoneography.com blogged about why he did not use Hipstamatic, most of the reasons
he cited were technical: you cannot save the raw image; Hipstamatic takes quite a bit of
time to process images. Aesthetically, he said Hipstamatic images had the potential make
everyone’s photos look alike.
Marty, the author of lifeinlofi.com, responded. In his reply, Marty defended the use of
Hipstamatic, and wrote about the reasons he did use the app. For the most part he spent
a good deal of time writing about its merits. However, toward the end of his post, he
wrote the following:
My problem with Hipstamatic isn’t with the app—it’s with the jillions of new users who think
that all it takes to create art is to take a crappy snapshot and app it up with Hipstamatic. It’s still
a crappy snapshot, only now it’s wearing the look of a nice filter. You can’t use Hipstamatic as
a crutch in place of good photography.
This sentiment is common among iphoneographers, and was often repeated in inter-
views. The tension around Hipstamatic, articulated by Marty, was that it made it much
easier for less technologically or artistically inclined individuals to create different kinds
of visual images with their iPhones. Much of the legitimating discourse within the ipho-
neography community hence had to differentiate itself from these mass, app-happy,
iPhone camera users. The debate around Hipstamatic, and more recently Instagram,
proved fertile ground for such legitimating work.
The Hipstamatic online debate provoked much discussion within the iphoneography
community. There were 35 comments in response to iphoneography.com’s original post
and an additional 16 to lifeinlofi.com’s reply. On each post, comments about arguments
for and against Hipstamatic furthered the debate. One commenter defended Hipstamatic
because it introduced a way for him to use his cellphone camera: “I thought I’d hate the
limitations of a cellphone camera, but Hipstamatic, with its tiny viewfinder and one-click
shooting, forced me to rethink photography.” While another focused on the legitimacy of
the author: “It’s nice to see a positive opinion about Hipstamatic from a ‘proper’:) pho-
tographer/artist for a change.” Still another questioned the author’s credentials, “Are we
‘real iphoneographers’? If so, what does it take to become one?”
Back on the original post at iphoneography.com, technical discussion about the merits
and drawbacks of Hipstamatic continued. One commenter discussed the drawbacks and
lack of freedom, but ended by saying that, “I still use Hipstamatic, though I use it more
for family-shots,” drawing a distinction between his artistic and his social/ritual use of
the camera.
What it meant to legitimately engage in iphoneography was being defined through
these discussions, but on a broader level, we found that opinions on what it meant to be
accepted as a legitimate art form also varied. For some, finding a specific aesthetic and
set of rules through selective and careful curation, both online and in brick-and-mortar
exhibitions, would help build an art world similar to the visual art worlds already well
established. For others, legitimation meant thinking about visual art in new ways. Andy
advocated not thinking of just an image or movie or anything else, but of something more
like a small portable method of expression and representation that would allow us to
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 17
creatively express ourselves anywhere, any time. This again demonstrates the ubiquitous
aesthetic of iphoneography seen in both the content of the photos as well as articulated
through the sharing and distribution of the iphoneography.
Conclusion
Iphoneography represents an example of an emerging art world currently in the process of
legitimation by distinguishing the process, artifacts, and actors from mass consumers of
iPhones and photo apps. This study sought to document the process of legitimation for
this community so as to reveal insights into the larger social processes circulating between
art, media, and everyday practice. This study demonstrates the importance of community
discourse in defining, distinguishing, and legitimating commercial media use for artistic
form. The aesthetic and technical debates within the iphoneography world work to legiti-
mate iphoneography as an art world. Like Bourdieu’s (1996) camera clubs, a large part of
the reason iphoneographers engage in social activities together is to engage in the creation
of iphoneography as a legitimate art form. The very fact that they are interacting with one
another, agreeing or disagreeing on what counts as iphoneography helps establish legiti-
macy. The development of this iphoneography community and the ways in which indi-
vidual iphoneographers talked about their artistic process work to demonstrate the
importance of the legitimation in the emergence of an art world (Becker, 2008).
This study demonstrates the contentious relationship between consumer products,
digital technology, and artistic expression. The tensions this triad raises can be under-
stood through the sociology of art as worked out by the art world itself. The actors,
practices, and discourse help to identify and establish the boundaries of what is consid-
ered iphoneography but will need to be continually reconsidered in light of technological
advancements and changes in community aesthetics.
