cameras are tools...really?

back alley

back alley

IMAGES
Local time
12:31 PM
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
41,289
i hear this over and over here on rff and on other photo sites as well.

i wonder when this line of thinking started? it likely started with pros who like to throw their kit around to give it that war weary look, perhaps...

but for most of us here who are hobbyists are they really tools or just gear to help us enjoy our saturday outings?

do many audio buffs say the same about their turntables, amps or cd players?

or even painters who i doubt form quite the same attachments to their brushes and pallets?

if you make a living with your gear, then i think you should call your gear tools but if it's a joyride with no income involved? - then it's my gear, my kit, my beautiful lens or camera!

can you imagine a website that might have a thread called 'turntable porn'?

joe
 
Some people fondle. Some people get hung up on name brands. Some like to name-drop. Some just like to shoot photographs.

I used to have favorite cars. Now it's just transportation. Times change, attitudes change.

I like my big Fuji rangefinder, and I'm glad I got it fixed. It has brassing - had it when I got it. I don't care to cover it up, and I don't care to add any more to it. I truly don't care how it looks - only what it can do.

But I do have cameras that look quite nice, and that's fine too.

And Audiokarma users regularly post 'nudes' of the insides of their receivers, and such like.

www.audiokarma.org
 
As long as the glass is clean and the focus turns smoothly I'm content. I've also had some lenses where the glass wasn't all that clean but I liked the effect that resulted from the internal grunge, scratches, or missing patches of coating.
 
To me, the tool represents the craft and the craftsman. A good camera is still a tool, but it also shows your concern, knowledge and commitment to some type of quality.

Not to say that there are bad cameras out there. I think the era of bad cameras and tools is over.

But yes, they are tools... that show what we are and how we see ourselves as practitioners or craftspeople.
 
Actually, I think it is not a real issue for photographers. Remember, just because you have a camera, doesn't make you a photographer. Nor is everything a good photographer shoots, art. The idea that a camera "is just a tool" is a silly affectation, usually employed by someone a little on the short side of talent. But, that is not to say that you don't grow out of it once you make some good images and begin to realize the relationship between the photographer and the camera. But, that is also not to say that you have to have a slavish devotion to every new bauble that comes on the market. There is a very nice discussion of this issue in On Being A Photographer, by Bill Jay and David Hurn.
 
Everyone is different.

I do not collect mechanical wristwatches from the 1940's because I wish to know what time it is. I collect them because I like them. They also will tell me what time it is when I choose to wear one of them.

Some people like kit. It's fun for them and why not?

Others like the prestige of owning the 'best' this or that and why not? If they can afford it, then who is to say they should not do it?

And some just like to take photographs and choose what they consider to be the best tools for any given purpose.

I really don't care. I have cameras that I like because I like them. Others that I like because of what they do that is different from what other cameras do. And some just look nice on a shelf.
 
I remember as an apprentice motor mechanic I would always clean all my tools and make sure they were hanging back in my spotless tool cabinet before I could leave work. People would come over and look at my immaculate work area and shake their heads and walk off.

My cameras are just tools but I still take an immense amount of pride in them and gain a lot of pleasure from their mechanical precision. I still have to be happy with my own ability to take decent photos though ... as I needed to be confident that I was a competent mechanic! :)
 
My digital gear is just tools for the job. I don't really carry any real sense of personal attachment to it. If I had a 50 1.2L or 85 1.2L I probably would have a better personal relationship with them.

My film cameras are still tools, but I enjoy them a lot more. When I get my MP it'll be my personal lovechild. Not to say I'm going to baby it - because it's still a camera to take pictures. But theres something a little more in something like an MP
 
"<rambling rant complete> " Amen. Some fondlers act like we should build temples in honor of cameras. They're false gods...
__________________
 
I agree with Joe.
When you're a pro photographer your camera is a tool. When you're a hobbyist it's more than that.
When you're a professional DJ your turntable is a tool. When you're an audiophile it's more than that.
When you're a Formula One driver your car is a tool. When you're Jay Leno it's more than that!
 
It's a tool. Even if one's not a pro, the camera stays tool. In the amateur's case It's something that boosts his Ego. An Ego-Boosting tool.

Tool.
 
back alley said:
i wonder when this line of thinking started? it likely started with pros who like to throw their kit around to give it that war weary look, perhaps...
Click to expand...
Dear Joe,

There are two separate issues here. A good workman looks after his tools -- but he also uses them, and a camera is a tool for making pictures, whether you are making those pictures professionally or as an amateur.

Any pro who deliberately 'throws his kit around to give it that war weary look' is a cretin, and probably a useless photographer as well (I've met 'em, usually on small-town newspapers), but there's a big difference between looking after your kit, and pampering it. I look after all my cameras as best I can, but if they're used hard, it shows, sooner or later.

Cheers,

Roger
 
The idea that a camera "is just a tool" is a silly affectation, usually employed by someone a little on the short side of talent.

I suppose this means that most or all professional photographers are devoid of talent.
 
A camera is a tool.

"Tool" is not a pejorative term.

A craftsman, a journeyman, an apprentice or an amateur is a fool if he does not understand, respect and maintain his tools.

Regards,

Bill
 
In context "we born naked and die naked" anything we have and use is expendable, actually - can be agreed to be tools. Even our closest relatives don't belong to us and stay alive or die before us without our will, so they also are "persons, helping us better learn this world". In some sense, as ErikFive says, they are another learning "tools". So why cameras should be different ?

Oh well, I'm going to mod my nice Lynx to take 1.5V battery and I love how it sits in hands and...buttersmooth operation, I said I love it ? :D:D:D:D
 
I don't know.

That camera is "a tool" implies it's almost a must to have many. Right tool for the job, etc. Assuming that you have to cover normal, wide, portrait, supertele, macro, digital, pocketable, large format.. you end up with plenitude of cameras. A perfect way to justify GAS :)

But a reverse approach (right job for the tool?) seems to work almost as well. You have a camera, you take photos that this camera can.
 
Yes, a camera is a tool used for taking photographs. But a "well sorted" tool can feel better in the hand, which has an aesthetic virtue of its own and may add functionality by simply feeling "right" or comfortable rather than "wrong" and hence distracting. Or it might just be "better looking" (in someone's view) which might not add any functionality but be worth admiring for its own sake. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I tend to go more towards the functional - but that may be my own aesthetic prejudice and isn't something I'd expect others to agree about.

...Mike
 
Some people collect tools, photographic or otherwise.
More expensive tools won't make you better at using them, but hopefully they will have greater capabilities than cheaper ones. And there are different tools for different jobs, why do you think there are so many lenses? ;)

back alley said:
or even painters who i doubt form quite the same attachments to their brushes and pallets?
Click to expand...

Just an OT aside, but I have listened to my painter friends get into heated arguments about their brushes. For hours. Arguing over which brand/shape/type is better. BTW some of them make a living selling paintings, others do it just as a hobby. Hmmm, sounds familiar doesn't it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom