Mastery - an alternate theory

[BillP]

Now, here's the thing.

There are veritable terabytes of server space on RFF devoted to GAS in all it's forms, and in the why and wherefore thereof.

Something someone said yesterday sent me on an alternate track. Maybe the acquisition of equipment is a control-freak issue.

Let me explain.

You buy a [insert as applicable]. The first time you use it you are dissatisfied with the results - you feel you can do better. You try again, and again until you feel you have mastered the [insert as applicable]. Once you have done that, you start to lose interest - the challenge is mastered, the desired result has been attained.

Of course the alternate can also be true - you never master the [insert as applicable] - results obtained are always flat, not what you are hoping for. You sell it on with a sense of regret, and may even end up buying another in the future to have another go.

So.

This is, I suppose, for want of a better phrase, the "train spotter" theory. That GAS is all about ticking off rather than ownership per se. It's about being able to say "been there, done that", then moving on in search of the next challenge to master. In fact, the last thing it is about is the image.

If this theory holds true, the worst manifestations of GAS can never be cured, because it is about expectation rather than realisation.

Discuss.

Regards,

Bill

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Bill,

An intriguing theory. I'd certainly agree that there are many people who are more interested in having owned a camera or lens than in actually learning how to get the best out of it.

The older I get, the more I realize that in common with the vast majority of photographers I've never 'mastered' any camera or lens in the sense of getting the absolute maximum from what it can do, except on occasion, by luck.

But I have also come to the conclusion that some cameras (and lenses) give you more options than others, and make it easier to get good pictures. Within that frame, I look for the best (for my purposes) that I can afford, and I have no burning desire to swap one high-end camera for another, as doing so is unlikely to make me a better photographer.

Perhaps paradoxically, 'more options' means 'minimum controls' for me, as I'd rather trust to (and learn from) my judgememt than rely on a computer programmer writing algorithms for eight different 'exposure modes'.

Cheers,

R.

 

[FrankS]

By having owned a great many different cameras and camera types, I now feel that I can set aside gear lust and focus more on the photography. I've been there and done that, now I can get over it, and get on with it.

 

[BillP]

By having owned a great many different cameras and camera types, I now feel that I can set aside gear lust and focus more on the photography. I've been there and done that, now I can get over it, and get on with it.

Frank, and Roger, thank you for your thoughtful responses. I think that maturity (with a small m) has much to do with what you are both saying.

You have grown beyond the need to keep chasing the latest and best (or rarest and oldest) as your own abilities and confidence in them has grown.

In other words, the more you have mastered the machinery, the less you have felt the need to keep "searching" for the "next best thing". Your ability to satisfy yourself has transcended the equipment owned.

Regards,

Bill

 

[BillP]

...

Perhaps paradoxically, 'more options' means 'minimum controls' for me, as I'd rather trust to (and learn from) my judgememt than rely on a computer programmer writing algorithms for eight different 'exposure modes'.

...

Roger, I wanted particularly to pick up on this point that you have made, since it succinctly mirrors my own view. As the years have passed my equipment has become less and less sophisticated. Although I own a DSLR, the camera I use most is a IID. I arrived at that via a IIIc. With each iteration I have found myself less willing to rely upon the "ghost in the machine" and more confident in my own ability to juggle focus, aperture and shutter speed to achieve my desired result.

Regards,

Bill

 

[back alley]

i don't disagree but...

i see photography as 2 (at least) separate things that may not be as true for other disciplines.
one is the image focused process and the other is the gear focused process.

i may be a lousy shooter and at the same time be a great buyer/owner of gear.
conversely, i may be a talented and recognized shooter and own mediocre gear.

for many parts of the year, due to old age and poor weather i am a gear focused shooter. today, with warm temps and mild weather and being mostly content re. my gear...i am an image focused shooter.

sometimes it's just easier and more fun to focus on the machinery.
joe

 

[Doug]

Bill, that is a very gear-centric theory. I like gear, and I like exploring the gear's potential both as it applies to what I'm doing and also new ideas suggested by the gear's attributes. As Roger suggests, some gear makes it easier to get satisfying photos. So how best to find what works best for you?

 

[BillP]

Bill, that is a very gear-centric theory. I like gear, and I like exploring the gear's potential both as it applies to what I'm doing and also new ideas suggested by the gear's attributes. As Roger suggests, some gear makes it easier to get satisfying photos. So how best to find what works best for you?

