Your support helps us to tell the story
My recent work focusing on Latino voters in Arizona has shown me how crucial independent journalism is in giving voice to underrepresented communities.
Your support is what allows us to tell these stories, bringing attention to the issues that are often overlooked. Without your contributions, these voices might not be heard.
Every dollar you give helps us continue to shine a light on these critical issues in the run up to the election and beyond
Eric Garcia
Washington Bureau Chief
Are we done with the snapshot? Following an Independent report on Vine last week (the 'six-second video app that is reinventing film') Slate's Farhad Manjoo believes so. The thesis runs like this: if we've got the technology to take video - and transmit it at high speed - then the need for actually-not-moving-at-all photography is pretty much null and void.
The rise of Vine, which overcame early stutters to claim 130 million smartphone downloads, raises questions about what exactly we are trying to capture when using phone cameras. Is it beauty - a nicely framed, well-lit picture - or truth - a six-second clip recording hundreds of different moments? Manjoo plumps for the latter.
When recording his 3-year-old son, he says, "I want to remember exactly what it felt like, what it sounded like...for authenticity- or, better authenticity, videos handily beat photos".
Manjoo's argument - which he admits might sound "arrogant and overly general" - is backed up by some powerful Vine clips, all of which can be seen here.
Of course, the video sharing app offers more than strict 'click-and-record' to users, with many veering off into more surreal territory (see man on a magic banana, below).
But what do you think - does video preserve a memory better? Will it overtake the humble photograph? Let us know in the comments below.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments