emraphoto
Veteran
It all matters, in varying degrees, depending on the individual.
unixrevolution
Well-known
The photograph matters. How you get there is up to you.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
This is a totally different scene, with completely different intentions by the photographer. I mean... where's the couch??
This photograph can easily be done with most modern p&s digital cameras. Its the photographer's skill/vision that made this image lovely. Gear had very little to do with it... in my opinion, of course.
This photograph can easily be done with most modern p&s digital cameras. Its the photographer's skill/vision that made this image lovely. Gear had very little to do with it... in my opinion, of course.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
This thread is a storm in a teacup!
alistair.o
Well-known
Yes, but is it a complete storm without the saucer ?
Sparrow
Veteran
... with a teaspoon, and being stirred ?
benlees
Well-known
It only needs to be stirred if there is sugar. Should we add some? This thread could use some sugar.
alistair.o
Well-known
Sugar is so passe - it's all sweeteners now. I'm open to a sweetener or two...
Sparrow
Veteran
... well with all these sweeteners, Does Sugar Even Matter Anymore?
Pete B
Well-known
I think they were taken with 4"x5" Kodachrome film in 1942.
Just my little joke. I was pointing out that it is unlikely anyone would think these are taken with a cheap point and shoot digital i.e. for certain work, quality equipment has its advantages.
Pete
jan normandale
Film is the other way
OP: "Does the Camera Even Matter Anymore? Or is it about software/software skills?"… "Does gear - bodies, lenses even matter anymore?"
The point Nick discussed was not about his S/O, the quality of the photo, light, composition or mise en scene. So if you're discussing those topics you are not discussing the point he has raised. You might as well be discussing the hockey playoffs.
In regard to my comment about using a Holga or Hipstamatic image processing template the point was it is a software manipulation of an image. The point Nick has made was in regard to the image processing power of computers and software upon images captured with "point and shoot" cameras vs high end DSLRs with in camera image processing.
BTW: I agree with your "Point 7" signature line
ferider
Veteran
Nick, next time you have guests for dinner, buy Big Macs for all, and ask them if the Damascene kitchen knives are really needed for the prep of a three star dinner.
eric rose
ummmmm, filmmmm
What a troll thread! It's never been about the camera, or it's lenses, or whether it's film or digi IT'S ABOUT THE PHOTOGRAHERS VISION! :bang: :bang: :bang:
celluloidprop
Well-known
He used the photograph as an example of his point, that his post-processing made up for cheap equipment. The 'point he raised' is inseparable from the image presented - the quality of the photograph and the post-processing. Both of which are failures.
Yes, and as with the original image presented, software manipulation - and equipment - only matters insofar as the post-processing and the image itself are good. A bad image is a bad image, regardless.
Which is the point being repeatedly stressed here.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
If you want to read it that way then that's fine. To me it's similar to reading Aesop's fables.. I don't really believe the "the ant and the grasshopper" speak. So I don't say that the concepts being illustrated in Aesop are 'inseparable' and therefore impossible because the example has a speaking ant.
If the example for the point becomes the point then I guess that's how you see it. I don't see it that way.
And no this post by Nick is not a troll post. Sheesh!!
jsirevaag
Member
"A camera is a mirror with a memory, but it cannot think." -Arnold Newman
The implication here is that while every photograph (of any technical quality) is, to a degree, a true representation of its subject, not every photograph is effective at conveying meaning or the qualities that inspired the photographer to make the exposure. Great images are produced by insightful minds -not precision equipment. Give a master of photographic expression a Holga and watch the magic unfold. Give a duffer a Hasselblad and prepare to be bored!
We need special equipment to capture an image, beyond the basics, everything else is a matter of degree.
The implication here is that while every photograph (of any technical quality) is, to a degree, a true representation of its subject, not every photograph is effective at conveying meaning or the qualities that inspired the photographer to make the exposure. Great images are produced by insightful minds -not precision equipment. Give a master of photographic expression a Holga and watch the magic unfold. Give a duffer a Hasselblad and prepare to be bored!
We need special equipment to capture an image, beyond the basics, everything else is a matter of degree.
Sparrow
Veteran
... more like twaddle than fable I feel