Hi Doug, yes it is, but that is because it is trying to "explain" GAS. What you describe in your own experience is the "journey" - you are "moving through" gear to establish what suits you. This is an empirical method, and none the less valuable for that. But I will wager that your buying and selling has both decreased and become more "directional" as time has passed, and as your own understanding of, and confidence in, your abilities (and the tools that suit you best) has grown.

Regards,

Bill

 

[back alley]

I'm glad to see you've got over that nasty bout of cabin fever Joe.
It was a long, hard winter where you are.

yes, it was!!

as a matter of fact i am heading out soon for a nice long walk with the dog and my little grd in my pocket.

i hope the weather is good for you too.

joe

 

[Roger Hicks]

i may be a lousy shooter and at the same time be a great buyer/owner of gear. . . . sometimes it's just easier and more fun to focus on the machinery.
joe

Dear Joe,

Very true. But is acquiring gear actually photography, in the sense of 'drawing with light'? It may be tangentially related; but possibly no more so than the way I buy 'props' (mostly rusty metal) unless I actually photograph them -- which I often don't.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[oftheherd]

I'm sure there are people who are never satisfied, and others who always want to try new (to them) things. In my case, I find myself able to get things I never could before. That is a selective want. I still don't want Leica, Nikon or Canon. I want Fujinons and folders. I can't use them all at once, but can switch back and forth between them as interest/need/desire dictates.

Just me.

 

[back alley]

Dear Joe,

Very true. But is acquiring gear actually photography, in the sense of 'drawing with light'? It may be tangentially related; but possibly no more so than the way I buy 'props' (mostly rusty metal) unless I actually photograph them -- which I often don't.

Cheers,

Roger

i guess it's more photo related than actual photography. but when i cannot get out to shoot it helps me feel like i am still a part of photography. it's like this photo forum...not really shooting but i feel like i am connected to things photographic.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'm not referring to anybody here, but out there, in the mad world, there are far too many people with more money than common sense.

Dear Richard,

Very true, but the most distressing thing is not that that so many people have so much money, but that so many people have so little common sense. 'Poor' people commonly work their arses off to pay for stuff that is worth far less than the free time they could have if they didn't work so hard to buy more stuff.

The only reasons I buy a 'bargain' nowadays are:

1 I need it anyway (e.g. a new dishwasher SOON, but I'll wait for a bargain).

2 I've always wanted one and I want to see what it's like (e.g. a Morgan -- though I doubt I'll ever find one at a price I am willing to pay and can afford).

3 It's so little money I don't care (most of the 'props', voir 'ornaments' (see above)that I buy at vide-greniers). (English: car boot sale; American: garage sale, swap meet; German: flohmarkt.)

4 I can make some money out of it, by re-selling it or writing an article about it.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[chris000]

This is my entire collection, amassed over 35 years (Oh, and I only have one of each)

Used most frequently:

35mm Rangefinder
X-Pan

Used occasionally:

Digital Compact

Used rarely:

Digital SLR

Mostly confined to the cupboard:

35mm compact (inherited from my father)
35mm SLR
6x6 SLR

I don't think that qualifies as GAS and I do look on with some bemusement at some of the gear related threads on these forums - I've just never understood the camera 'collecting' thing I suppose, and I would probably sell the bottom four above if I could be bothered and if I thought I would get any kind of price for them.

 

[BillP]

So true Roger.

The woman I spoke of is up to her eyeballs in debt! (for things she doesn't need)
She has been for years, that doesn't seem to mean anything to her.

She just takes out another loan to pay the debts and she's not alone in this. The rate of over-endettement (? can't remember english!) in France is enourmous!

In the UK too. Here's a bit of useless information for you.

In the UK, the only utility that cannot be cut off for non-payment is water. This is of course for hygiene reasons, but has led to an interesting paradox, and some creative methods for dealing with it. The water companies can seek redress through the civil courts to recover bad debts, but most of them still carry up to a third of their balance sheet value in bad debt. As a result, tempro-geo-spatial debt analysis has become a major tool. This enables companies to trace back to establish the original cause of an "outbreak" of bad debt - typically not caused by poverty per se, but by someone twigging that they don't have to pay and spreading the word to their mates "down the pub". It is these people that the water companies go after, rather than the genuinely poor. By doing so the same word of mouth that led to the outbreak in the first place now works in their favour - suddenly people are queuing up to pay.