As new media are created and new art worlds form, remediation plays a large role in
the legitimation process. Bolter and Grusin (1999) point out the ways that media enter
into conversations with their predecessors, and those conversations form the controver-
sies and discussions that facilitate legitimation. In the case of iphoneography, those who
use apps to transform their images are in conversation not only with photography, but
also painting, collage, and multimedia artworks. iphoneography illustrates remediation
through tensions between immediacy and hypermediacy, and these tensions form the
basis for debates concerning the authenticity and aesthetics of that which is called ipho-
neography. The feeling that the medium itself is a part of reality is clear in the apped and
nostalgic aesthetics described above. For the apped aesthetic, the layering and effects
that remove the image from reality are like brush strokes in a painting that draw attention
to themselves. The experience of viewing these images, then, is to observe the mastery
of form, color, and texture found in the images. In the nostalgic aesthetic, the introduced
light leaks, frames, and other imperfections evoke photography of the past, suggesting
that the mechanical reproductions created by film cameras possess more aura than their
current digital counterparts. Composition is still an important part of the image making
process, but the aim is to use these introduced points of focus, these aspects of hyperme-
diacy, to create a sense of immediacy by presenting the photograph as an artifact as well
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
18 new media & society
as an image. These are two ways of using hypermediacy to achieve a sense of immedi-
acy, and, in many cases, they are at odds with one another.
The discord between these different aesthetics (when there is discord—many iphone-
ographers find value in more than one aesthetic) stems from the way the image makers
evoke immediacy; each is vying for legitimacy by claiming to present a truer or more
authentic experience of the medium. In other words, they are arguing over what consti-
tutes aura.
The simulation of aura within photography becomes an aesthetic move, rather than
medium-specific. Thus, it was in the darkroom that photographers could retouch photos
to their particular taste and thus simulate aura in their artistic expressions. For iphone-
ographers, retouching and photographic manipulation become auratic expressions re-
introducing the artist’s hand into the mechanical process. Nostalgic iphoneography may
find its aura by introducing properties found in older photographs. Nostalgic media
become a mode of cultural mediation through which we can engage with the past while
representing the present (Grainge, 2000).
The use of apps is at the center of the debates that aim to establish legitimation in the
iphoneography world. These apps allow for the re-introduction (or simulation) of aura in
the process of digital photography. Many of the informants lamented the “too perfect”
nature of digital photography, even in point-and-shoot cameras. Retro apps, like
Instagram or Hipstamatic, often introduce grain, light leaks, and borders, all of which
constitute a nostalgic aesthetic and help establish the image as unique. Moreover, some
iPhone image manipulation goes beyond the selection of filters, requiring physical
manipulation by the artist. For example, in some apps, iphoneographers use their fingers
to blur or sharpen select areas, to draw lines where the image should be cropped, or to
add color or other painterly elements to their images.
Iphoneography is an indication that “The presence or decay of aura is not, as Benjamin
suggested, predetermined by the choice of media technology or by the dominant tech-
nologies of the time” (Bolter et al., 2006: 36). Aura does not live or die by the medium,
but is reinvented as artists embrace new media. Iphoneographers are reinterpreting aura
through apps that draw attention to the medium itself, and to older forms of photography.
Just as photographers after 1880 manipulated images in the darkroom to simulate the
aura of early photographs (Benjamin, 2006: 207), iphoneographers manipulate images
on their phones to simulate the aura of analog photography. As Bolter and Grusin sug-
gest, this simulation of previous forms of photography is, in turn, legitimated by the
current simulation of these forms.
The case of iphoneography reflects long-standing debates regarding art and technical
reproduction. Both remediation and aura become lenses into the aesthetics of iphoneog-
raphy that help unpack the way iphoneographers and photographers are wrestling with
the use of technology. These debates, discourse, and practices are central to the legitima-
tion process of iphoneography as an emergent art world.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Cornell’s New Media and Society group for their comments on an
earlier draft of this article. A previous version of this article was presented at the 4S Annual
Conference in Cleveland, Ohio, in November 2011.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Halpern and Humphreys 19
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or
not-for-profit sectors.
Note
1. One of these users was also the Community Director for Synthetic, the company responsible
for Hipstamatic.
References
Becker HS (2008) Art Worlds: 25th Anniversary Edition, Updated and Expanded. Oakland, CA:
University of California Press.
Benjamin W (1972) A short history of photography. Screen 13(1): 5–26.
Benjamin W (2001) The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. In: Durham MG and
Kellner D (eds) Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp.
48-70.
Bolter JD and Grusin RA (1999) Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge, MA: The
MIT Press.
Bolter JD, MacIntyre B, Gandy M, et al. (2006) New media and the permanent crisis of aura.
Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 12(1):
21–39.
Bourdieu P (1996) Photography: A Middle-Brow Art. 1st ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Buchanan M (2011) Hipstamatic and the death of photojournalism. Gizmodo, 10 February.
