Instagram, hipstamatic, flickr, lightbox and much more… Some are more hype or cooler than other but at the end of the day, they may, can or will do the same job:
1. Shoot with your smartphone,
2. Apply a digital filter (with a 70’s look),
3. Share it in a way or another.
But frankly, it would be very primitive to believe that they are popular for another reason than just being new. Basically, their services will be soon commodities for other social websites, should it be Flickr, FB, G+ or any other. It’s fun to look at digital pictures masqueraded like analog ones, but for how long?
It looks important to make a difference between a stand alone new service and a funny, useful, or cool innovation with a limited entry-barrier. Some will say 30 millions of fans is not so limited, fair enough, but implementing their features into a social community does not look so much complicated either. I just want to mean: relax, that’s just for the hype, some investors are going to get some return from their ventures (e.g. the IPO of Facebook is coming soon), so don’t mix things up.
I won’t be surprised that within some months, or just a fewones, and maybe not so many, it will be very old fashioned to post a photography with an analog touch.
Two things are sure, however: photo sharing will stay popular, and social websites will continue to grow…