My point is this - when the bailiffs are eventually called, they often find rich pickings - 50" plasma TVs, late model BMWs, etc. "Poverty" is no longer an absolute, and is often a misnomer.

Regards,

Bill

 

[FrankS]

If this were last year, I would have been quicker than Richard in asking that question. 🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . takes out another loan to pay the debts and she's not alone in this. The rate of over-endettement (? can't remember english!) in France is enourmous!

Dear Richard,

Indebtedness (took me a while to remember, too -- once you have the French in front of you, the English is a bit peculiar and complicated).

Yes, I love the idea of taking out loans in order to pay loans. Obviously the new lenders are making no money out of this and is doing it out of the kindness of their hearts! And because they are taking on only the very best credit risks, they can afford to give very low rates of interest...

Another great way to be forced to work too hard is not to prepare your own food. Ready-cut-up chicken is maybe 3x the price of a whole chicken to cut up yourself -- and two people can get at least three delicious meals off a chicken (including soup made from boiling up the carcass). Worse still, go out to dinner 3x a week because you're working too hard to have the time to prepare your own food. And why are you working too hard? In order to pay for the meals out... (I have a few friends in this situation, mostly in the US).

Bill's point -- thanks, Bill -- about water is intriguing, too: I'd encountered that before, but forgotten it, and not known of the stories (which strike me as entirely believable).

Cheers,

Roger

 

[yanidel]

Bill's theory has got some sense and I would say it applies to life in general. Some people like routine, know so well what they do that any change is disturbing, so they stick to what they have. Others like change, discover new things and never really go through the depth of a special art, situation, place ... not to say women.
That being said, over the last five months, I have bought around 10 lenses ... and I am far but very far from mastering any of them. So why buy them. To piss off my girlfriend ... (well, I guess she prefers other lenses to other women😀) No, knowing there is little depreciation in lenses, I am experting what I like most, and will probably sell the ones I don't use when I need money.
Ok, lost out my thought, sorry, ...that leads me to the point that my approach is probably mastery by substraction on lenses. Meanwhile with the RD1, I know leave untouched most settings all day and except for ISO and sometimes speed, I do not touch anything anymore, just concentrate on what I see and focus. But I am so far from mastery ... especially with perspectives, metering and remaining unnoticed by the subject.

As for the water bill, no problem, it is more the electricity one that drives me nuts (electric heating ...) 😀

 

[ferider]

Interesting discussion.

The one thing that contradicts your theory, Bill, in my experience, is that for me GAS and photography a very separate. Once I have picked what I will use, in fact agonized over the choice, I pretty much forget the background and just use it - focus much more on the desired output and photographical experimentation. Friends have seen me "roll my Leicas in the dirt" and seemed surprised.

Like a cook obsessed about the right knife set when buying it, but just using it independent of brand when doing a meal.

Observing other gear obsessions in friends, etc., I don't feel alone.

Talk to a mechanic about tools - the wrenches that he might be very emotional about over a beer will just be used when he works on your car.

Roland.

 

[Charly]

This is stuff I've never really got - perhaps it is "man realm" - if I want to blow money on something that is totally pointless and makes me feel better - well, I'll be found at a cosmetics counter in Selfridges!

It's not that I don't own some nice gear - I do - but I justify it's ownership by having the arrogance to think I'm good enough - since my brother hasn't sorted my website, search my posts on here if you want a look. I bought my german thingy after years of a Canonet being my favourite camera and selling off my dslr gear. I also have a Ricoh GR1, the Canonet and some digicam. Some people say "I wouldn't take my Leica there! Too dangereous!" they are probably the same people that go on about how descrete they are! About the only place I wouldn't take mine is snorkelling....

Currently, I am seriously considering a Rolleiflex - this isn't GAS so much as an upcoming project I am working on that requires a big neg and something other than the wide angles I've been so used to shooting.

I actually think that there should be a system of licencing photographic equipment so that the good stuff doesn't all end up on shelves collecting dust as it's owners collect cameras. The prices of German stuff are held artifically high due to old men with cabinets and meanwhile it prevents young blood from acquiring the gear they need to further their photography.