why is gear talk more popular than photo talk?

[Tim Murphy]

My sentiments exactly

My sentiments exactly

Hmmm, I don't do art, I do photography and I see the camera as a sort of notebook that I can use to record things with. From time to time I think pictures might amuse or entertain but I know what I like/laugh at won't appeal to others and vice versa.

So I don't see the point of it on RFF which is about range-finders and a few other types of camera.

If I was teaching or learning I'd think differently but I do suspect that teachers/critcis have favourites...

Regards, David

Dear David,

Well said. You've described my feelings on the subject perfectly.

Regards,

Tim Murphy

Harrisburg, PA 🙂

 

[al1966]

i'm not an arts educator, but i've taken several photography and arts classes that had crit sessions. the important thing is to be respectful and for negative (and positive) comments to be concerned solely with the artwork, not the person. other people who have not had this experience will eventually find it valuable, like you did!

do you remember how the teacher conducted crit sessions? maybe you have the experience to be a moderator in the "crit session" category...

Yes they were never personal and offered constructive criticism, along the lines have you thought of this or trying this etc. It was more along the line of how we were thinking when making the work, how they sit in a series or as a singular image. Not sure I will have the time to moderate unless sporadically, being the glutton for punishment I'm looking to do a PHD so energies are being spent there.

 

[aizan]

Hmmm, I don't do art, I do photography

and doing photography is something that you can't get better at by hashing out your ideas with other people?

participation is not required, obviously. some people don't want to, some people do. some will change their minds later, some won't.

 

[aizan]

Taste in 'Art' is so ridiculously varied that the only safe discussion <IS> about gear and technique.

taste in cameras is also ridiculously varied. hop over to dpreview and check out the flame wars people have about gear and technique!

if anything, that goes to show that there are both respectful and inflammatory ways to discuss a subject. we're pretty civilized over here so i'm expecting the photo talk that'll go on here will be good.

 

[02Pilot]

I'm finding this whole discussion fascinating. The idea that photography isn't art baffles me a bit; art is personal expression, photography is personal expression, so how is photography not art?

In any case, the point I and others have made here stands. Useful critique is not targeted at intent, but at the correlation between intent and photograph. It's easy to think you've done everything you intended in a photograph, but unless others see it, it's impossible to say for sure.

 

[jszokoli]

While I will give you that equipment choices are vast, I think the the breath of art is orders of magnitude greater. There is somtimes no common ground to gain traction. People are not even arguing but talking past each other.

For me there are parts of what are considered mainstream art that I can't even begin to understand. And believe me I've tried. I can't go to a modern art exhibit and not see something that leaves me thinking ***. But I would never totally dismiss what I see.

The problem is there are people who really have concrete ideas about what is what, and that can poison the well.

Joe

 

[PKR]

I've attempted to draw folks into various photographic topics with limited success. Usually it comes down to a handful of members that participate. Sadly the internet propagates the notion that more and more expensive equipment makes you a better photographer. It's not about the images you produce, it's about the equipment you own and how cool you look with it. Anyone can talk but not everyone can make excellent photographs.

Hi X-ray;

I've pretty much quit posting on here except for archiving on the Camera Work thread. Many "Photographers" have passed through this forum in the number of years I've been on here. All but a handful of people on here are interested in Photography, i.e. making photographs. It's the norm on this forum and others on the web, to talk about acquisitions and planned acquisitions of camera equipment. Most threads (you and I have been in a few) dealing with imagery last only a few days with the same handful posting. It's not likely that this will change.

Many on here believe the marketing hype generated by camera manufactures that promote the idea: If your pictures aren't as good as you would like, you need a better, more expensive, camera. I'm sure some can see through this bs but, they still fork over their earnings in the hope of improvement. We have talked in the past on here about the amount of work, hours put into.. providing a good technical foundation for making presentable photos. But, it remains, if there is content lacking in an image, all the technical skill and good equipment won't get much acknowledgement from a viewer who knows the difference.. one who is looking for Art, with a big or small A.

The technical stuff can be learned. But, I have concluded that.. creativity can't be taught. So, all the hand wringing over imagery is just a waste of time, to my mind. Those who must create will not likely be stopped. Those who can't, will wonder at what drives those who can.