Available at: http://gizmodo.com/5756703/is-hipstamatic-killing-photojournalism
Castel R and Schnapper D (1996) Aesthetic ambitions and social aspirations: the camera club
as a secondary group. In: Bourdieu P (ed.) Photography a Middle-Brow Art. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press, pp. 103–128.
Chip Litherland (2011) There’s an app for photojournalism. Chiplitherland.com, 9 February.
Available at: http://www.chiplitherland.com/blog/2011/02/09/theres-an-app-for-photojour-
nalism/
Crimp D (1980) The photographic activity of postmodernism. October 15: 91–101.
Danto A (1964) The artworld. Journal of Philosophy 61(19): 571–584.
Dao J (2010) Between Firefights, Jokes, Sweat and Tedium. The New York Times, 21 November.
Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/22/world/asia/22grunts.html?_r=1
Davies J (2007) Display, identity and the everyday: self-presentation through online image shar-
ing. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 28(4): 549–564.
Flusser V (1983) Towards a Philosophy of Photography. London: Reaktion Books.
Gonzalez JA (1992) A contemporary look at Pierre Bourdieu’s photography: a middle-brow art.
Visual Anthropology Review 8(1): 126–131.
Grainge P (2000) Nostalgia and style in retro America: moods, modes, and media recycling.
Journal of American and Comparative Cultures 23(1): 27–34.
Grobart S (2010) In Smartphone Era, Point-and-Shoots Stay Home. The New York Times,
Technology, 3 December. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/technology/
04camera.html?_r=2&;src=tptw
Ha P (2010) The 10 best camera apps for the iPhone. Time.com, Techland, 1 March. Available
at: http://techland.time.com/2010/03/02/the-10-best-camera-apps-for-the-iphone/slide/color-
splash/
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
20 new media & society
Ito M (2003) Camera phones changing the definition of picture-worthy. Japan Media Review.
Available at: http://www.douri.sh/classes/ics234cw04/ito3.pdf
Jenkins RV (1975) Technology and the market: George Eastman and the origins of mass amateur
photography. Technology and Culture 16(1): 1–19.
Kindberg T, Spasojevic M, Fleck R, et al. (2005) The ubiquitous camera: an in-depth study of
camera phone use. IEEE Pervasive Computing 4: 42–50.
Lillie J (2012) Nokia’s MMS: a cultural analysis of mobile picture messaging. New Media &
Society 14(1): 80–97.
Lofland J, Snow DA, Anderson L, et al. (2006) Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative
Observation and Analysis. 4th ed. Independence, KY: Cengage Publishing.
Madrigal A (2010) Hipstamatic and the time when photographs looked like paintings. The
Atlantic, 15 October. Available at: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/
hipstamatic-and-the-time-when-photographs-looked-like-paintings/64618/
Nightingale V (2007) The cameraphone and online image sharing. Continuum 21(2): 289–301.
O’Grady JD (2010) Top 10 iPhone camera apps. ZDNet, 2 March. Available at: http://www.zdnet.
com/blog/apple/top-10-iphone-camera-apps/6161.
Price D and Wells L (2000) Thinking about photography: debates, historically and now. In: Wells
L (ed.) Photography: A Critical Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, pp. 11–64.
Sheller M (2012) Mobile mediality: location, dislocation, augmentation. In: Witzgall S, Vogl G
and Kesselring S (eds) New Mobilities Regimes in Art and Social Sciences. Burlington, VT:
Ashgate, pp. 309–326.
Sontag S (2001) On Photography. New York: Picador.
Van Maanen H (2010) How to Study Art Worlds: On the Societal Functioning of Aesthetic Values.
Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Villi M (2007) Mobile visual communication: photo messages and camera phone photography.
Nordicom Review 28(1): 49–62.
Wells L (2000) Photography: A Critical Introduction. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Winter D (2011) Through my eye, not Hipstamatic’s. The New York Times. In: Lens Blog.
Available at: http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/11/through-my-eye-not-hipstamatics/
Author biographies
Megan Halpern is a PhD candidate in the Department of Communication at Cornell University.
Lee Humphreys, PhD, is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication at Cornell
University.
at CORNELL UNIV on June 30, 2014nms.sagepub.comDownloaded from
... Many studies on Instagram have concluded that the main reasons it became so popular was its filters and easily applicable interface that connects social relations through one single platform (e.g. Bakhshi et al. 2015;Borges-Rey 2015;Chester 2018;Halpern and Humphreys 2016;Manovich 2017). As Chester (2018, 11) argues, on Instagram a photographer can have the charm of old-style analogue cameras without the riskmistakes can always be deleted or edited into a desired result. ...
