Once again...

[Bill Pierce]

Looking at all the written sites and spoken video sites dealing with photography, I am amazed at the high percentage of them that are for the most part devoted to equipment reviews, many not with specific brands, but simply with the latest, most recently introduced gear. Some of these sites are excellent in their evaluations of gear. But if you don’t use the brand of camera they are reviewing, the material isn’t of much use.

To me, that’s rather sad - especially in the case of folks whose photographic knowledge obviously goes far beyond the evaluation of a single piece of gear in a world where the much of the gear is so good that it really doesn’t matter what “brand” you use. Indeed, the controls on today’s digital cameras are so extensive, but so different between brands, that there is a strong argument to sticking with one brand if you want to work quickly without thinking too much about operating the gear. As someone who quite often picks up Camera X and reaches for the controls on Camera Y, I should take my own advice.

Gear is important. If they’ve been around long enough even some photographers will begin to think of themselves as important (not the really good ones). But none of this is as important as what is in front of the lens. So, as we do every few months, any sites that you recommend - especially if they go beyond gear reviews and deal with what is in front of the camera. (And maybe, just to be fair, your thoughts about photo sites in general and even your favorite gear reviewer when they review “your brand.”)

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

That's because most people who buy cameras are not photographers, they're gear fondlers. One thing I love about RFF is that there is a lot of talk here about photographs. Yes, the site is somewhat gear-centric since it was originally founded for people who shoot with rangefinder cameras; but RFF has some incredibly talented photographers, many of them professional artists, commercial photographers, and photojournalists.

Other photo forums are obsessed with gear or process to the exclusion of any concern for the actual images produced. We manage to have a good balance of talk about images, process,and gear here that is nice.

 

[Cascadilla]

+1 for Chris Crawfords's response--I've known many gear collectors who thought they were photographers, people who thought that if they only had the right camera and lens that they would suddenly become great photographers. That there are a lot of u tube videos and sites devoted to gear isn't surprising, since these people probably buy a good share of new equipment. I shouldn't disparage them too much since they help to create a used market with a lot of almost unused equipment at lower prices than new that I have taken advantage of.

 

[Pál_K]

Another vote for RFF itself. Many of the photos I’ve seen in just the last two years by talented people here are truly outstanding.

 

[boojum]

I really like the board for the depth and breadth of knowledge. That and the photos which remind me that I still have a ways to go. I would like to believe that that sexy new camera and hot-shot new lens will get me a Pulitzer but I can't. The pen does not make the author. Granted a lens can improve something but it cannot make a lousy photo a great one. I'd buy one of it could. ;o)

 

[bluesun267]

I think I mentioned this before but I've found this guy an inspiration: https://www.youtube.com/c/ThePhotographicEye

 

[willie_901]

I avoid gear review sites. Sites that focus on gear do so because this is a means to generate revenue. When I am interested in gear I do specific searches. One site I do visit occasionally is LensRentals.

...
But none of this is as important as what is in front of the lens. So, as we do every few months, any sites that you recommend.
...

As far as "what is in front of the lens" goes - in no particular order:

• https://urbanautica.com
• https://loeildelaphotographie.com/en/
• http://lenscratch.com
• https://americansuburbx.com
• https://www.aint-bad.com
• https://www.sxsemagazine.com
• http://www.hamburgereyes.com
• https://www.lensculture.com
• https://cphmag.com
• https://shotsmag.com
• http://www.seesawmagazine.com/index.html
• https://photobookjournal.com
• https://www.lizkuball.com/photography
• http://georgebarr.com
• https://tao-of-digital-photography.blogspot.com
• https://elizabethavedon.blogspot.com
• https://tonyfoto.com/drool/
• http://www.rachelhulin.com
• https://www.rescuedfilm.com/rescued-latest

NOTE: These are links to the home page. Some of these sites sell things (books, prints), some, on occasion, contain nudity, a few don't avoid debauchery and some of the work on these sites has political or sociatal agendas. It's possible to accidentally come upon something you find offensive. However, none of them are dedicated to, specialize or focus on controversial, salacious and, or indeliccate content.

 

[farlymac]

This is a site I like to visit. It has a good mix of gear news and photography tips. https://photographylife.com/

PF

 

[ooze]

On the spoken video sites I avoid gear reviews like the plague.

If your main concern is photography, especially when explored in book form, I highly recommend Alec Soth’s channel on youtube. He posts relatively infrequently, but when he does it’s always a gem.

 

[JeffS7444]

Lomography.com is worth perusing from time to time. Although the site exists to promote Lomograpy's corporate message and to sell products, pretty much anyone with a camera is welcome. Much of the work being shared is unpolished, but here and there, some images which work well for me: It's a treat to discover the work of someone for whom the latter is more than just a happy accident!

Brand-specific bulletin boards: Of occasional value if I'm considering the purchase of a camera or lens and want owner feedback. As for switching systems, I half-seriously think that the replacement for my A7R4 will be the A7R8, but I haven't got a clue what that will offer: Maybe greater emphasis on computational imaging will be tomorrow's must-have.

 

[ranger9]

...none of this is as important as what is in front of the lens. So, as we do every few months, any sites that you recommend - especially if they go beyond gear reviews and deal with what is in front of the camera.