Best, pkr

 

[back alley]

i've been photographing since i was 19 and am now 67...i have had binges of creativity that left me satisfied and wells of depression where i have created nothing...art or not.
for me it's been a lifelong experiment at being creative...i no longer seek the approval of others but honestly enjoy both the positive and negative feedback that i do get.
any and all of my images are open to some CC...my 365 project has been a freeing experience for me and i'm enjoying it immensely. at the moment it is showing me that i can turn on a dime and create something different each day.
is it art? yes, i think it is...good and bad art (note the small a 😉)
i hope we don't give up on each other and that for those that want, we keep pushing to improve and enjoy the trip.

 

[mrb]

I think it's a vocabulary problem. Talking/writing about aesthetics, form, composition, tone, or other qualities of a photograph is hard, especially compared to posting about gear. It's been said before, but studying art will probably make most of us better photographers than studying cameras.

 

[Ccoppola82]

I think photography can land in the art category if that's what is intended. It can also be just a personal journal. I do art professionally, so I may have a slightly different take on things. I started photography to take reference photos for my painting or tattooing projects and it allowed me to quickly practice different compositional ideas. Drawing or painting takes a lot more time than photography!! Then I fell into the vintage adapted lens rabbit hole and decided that I was going to jump into film. As far as why equipment conversations are interesting to me is, I think it's incredible that the same camera and lens used at the dawn of 35mm can STILL be used today (thank you Leica)

As far as photos go, I see successful photos as falling into 1 of 3 categories (or all of them if lucky)
1. Historical significance
2. Unique human gesture
3. Organization of shapes.

Of those, the ONLY one we can really practice is number 3. The rest fall into "right place right time" category. The masters were not all technical masters. They were compositional masters. I encourage everyone to study "notan structure" and start practicing how to see shapes. My takeover from painting is, when choosing a composition, SQUINT at the scene. This Eliminates distracting details and breaks down values, shapes, and edges. Sorry for the tangent! Love this forum though. I've really learned a lot here

 

[robert blu]

My father was a passionate amateur photographer, I still have a few color photo he printed in our bathroom when I was a child. From that time I remember we sometimes drove a few hours to go to buy chemicals, no internet in those time, it was in the '50s.

This is to say photography has always been part of my life.

When many years ago I decided that my photography needed an improvement I didn't buy more or better gear: I took part in serious workshops with very experienced photographers. For a few years I invested my photo budget in "formation".

This allowed me to know different way the photographers can use their equipment in order to convey ideas, feelings, emotions: in other words I learned the "language".

And I learned that, generally speaking you can express your idea with any tool, it could be a Leica or an high tech DSLR or a Holga (of course if you are interested in something very specific, macro or sport you need specific tool)

And in order to master the language in a better way you have to confront yourself with the story of photography, to know what the other photographers did, to understand why the did it in that way. You have to know what other people, artists who use visual media did or are doing, painters, drawers...even musicians can tell you something: deciding which rhythm you need in a song is not very different than deciding which rhythm you must follow when sequencing your photos for an exhibition or a book or a zine.

But the photographic industry needs to sell to make profits, to keep the plants running and the amateurs are the ideal market for them. It's easier to convince people they can improve their output just buying something new or "better". And it's easier to enter a shop and buy something than study the master of photography, visit exhibitions, take part in workshops, experimenting.

As consequence also a place like RFF can be "victim" of this situation: it's easier to speak about gear than discuss the language of photography.

I'm in RFF since 2005 it's a long time and noticed how the place changed but still think is the best place in the internet to visit about photography.

Sometimes I see in the gallery photo which I "do not understand" why they are posted. But I find very difficult and inappropriate to say this in front of everybody. It would be different if we are personally meeting and I could open speak to him saying what in my opinion doesn't work and ask him why he made certain choices. But in the net it could bring out misunderstandings, even more being english not my mother language and there are concepts not easy to express in a foreign language. And as consequence there is always the risk to offend someone without desiring it.

But even being RFF a gear centric forum there are still members who post interesting ideas about photography and not gear, not many perhaps but for sure good!

robert

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Just a few points; most of the famous artists were - as students etc - seen as troublemakers and dismissed by serious artists. So we got the rejects salon and Manet's "The Bar at the Folies Bergère" and the van Goghs and so on. Look at Whistler's "Arrangement in Grey and Black No 1" and the history of it, because it ended up in the law courts.