... While the site's initial user base consisted mostly of creative communities, such as the 'iphoneographers' (see Halpern and Humphreys 2016), that used the app's tools for artistic expression, 'today's sprawling network of more than one billion active monthly users includes more than twenty-five million businesses and countless participants in the so-called system of influencer marketing' (Duffy and Sawey 2021, 136). For social media entrepreneurs and influencers, Instagram is not just a platform for creative content creation (e.g. ...
... Throughout history developments in photography have not only changed the technical features and apparatuses possible for image capture and editing but also raised ongoing questions about professional and artistic authority, as well as the essence of art itself (e.g. Arnold 2021; Halpern and Humphreys 2016;Murray 2021). Already at the time photography was introduced in the North Atlantic metropoles in the late nineteenth century, women were very much involved in photography and photographic colouring and retouching practices, which quickly gained popularity and commercial success. ...
Article
Full-text available
Woman social media content creators’ visual expertise is ill understood and arguably overlooked. Through the example of lifestyle-creators, this article explores the ways they plan, produce, and look at imagery on Instagram and YouTube, and shows that creators have specific ways to learn, communicate, and take part into social practices that are key in formulating their skilled vision and visual professionality. The study is part of a larger nethnographic project in which lifestyle-YouTube channels and related social media platforms have been studied for three years. In this article, online observation of 13 creators and content analysis of instructional ‘how I edit’ – videos show, that creators have trained sense of vision that involves everyday work practices common both for amateur and professional photography practitioners. The findings suggest that creators’ skilled vision is produced through four processes: (1) sharing expertise; (2) the use of specific technology and software; (3) routine; (4) creativity. Finally, it is argued that investigating creators’ skilled vision adds to our understanding of the mechanisms that have excluded a great deal of ‘feminine’ creativity from our historical and present accounts. I situate lifestyle creators within a longer tradition of women engaging with photography, photographic technologies, and product advice, and offer ways for understanding digitally networked ‘influencing’ and visual practices on social media today.
... As a result, a new direction in digital imaging and graphic design has emerged that is dedicated to human activity, new social and visual aesthetics in addition experimental amateur imaging practices. Image-based social media has generated new visual opportunities, which have been studied through the lens of photography theory (Berry, 2014;Halpern & Humphreys, 2014;Keep, 2014aKeep, , 2014b but not from the perspective of visual communication. ...
... The two features that distinguish iPhoneography from traditional photography are prevalence and immediacy: iPhoneographs are prevalent since the availability of camera phones makes it possible to create visuals based on one's personal life at any given time and their immediacy is due to the fact that they can be shared instantly on various image-based social platforms. iPhoneographs also reflect new visual aesthetics where images are altered, enhanced, and filtered (Bakhshi et al., 2015;Berry, 2014;Halpern & Humphreys, 2014) and are therefore, visual artefacts capable of generating meaningful visual experiences. This emphasises the idea that current forms of visual communication are changing social and visual conventions on a global scale as these changes are not restricted to any specific region. ...
... Instagram, which started as a platform for documenting daily life as it happened, is now allowing Instagrammers, both as individuals or corporations, to publicly and instantly share images shot and processed on mobile phones. This snap, edit, and share phenomenon that takes place on Instagram, among other image-based smartphone applications, has interested several authors, such as Favero (2014), Gómez Cruz (2012), Gómez Cruz and Meyer (2012), Gye (2007), Halpern and Humphreys (2014), and Hochman and Schwartz (2012), for its ability to transform our personal experience with images. ...
... Our examination of Finstagramming as a means of escaping the pressures of Instagram's calculated (Halpern & Humphreys, 2016) and controlled (Abidin, 2018b) authenticity reveals how influencers strategically toggle between different digital personae. Here we flesh out how influencers perform differentiated digital labour (Duffy & Hund, 2015 across their main and Finsta accounts, so that the stories they tell (Gurrieri & Drenten, 2019) and 'affective encounters' (Reade, 2021) they foster with their audiences engender palpably different calibres of authenticity. ...
Article
Despite the proliferation of scholarly studies on social media in recent years, not many have focused on male social media influencers in the beauty industry, which is often viewed as a feminine preserve with the vast majority of ‘beauty influencers’ being female. This study focuses on the discursive practices of two male beauty influencers to examine how their visual self-portrayal contributes to their popularity and influence. A total of 752 photographs collected from their Instagram accounts were examined using a visual appraisal framework adapted from Martin and White’s (2005) Appraisal Theory described in The Language of Evaluation, focusing on normality, capacity and authenticity. The authors’ findings show that both influencers, who are openly gay, portray themselves as gender norm transgressors whose performance of capacity and authenticity as social media celebrities is a highly contested and conflictual aspect of their identity construction as beauty influencers. These findings not only shed light on the visual discursive processes and practices through which beauty influencers perform their aesthetic labour to enhance their popularity and influence but they also contribute to our understanding of how they perpetuate mediatized and marketized stereotypes of beauty and being as part of the broader sociocultural phenomenon of the celebrification of social media influencers in contemporary society.
