Food for (Photographic) Thought

[Pea-n-Me]

I came across this article and thought it would make an interesting topic here.

It begs the question, to what degree do photographers make photos, and not cameras?

Your Camera Doesn't Matter by Ken Rockwell

 

[fitzperry]

I've read this before, and I have to ask ol' Ken . . . . If the camera doesn't matter, then why isn't he taking more pictures with a $150 point and shoot? He sure seems to love his D300. The answer of course, is that the camera does matter. A lot of the equipment snobs I've encountered on some other message boards seem to share this view, despite looking down their noses at Ken Rockwell, acting as if they could take museum quality photos anytime they want with a cell phone, and so no one else need bother obtaining the expensive equipment they already own. I tend to think they just don't want anyone else joining the club.

It's of course true that a skilled photographer can take great pictures with an inexpensive camera, but that's partially because the skilled photographer understands the limitations of the equipment s/he is using and works within them. There is a valid reason that many people desire high end gear--it can do things that cheaper equipment can't. Not everyone wants a nice camera just because it's the latest and greatest or because they think it will turn them into Ansel Adams, although I have to say that just using an entry level dslr on auto will probably produce better quality images than the auto mode on about any point and shoot. Still, I think if you want to get your money's worth out of an expensive camera, you're well advised to learn how to use it.

 

[jann1033]

having recently watch a doc. on ansel adams...lots of his "magic" was done in the dark room, knowing what & how to process for what he wanted to portray...so then does that mean he could have taken the photo with a shoebox with a pin hole in it? if so why did he use the "good" cameras of the time( and lug around all that stuff that must have weighed a ton)

agree with fitzperry,,,how come it's only the guys with the $$$$$$$cameras who claim it doesn't matter what they use maybe they are trying to prove it's their "genius" and not there $$$that makes what they take decent
to a degree, it's eye, or being able to cultivate your eye but come on, it's crazy to say all the advancements in cameras make no difference and using a brownie could do the same thing

 

[Anewman]

Well a good carpenter can build anything with a 99 cent hammer, but having decent tools sure makes things easier and faster.

 

[MICKEY88]

it's a combination of both,

I think everyone would agree that a truly skilled professional would take a better picture with an entry level dslr, than a 3 year old would with a pro level dslr...

as one's skill develops you will reach limitations with cameras, some limitations can be worked around other's can not, for the average family photographer just taking snapshots, the level of dslr wouldn't make much difference..

the big difference is in difficult situations, tricky lighting, action photography..etc...then the camera can make a big difference...

another thing about pro level cameras. they usually are built tougher, to take daily abuse...

 

[brack]

The camera is a tool. There are cheap tools and expensive tools. The photographer is a craftsman who uses these tools. Some tools help make their job easier.

A good photographer can get the best results possible from even the cheapest camera while a "not so good" photographer can take bad photographs from the most expensive camera available.

 

[velvetelvis]

its a good amount of both! i have seen some simply amazing pics taken with a crappy P&S that would rival some of the best pics taken by expensive SLR's. you have to know what you are doing and have a really good imagination when it comes to taking good pics. you can by a 2000 dollar camera and still take horrible pics if your composition and subject matter are all off.

 

[boBQuincy]

Someone who is skilled may get good results from a low quality tool but may get good results faster, easier, and more consistently with a good tool.

Someone who is unskilled may or may not get better results from a good tool than a low quality tool but there is usually little consistency with an unskilled operator.

 

[Groucho]

What this thread needs is MORE METAPHORS:

Here's another one: a skilled driver can get around a racetrack faster in a junky rental car than a bad driver in a Ferrari.

But the skilled driver will go faster still in the Ferrari, which is built with racing in mind, not just getting from point A to point B.

You can take a photo with just about anything. But you need specific equipment if you want to take certain photos. Very wide, very far away, in low-light, fisheye, with no redeye (without software tricks), with multiple flash units, with very long exposures, etc, etc, etc.

 

[jann1033]

here's one to add to the collection...Edison and Jefferson invented lots of things without the benefit of a computer....now think of what they might have invented with the aid of a computer..well you can't really cause who knows ( i'm leaving Einstein out cause stories claim he was technically illiterate and so i'm figuring probably would have blown up the computer )

 

[Pea-n-Me]

The cell phone photos blew me away.

I think the points he makes are something to keep in mind, like to spend less time worrying about equipment and instead focus on technique.