I agree photography is a creative process but so is writing a shopping list. It would be nearer the truth to say that some things that are purely functional have to be created but that doesn't mean they have to be works of art. Nor should they become them when the creator dies but, OTOH, look what a note to her sister scribbled by Jane Austen would fetch at auction...

At times/often I think we take things too seriously, and then we die so what does it matter?

Regards, David

PS And one or two famous (and serious?) artists seem to me to have taken the attitude that if the fools will pay for it they'll go on churning them out; even forgeries of their own work...

 

[raid]

Well said

Well said

My father was a passionate amateur photographer, I still have a few color photo he printed in our bathroom when I was a child. From that time I remember we sometimes drove a few hours to go to buy chemicals, no internet in those time, it was in the '50s.

This is to say photography has always been part of my life.

When many years ago I decided that my photography needed an improvement I didn't buy more or better gear: I took part in serious workshops with very experienced photographers. For a few years I invested my photo budget in "formation".

This allowed me to know different way the photographers can use their equipment in order to convey ideas, feelings, emotions: in other words I learned the "language".

And I learned that, generally speaking you can express your idea with any tool, it could be a Leica or an high tech DSLR or a Holga (of course if you are interested in something very specific, macro or sport you need specific tool)

And in order to master the language in a better way you have to confront yourself with the story of photography, to know what the other photographers did, to understand why the did it in that way. You have to know what other people, artists who use visual media did or are doing, painters, drawers...even musicians can tell you something: deciding which rhythm you need in a song is not very different than deciding which rhythm you must follow when sequencing your photos for an exhibition or a book or a zine.

But the photographic industry needs to sell to make profits, to keep the plants running and the amateurs are the ideal market for them. It's easier to convince people they can improve their output just buying something new or "better". And it's easier to enter a shop and buy something than study the master of photography, visit exhibitions, take part in workshops, experimenting.

As consequence also a place like RFF can be "victim" of this situation: it's easier to speak about gear than discuss the language of photography.

I'm in RFF since 2005 it's a long time and noticed how the place changed but still think is the best place in the internet to visit about photography.

Sometimes I see in the gallery photo which I "do not understand" why they are posted. But I find very difficult and inappropriate to say this in front of everybody. It would be different if we are personally meeting and I could open speak to him saying what in my opinion doesn't work and ask him why he made certain choices. But in the net it could bring out misunderstandings, even more being english not my mother language and there are concepts not easy to express in a foreign language. And as consequence there is always the risk to offend someone without desiring it.

But even being RFF a gear centric forum there are still members who post interesting ideas about photography and not gear, not many perhaps but for sure good!

robert

-------------------------------------------------
You have said it very well, Robert.
My father used a Zeiss Contina camera that I received to use when I was a teenager, and I then started to be interested in photographing people around me and at college later on. When I moved to the USA as a graduate student, photography helped me overcome being homesick. I bonded with photography of mountains and valleys and animals close to campus, and it kept me happy. I take photos and I never claimed to crate art.


Keep it cool here, and let people do what they enjoy doing.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

I think it is very possible to discuss photography, the process & the prints without 'critique'
& i agree it's sadly lacking & that the over abundance of 'gear talk' gets old.

 

[35photo]

I think it's a vocabulary problem. Talking/writing about aesthetics, form, composition, tone, or other qualities of a photograph is hard, especially compared to posting about gear. It's been said before, but studying art will probably make most of us better photographers than studying cameras.

I've kinda have come to this conclusion as well... Folks just don't know how to talk about photographs because they lack in the visual vocabulary... It is tough no question, its something I've struggled with in the past and still do.. I used to have a blog where I would post some of my images and just talk about them and even thought about posting others work and doing the same... I just got lazy with it, writing isn't my strong suit to begin with and trying to express myself in words has always been a challenge for me...

 

[citizen99]

"...over abundance of 'gear talk'..."

Conversely, I wouldn't characterise non-gear talk as 'over-abundance', even though it's not my personal main interest*. There are different threads for all tastes, even though (re-reminder) this is by definition a site with gear-related themes. I expect other sites exist to suit anyone who prefers less 'gear talk'. Some of the phraseology gives me the feeling of being 'elbowed-out' from here.

