Kw-logo-smaller

The Evolution of Photography

Cameras today are a lot smaller than ever before.
Modern Camera
One of the first forms of photos invented by Louis Jacques Mande Daguerre.
Daguerreotype Photograph
Cameras used to be very clunky machines.
Old Table Camera

Peeps today often take it for granted that they can run to the drugstore and pick up a disposable camera for whichever event they would like to capture on film. But it wasn't always this easy. There was a time when photography was just a dream. Of course, people tried to capture their surroundings for others to see by drawing or painting pictures and although these can be and were beautiful, it's just not the same as having a photograph.

Joseph Nicephore Niepce changed the world when he produced the very first photograph in 1827. It was really blurry and you couldn't quite make out what he had taken the photo of, but it helped to catapult other inventors and artists to try their hand at photography.

Next came Louis Jacques Mande Daguerre's version of the photograph. He used thin sheets of copper-plated metal combined with different chemicals like mercury, bromine and chlorine to produce images onto metal sheets. Photographs are all about how much light is exposed onto the chemicals. A lot of light can make the picture appear too dark, while not enough light will make the picture too light to see anything. The perfect photo needs the perfect amount of light.

It didn't take long before someone had perfected developing photos on paper instead of metal and by 1850 photographs were cheap enough that almost anyone could have a portrait of themselves or family members taken.

It wasn't until the late 1970s, though, that our beloved "point-and-shoot" cameras were marketed. Up until then, you had to focus your own camera and decide how much light your picture was going to need and adjust what is called the aperture or f-stop. You can still buy manual cameras today and many peeps prefer them for taking artsy photos because you can play around with the light and the focus.

The most recent development in the world of photography is the digital camera. Digital photography allows you take pictures right onto a memory card and the pics can then be transferred directly into your computer. This eliminates the need for manual, chemical processing of film and makes it so much easier to send pics via email to all your friends and family.

Why not check out some of the cool, new photographic technology at www.canon.com.

Do you like photography? What kind of camera do you use? about your photography skills!

 

>
>

readers voted!

Comments

Surfs_Up_Girl

Surfs_Up_Girl wrote:

I love photography too much !
commented: Thu Dec 05, 2013

InfinityAndBeyondxP
cool!
commented: Thu Dec 05, 2013

directioner_4lyfe
Cameras are cool
commented: Sat Sep 07, 2013

there are 13 more comments

Please login or register to add comments

share with your friends


Twitter Facebook Myspace Digg


like this article?
Sign up now to get more just like!

latest videos

Film-poll

When was Color Film Invented?

  • In 1841, just after the Daguerreotype.
  • In the early 1900s?
  • I think I read somewhere that it was in 1935.
  • I think it was in the 1970s.

related stories

Micro_deardish-photographer-micro
Photographer asks: I love taking pictures. My parents bought me a small camera for Christmas, but...
Micro_step up-micro
If you’re in the mood for a feel-good flick, a dance movie might be just the thing to get your to...
Micro_how to take a photo-micro
Lots of people are camera shy, but are you shy of using a camera? Taking fantastic photos can be ...
Micro_a micro
Do you need some ideas for a school science project? What about animals? Kidzworld is starting a ...

Random in the forums

Teh_Skittlez
Teh_Skittlez posted in Debating:
"AlphaT" wrote: "Teh_Skittlez" wrote: "AlphaT" wrote: "Teh_Skittlez" wrote: "Vampire Poison" wrote: I'm not exactly sure about this one, I do feel like we should have the death penalty, and then again, I think it's cruel. I believe that it depends on the kind of person and what their crime is. I would feel a lot safer if a person who was a serial killer wasn't around anymore. Again, the Anders Breivik case is a great example of a country treating a mass murderer like a human being rather than a monster (after all, we are a little bit old to be believing in monsters).  So...after reading up on him, I'm very surprised.  He was the Taliban's Taliban.  But he's twisted. He should not of been deemed sane. He should be spending the rest of his days in Solitary Confinement.  Would locking this man in a small space and letting his mind corrode even further really service anyone? Would you or I actually be better off? Do you think the victims' families will be safer at night knowing we've crushed the psyche of a murderer?  Being in prison is good enough, and he'll stay in prison as long as he's a threat, I see no reason that we need to torture him (and that is exactly what indefinite solitary confinement is), other than to satisfy our primal desires. This is why I consider this such a progressive decision. Treating even mass murderers like human beings who still have potential value is progress.  Crushing his psyche is more humane then killing the man. And at this point, he's not going to be much good to society.  Not every psychopathic murderer can come back to be a good citizen. Should he get a shrink? Of course. But if he's deemed "broken beyond repair" I don't see why we should let him be among others, so that he can either be martyr'd for his beliefs in jail or kill a Muslim who is in the prison, or spread his message to to others.  The compromise is that we need to have a volley of psychological tests to determine if they could be fixed (And yes, i know it's not that simple...but its better then letting EVERY SINGLE PSYCHOPATH in a regular prison) and use those tests to place them either in a regular prison, or have a makeshift Arkham Asylum, or solitary confinement.  I think you're confusing high-security and solitary confinement. There is absolutely no reason to keep anybody in solitary confinement indefinitely. We do not need to kill him, or crush his psyche, we have other options. IF he is still deemed unsafe, they can deal with him as they see fit. Obviously if he presents an active danger to other inmates, he should be kept away, but I seriously question the idea that we should preemptively punish him for things he hasn't actually done yet. I don't disagree that it's a case-by-case basis, obviously not every murderer can be reintegrated into society, but if there's even one, don't you think we should give him that opportunity? I think we should start by assuming that every one can be rehabilitated (which obviously won't happen), and then narrow it down from there, not the other way around. Prison is not about making people uncomfortable, it should be about keeping society safe, and about reintegrating violent criminals into a safe society. 
reply 21 minutes
Fenmore
Fenmore posted in Say Anything:
potato
reply 22 minutes
WizardMorgan
COOKIES  :)
reply 30 minutes
AlphaT
AlphaT posted in Say Anything:
Store bought posters, be swaggin in dat room yo.
reply 36 minutes
Macbarbie09
Macbarbie09 posted in General:
Welcome to my August faves! Here are some of my Fave things in August: Song: Dancing Queen- ABBA!! That song is so Awesome!! Rude- Magic!!!  Why you gotta be so rude? Don't you know im Human too? Food: Ice Cream! Game: Pokemon X!! Show: How i met your mother what are some of your faves from August??
reply 43 minutes

play online games

Candy-100

A great online version of the famous Candy Crush. This is the best game launched...

1515_gl_kidzworld_100x100_jpg_fz

Intriguing planets, weird and wonderful characters; challenge friends and find a...

157262_(2)

When you go back to Candyland, you’ll wonder why you ever left in the first plac...

100x100_ra_logo_girl

Uncle George has left you his farm, but unfortunately it’s in pretty bad shape. ...

_thumb_100x100

Shoot blobs with different properies to merge yellow blobs. Your blobs can be re...