PetaPixel

Twitter Officially Launches Retro Photo Filters for Its Mobile App

Well that was fast… Just hours after Instagram launched a major update to its popular photo sharing app, Twitter dropped a bomb on the industry by finally unveiling its own long-awaited and recently-leaked retro filters. The move brings it into direct competition with what Instagram offers — the two services virtually offer the same product now, except Instagram is solely focused on images while Twitter lets you Tweet text as well.

There are eight new filters: vignette, black and white, warm, cool, vintage, cinematic, happy, and gritty. Twitter has gone the Facebook route by choosing descriptive names rather Instagram-esque names like Earlybird, X-Pro II, and Brannan.

Other features include a single grid filter preview, the ability to swipe through looks, and a magical auto-enhance feature (tap a wand icon to make your photo “pop”).

Here’s a video that introduces the new filter feature:

The filters and photo editing tools available through the app are powered by Aviary, which is what Flickr switched over to once Google snatched up (and shut down) Picnik.

To get started with Tweeting retro filtered smartphone snaps, just snatch up the latest version of the Twitter app from the Google Play or iTunes App Store.


We’ve released this update in Google Play and the App Store. Watch this video to learn more about our photo filters.

Thanks for the tip, Sam!


 
  • 3ric15

    I prefer a DSLR and RAW…

  • Samcornwell

    Jim Carrey tweeted today “Have you noticed Instagram is doing for photography what microwaves did for cuisine?”. It’s a shame to see so many others jumping on the bandwagon.

  • MarvinB7

    Instagram is just a toy. It’s fun sometimes. Like playing miniature golf vs the real thing. Just a distraction, though some people still make nice images with it.

  • 3ric15

    And I’m in high school!

  • lidocaineus

    Obviously.

  • John R

    The self self self of Facebook is bad enough without the mindless drivel of Twitter and now we have instant art too. Great. (That’s an ironic ‘great’, I’m not up to yellow smiley blobs to convey my ‘feeling’.) Damn, damn and double damn, I’ve just added to the spewternet.

  • 3ric15

    Obviously…what?

  • lidocaineus

    Your comment is devoid in content with regards to the article, and on top of that, is an almost reflexive, derisive reaction, ie something a typical high schooler would post. Illustrated example:

    1) Article talks about how the menu is changing at the popular local hot dog stand
    2) Someone posts a comment about how they prefer grass-fed beef loin cut steaks.
    3) Everyone rolls their eyes because the comment is meaningless in the context of the article and has a vaguely superiority-complex subtext to it.

  • 3ric15

    First off, I say I prefer a DSLR and RAW because I don’t think lame algorithmic filters are considered photography (hence Instagram and Twitter filters). I said I’m in high school because Instagram is a huge fad for HS and I am one of the few who doesn’t actually use it. Obviously your “illustrated example” makes sense but on a photography blog I would expect some people to know what a DSLR and RAW are, I sure hope you do. Do I need to explain what a “DSLR” and the “RAW” file format is for you? Probably not. Thought so.

  • lidocaineus

    Please come back when you’re older, re-read this thread again, understand what’s actually being said and how bizarre you sound right now. Like a certain, previous article here on PP involving another high school student who felt looked down upon, you will probably look back on this and groan. The fact that you clearly did not understand my example at all (and somehow confuse a misunderstanding of what the definition of RAW/DSLR are) when it is directly comparable to what you said is pretty much a confirmation that whatever I could possibly say here on out will go straight over your head. There’s a reason my comment has a bunch of upvotes and yours does not.

  • 3ric15

    I do understand your example, do not tell me if I understand something or not. Obviously what is going through your mind is not going down very well on (in this case) the computer. And by the way, I think it would be a little hard to tell by someone’s age if they wrote, “I prefer a DSLR and RAW…” I’m saying that I’d just rather use a DSLR and RAW instead of filters! Is this really that hard to comprehend?!

  • lidocaineus

    1 – No, it’s not hard to comprehend. In fact, that’s the only thing I’m talking about.

    2 – No, you don’t understand the example, otherwise you’d understand #1.

    Want me to make it as simple as possible? Here – you posted something. It added nothing to the discussion. It made you look like a twee teen stating the obvious and (to use a cliche) comparing apples to oranges. Yes, a dSLR + RAW is probably going to make sharper, more accurate photos. Does anyone care in a discussion about Twitter filters covering a gap left by Instagram? Of COURSE not. It’s like a bunch of people were discussing board games and you barged in and declared how much you love playing and prefer baseball. Ok, that’s fine and all but… what’s your point? I use a Leica M9 every day for work and love it. Maybe I should’ve posted that earlier in this thread because I prefer it to Twitter and Instagram filters. Do you see how ridiculous that sounds?

    I have to stop talking to you now, as I literally feel my brain burning brain cells.

  • Michael Egbert

    Girls, girls! You’re both pretty!