Article
iPhoneography is the practice of capturing, enhancing, and sharing images using a smartphone device. With the emergence of image-based social media platforms that highlight the experience of making images, it becomes critical to examine how the act of creating images enhances comprehension of visuals. The practice of iPhoneography and image-based social media platforms bring forth new directions for studying visual literacy. The field of visual literacy can be used as a framework to examine both the value of reading and making images. Through the use of purposive sampling and interviews, the study examined the experiences of twelve image-makers to understand how the making and the continuous exposure to them can contribute to enhanced creative growth.
Article
Smartphone photography and social media are central in our everyday social lives, and they have paved the way for extremely fast distribution and sharing of our digital photographic texts. The new technology has profound consequences for the pace at which conventionalisation of new social practices can take place, and, consequently, at this point in history our understanding of visual manipulation is undergoing radical changes. This article explores the social semiotic concept visual validity presented by Kress and van Leeuwen in the 3rd edition of their influential book Reading Images, the grammar of visual design (2020) and discusses in what ways this concept is a fertile new approach to comprehending and analysing the contemporary digitally manipulated reality of vernacular photography. The engagement with the social semiotic theory is anchored in the author’s own experiences as a practising photographer and observations of students’ practical and theoretical work with photography. It is argued in the article that a new category of represented visual reality, emotive coding orientation, needs to be added to the social semiotic theory to encompass the perspective that photographs may not convey a naturalistic fidelity to how a depicted situation ‘really looked’ at the time it was photographed, but rather convey an emotional fidelity to how the depicted situation ‘really felt’ to the photographer. The article proceeds to pursue how we share photographic images as bodily experiences with the camera as an extension of our sensory motor apparatus, and consequently a part of our distributed cognitive system and of our social environment. The concept photographetic empathy (derived from Abercrombie’s (1964) notion ‘phonetic empathy’) is introduced to elucidate how the smartphone camera enhances a sensibility to a (more) bodily experience of photography caused by empathetic reverberation through digital sensorimotor imitation.
Chapter
Fotografien gelten als besonders authentisch, da sie es vermeintlich vermögen, eine präzise, wahrheitsgetreue und unvermittelte Repräsentation der Wirklichkeit zu erzeugen. Andererseits eignen sich Fotografien auch hervorragend dazu, trotz Inszenierung und Manipulation einen authentischen Eindruck zu erwecken. Um sich dem Thema „visuelle Authentizität“ zu nähern, präsentiert der Beitrag unterschiedliche theoretische Konzepte von Authentizität und diskutiert ihre Anwendbarkeit auf visuelle Kommunikation. Authentizität ist, dem Verständnis des vorliegenden Beitrags nach, ein situiertes und veränderbares soziales Konstrukt, dessen Authentizitätsmarker je nach Kontext und Publikum unterschiedlich interpretiert werden.
Chapter
This chapter explores the role of media accounting in identity performance and work by highlighting how media have always been important outlets for identity expression. It suggests that visual modes of identity representation are means of social interaction. Beginning with a review of the historical role of snapshot photography, it shows the early interconnections between media, the family, and identity. The chapter then reviews the rise of consumer culture and scrapbooks at the turn of the twentieth century, discussing the importance of performance, consumption, and identity on Pinterest. Two important aspects of identity representations are explored. First, it argues that identity is not an individualistic cognition or state, but fundamentally a dynamic and socially enacted process revealed through media accounting. Second, the ways in which people make choices about the small scraps, snapshots, and posts of their media accounting reflect identity work.
Article
This article takes a cultural studies approach to analyzing what could be termed the ‘cultural uptake’ of a new commercial visual technology, mobile-to-mobile picture messaging, in three key interdependent areas: user adoption, political economic contexts, and textual representation. Nokia’s early investment and marketing of multimedia messaging service (MMS) is juxtaposed to actual trends in user adoption and cultural appropriation, which in turn encouraged the company to deploy narrative practices based on perceived user needs and later focus on popular internet-based services, such as online image sharing. The goal of this study is to highlight the complex contested ground onto which new media technologies ‘emerge,’ while offering a partial, yet multilayered, snapshot of the first few years of a still relatively new, but already pervasive, personal media tool.