No, the opposite might be true.
Let's compare the process of a GP taking clinical photos when using PicSafe versus when using a DSLR camera. A DSLR (Digital Single-Lens Reflex) is what most people would know as a "good" digital camera. Spoiler alert. We show that PicSafe is much quicker, easier and doctors are far more likely to comply with practices that keep clinical photos secure.
Here is the process a GP would go through if using a DSLR.
In summary, that process is cumbersome and given doctors are often pressed for time, steps will be skipped resulting in noncompliance with guidelines/laws. Alternatively, if it is too hard, and doctors will not take a photo resulting in poorer patient care.
Here is the process if using PicSafe.
Obviously, we would like to get the photos into the medical record direct from the phone, and bypassing the steps of uploading to Box or Dropbox. Avoiding Box and Dropbox will come with more integration, something that is never going to be possible with the DSLR process.
We should note that we are not advocating PicSafe replaces the role of a clinical photography department in a hospital. There will always be a role for that. The quality of image a high-quality DSLR can achieve is superior to that of a smartphone (even if the gap is closing). For the vast majority of cases, the quality of photo that you can achieve on a smartphone is more than adequate for its purpose.
Where a smartphone is stored on your person, a digital camera is often left in different places and is at a greater threat of being lost or stolen. It is also common for SD cards to be lost or stolen.