* I am not a Photographer. I like gear of any age, although more the vintage/classic stuff, and I take photographs with it.

 

[mpaniagua]

I'm finding this whole discussion fascinating. The idea that photography isn't art baffles me a bit; art is personal expression, photography is personal expression, so how is photography not art?

In any case, the point I and others have made here stands. Useful critique is not targeted at intent, but at the correlation between intent and photograph. It's easy to think you've done everything you intended in a photograph, but unless others see it, it's impossible to say for sure.

Hello Pilot

Do you think satellite photography is art? X-Ray are art? Photography used by insurance to document insured goods?

I think it got something to do with the intent of the photographer AND his/her ability to transmit that intent.



So yeah, I think not all photography is art.

Just my 2 cents.

Best regards

Marcelo

 

[02Pilot]

Hello Pilot

Do you think satellite photography is art? X-Ray are art? Photography used by insurance to document insured goods?

I think it got something to do with the intent of the photographer AND his/her ability to transmit that intent.



So yeah, I think not all photography is art.

Just my 2 cents.

Best regards

Marcelo

Fair points, but is anyone participating on this forum doing so because they are primarily engaged in and wish to discuss satellite, x-ray, or insurance documentary photography? The sort of photography that RFF participants are involved with is indeed a subset of the technology, but I felt that was a generally understood point and didn't think I needed to make the semantic distinction.

I still hold that the type of photography being done and discussed by RFF members is primarily personal expression, and thus art. As I suggested elsewhere in this thread, the intent of the photographer is key to having any meaningful discussion of the result.

 

[Hogarth Ferguson]

Discussing photography invariably involves criticism, which is frowned upon. When you are only allowed to post praise, you get a half a dozen attaboy posts and the thread dies, with no one learning anything. The upside is no one is offended. On the other hand, you are allowed to freely praise or criticize camera gear, explain why you do and don't like it, and post comments on how you would like to see deficiencies addressed. Whether or not you agree with all the members' opinions, you generally learn something about the camera gear in question.

I'm so far behind on this thread, but I feel like it is exactly what I have been thinking about lately, and to a greater degree, for the last couple years.

I think the reason, as others have stated, for more gear talk rather than actual photo talk is mainly due to feelings. With gear talk, while people do get very personal with their gear, there is not the same emotional attachment as there is with a photo you took.

If you look at almost all social media these days (instagram, facebook, flickr, et al) there are plenty of ways to heap praise upon someone, but no way to express distaste. We all want to think our photos are good, and for the large part, they are. However, with a constant feedback loop and echo chamber that is the internet today, people are much more likely to receive praise and not criticism.

I recently deleted my social media for this very reason. I felt like there are two common threads. You post something, and everyone agrees, or you post something and it devolves into a horrible mess. Personally, I would love some criticism, some assistant, some way to guide myself into better photos, and "that is a good shot" while ego boosting, is nothing past that. People, it seems, do not want to be critiqued, and even if they are, they can turn around to another avenue to get the praise they so desire.

I have found, however, that RFF is made up of more concerned individuals, or people who actually do a job of saying if something is good or not, although sometimes it comes from a high horse attitude.

 

[mich rassena]

Gear is easy to talk about, and if you're in an enthusiast forum like this one, there's bound to be someone who's excited about whatever interests you. Unfortunately it's easier to buy gear from the comfort of your home rather than go out and use it. There's just so much to know, and lots of tiny distinctions that can consume your attention. In many ways, it's not very different from those that can quote all the sports statistics. We may play the game more than that group, but gear talk is borderline fandom.

But I do find old camera gear very compelling, and I would like to have one of everything. But I want to break out of that rut. I'd love to find a forum where I can give and receive constructive criticism about my photographs. But again, it's easy to get into a discussion on technical grounds. Those are easy distinctions, too blurry, underexposed, etc. I want more than that.

I don't know that I wouldn't be better off criticizing my own work and writing a bit about what I had hoped to achieve with the photograph, where it succeeds and falls short. Because whose opinion will I value more? Perhaps the democratic nature of forums is enough to undermine constructive criticism. Without a clear sense of who the knowledgeable authority is, there are no teachers, just someone else's opinion that I'm free to ignore.