This is a recurring refrain on photography-discussion sites: "Why can't anyone go beyond the gear and talk about what's really important?" But I think there are several reasons this is a mirage:

• The subject is too big. "What is in front of the camera" could be literally anything, and how do you launch into a useful discussion of "anything"? One advantage of concentrating on gear reviews is that it's a subject that can be divided into chunks of convenient size, so it's perfectly feasible to do a useful 10-minute video segment on (for example) how the Leica M11 differs from the M10R. Now try to imagine doing a similar-sized examination of (for example) how the work of Ruth Orkin differs from that of Vivian Maier, or the conceptual differences between photographing strangers and photographing friends. You either can't do justice to the subject, or you go on beyond what would interest anybody besides you.
• Appreciating photography is fundamentally about SEEING the photographs, and you can't see them very well -- if at all -- on most online outlets. If you can't see the original work, discussing it tends not to be very interesting. (Here, I'll prove it: Here's a link to a professionally-written review that I would consider a quick overview or a short gloss on a couple of exhibits that you can't see anymore by photographers you may not have heard of. Go ahead, try reading it and see how far you get before you lose interest.)
• Photographers generally aren't very good at writing about photography (even though quite a few of them are convinced they write brilliantly.) They're too close to the subject and they're too invested in their own viewpoints. Besides, you can't write well unless you're genuinely interested in the mechanics of how words work together... and if you were a word person you wouldn't have become a photographer, you'd have become a writer. Right?
• Critical thinking isn't allowed anymore. We've become (as someone said about pre-Brexit England) "a post-factual society that's tired of experts." There used to be actual professional critics who wrote usefully and insightfully about photography topics for a general audience -- A.D. Coleman and Owen Edwards being two names that come to mind -- but now the very notion of professional criticism is met with hostility. "It's all just somebody's opinion," says the reader, "and my opinion is just as good as anybody else's, so f*** you." A person who is capable of forming judgments about photography topics and writing interestingly about them isn't likely to have any incentive to bother in such an environment.

But here's a thought: When people say, "Why is nobody talking about what I think is really important?" what they often actually mean is, "How can I clarify my own thoughts about what I think is important?" Well, writing IS a great way to clarify and organize thoughts -- so write! Not necessarily for anybody else to read, not to post in a public forum, but just for your own purposes. Journaling is what the cool kids call it now, I think. Look at photographs -- your own, and other people's... look at the kinds of things you're interested in photographing... think about all of that... and then write about your thoughts. Don't try to write something that will impress other people, just do it for you. You may find that the act of writing helps you put your thoughts in order, and you also may find that reading what you wrote several months later may give you some useful perspective (or it may embarrass the hell out of you, but sometimes that's the same thing.)

 

[jsrockit]

Equipment is easy to understand and buy. Great photography is not.

 

[ptpdprinter]

One reason we have few discussions about photographs is that most of the photographs here are posted by members, and no one wants to offend the members posting them by suggesting areas of improvement. Perhaps if someone qualified to moderate the discussion were to post an anonymous photograph and make a few leading comments to get the ball rolling, a fruitful discussion might follow.

Here is just one of the sites I subscribe to. Every morning I receive an email containing a photograph from five photographers and a link to more photographs by them. They don't tell you why the photographs are good, but at least you are exposed to new photographers and photographs, and you can think about them.

https://loeildelaphotographie.com/en/

Be aware that most of the photographs are really good, and after awhile you may conclude that you might as well give up photography because there is no way you are ever going to make photographs as good as the ones in the email. Either that or you need a better camera.

 

[Dogman]

Sometimes I'm amazed at what passes for photography these days on many of the artsy sites. Multi-media, composites and constructions along with concepts that are murky and meander into incoherence seem to dominate. It's hard to find interesting photography among the pretenders. Often it's hard to tell what "photography" now means.

A couple I like these days are all-about-photo.com and 121clicks.com. They have some really good photography at times on both these sites and they allow me to discover photographers I had not been aware of previously. The old reliables lensculture.com and americansuburbx.com are still good sites to view photos and read interviews. Frames magazine is often interesting at readframes.com. When they have reviews it's usually book or exhibition reviews, not gear. I like to dig around on calvertjournal.com and fkmagazine.lv for photos from Eastern European photographers, some very interesting...at least to me. Also, noorimages.com contains some excellent journalistic photography as well as more contemporary work. NOOR doesn't appear to get updated very often but it's still an excellent source for a good bit of the work from the late Stanley Greene.

 

[ptpdprinter]

Sometimes I'm amazed at what passes for photography these days on many of the artsy sites. Multi-media, composites and constructions along with concepts that are murky and meander into incoherence seem to dominate. It's hard to find interesting photography among the pretenders. Often it's hard to tell what "photography" now means.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that you are qualified to assess who is a pretender and who is not?

 

[Dogman]

How did you arrive at the conclusion that you are qualified to assess who is a pretender and who is not?

It's not hard for someone who knows their craft/art. Surely you can do that too.

 

[Tom R]

Equipment is easy to understand and buy. Great photography is not.

Another way of saying almost the same thing: It's easier to buy things than to make things.

 

[ptpdprinter]

It's not hard for someone who knows their craft/art.

One time, on another forum, I posted a landscape photograph, and the forum know-it-all allowed as to how it was a "nice catch". Nice catch? It was a f*****g landscape you idiot. Since that time I have heavily discounted comments from self-anointed experts on forums, even when they are flattering. I am especially dubious of the guys handing out the pretender awards.

 

[KM-25]

One thing I love about RFF is that there is a lot of talk here about photographs.

Very true, much more than most forums, especially considering the banter is often associated with the posting of good to great photographs.

But the sad irony I can not help but notice in regards to this particular column is we never-ever get that from the columnist.

Will we ever get a great life as a photographer story with an accompanying photo from you Bill? Ever?

 

[quadtones]

https://rfotofolio.org Worth a visit. Many visits. Not about equipment, only about images. They support the art and craft of photography, and as a not-for-profit have provided some support to some photographers intent on conveying their vision and dedication to it.