back alley
IMAGES
i'm not talking about judging images...i'm talking about judging people.
lots of judgmental statements about caring more for gear than images...like gear is a bad thing and the people who like gear are 'wrong'.
lots of judgmental statements about caring more for gear than images...like gear is a bad thing and the people who like gear are 'wrong'.
back alley
IMAGES
The instrument (camera) doesn't matter, it's a tool, a vehicle .. the image matters! I know the idea is foreign to most on this forum.
PKR
Veteran
Yep, that's what I think.
And, if you noted my remark to nukecoke, I didn't tell him his images were good or bad, I told him that I liked them, and I did.
"I like the images, I encourage you to make more."
So, because I think cameras were created for picture making and don't fall for the "Leica Country Club AD Campaign" BS, I'm in some way harming others? It's just my opinion Joe. I think it's held by others (not all) that work a lot with cameras. And, I understand that if a lot of cameras weren't sold, few would be making them.
I know people collect spoons. But, I choose to use them for eating and little else..
back alley
IMAGES
...the image matters! I know the idea is foreign to most on this forum.
you don't see that as a condescending and judgmental comment about people on this site?
you don't see that as a condescending and judgmental comment about people on this site?
PKR
Veteran
No, didactic maybe, condescending, not my intension. I see it as a comment on the separation in thought between the gear people and the image people; not a proper separation, but for the sake of argument. And, as I said, the concept is foreign to most. How can someone be upset by something they don't understand, said by some one who just takes pictures. I'm, as a poster, clearly out numbered here. I'm likely a member of a 2% group among 98% thinking differently.
If those who are content in their gearness are upset by my comment...maybe they aren't content?
People look at my photos and tell me I should concentrate on color work and not black and white. These are painter friends who are very successful. I'm not offended, it's just an opinion. I do what I like, unless someone is paying me to think like them for a short time.
Why is my opinion on gear so offensive to you. I'm just one guy, who rarely posts now, except for this exchange (and CW thread)?
You seem happy and content in your camera ownership and use?
aizan
Veteran
i can unequivocally state that i like cameras more than photos, and i’d agree with back alley that there is something condescending about implying that gear doesn’t matter by way of saying that it’s the image that matters. i don’t take statements like this personally, though, because i’m a staunch believer in the importance of gear and technique in photography (craft- or art-oriented, or whatever).
on the other hand, i have no problem conceding that GAS is not particularly satisfying on a creative level unless you’re a very serious collector. since building a significant collection is not something many people can afford to do, i would like to see more support for creativity in our photography, which is much more accessible. the propose new forums thread didn’t get any traction, though.
on the other hand, i have no problem conceding that GAS is not particularly satisfying on a creative level unless you’re a very serious collector. since building a significant collection is not something many people can afford to do, i would like to see more support for creativity in our photography, which is much more accessible. the propose new forums thread didn’t get any traction, though.
PKR
Veteran
I have no problem with your thinking (I like cameras more than photos). You have, it seems, a good grip on your likes and dislikes. The image vs gear comment would, or should, only matter to someone who is interested in imagery and lets his camera get in the way of making pictures. I don't know if you will understand this concept? It happens a lot with new tools. Did you view the attached video link in my original post? I think the summation at the end is pretty succinct.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Is there a separation between gear discussions and art discussions?
Surely we need to know gear to create art? Craftsmen generally choose their tools carefully and look after them, regardless of the art they are thinking of producing...
So Gear + Vision + Craftmanship + a dash or two of Fashion or Time = Art.
Regards, David
Surely we need to know gear to create art? Craftsmen generally choose their tools carefully and look after them, regardless of the art they are thinking of producing...
So Gear + Vision + Craftmanship + a dash or two of Fashion or Time = Art.
Regards, David
back alley
IMAGES
i can't honestly tell you completely why i am offended by some of these statements...one thing is that i was disappointed that some of the statements were coming from you. i have always found you to be level headed and balanced in your viewpoints and this shocked me a bit...i have reached a point where i am completely happy with my gear...it does what i like and i like what it does. i am close to liking what i shoot...i have allowed myself to open up and try some new things and while still an amateur i can live with that title.
i still find you a key member of rff no matter how often you post.
PKR
Veteran
Well, thanks Joe. I've never seen you as anything but a good guy and a forum friend.
My comments on the gear as a tool have been published here since the first weeks I got on here. I'm surprised that you're surprised by them? I don't think they would be uncommon on a pro forum such as Light Stalkers was. But, I think as the personality of this form changes they may stick out more.
I'll try once more at the concept.. you have surely seen the "one camera, one lens for a year" challenges on here and other places? This is an attempt at making equipment disappear in the making of an image. HCB likely pulled this off better than most; though he used lenses other than a 50 at times. The idea is that your camera/lens is known so well that it's almost unimportant in the thought process of making an image. Like driving a car you've known for years. You get in and go to your destination, without thinking about the car. YOU JUST DRIVE. I personally don't like buying new cameras, though I sometimes do. I don't like it because I have to learn them backwards and forwards and it's a PITA when I just want to make a picture. I often keep using my old gear until I'm completely comfortable with the new stuff. This can take months, especially with digital hardware. So, I end up packing both new and old gear, because I'm sure how the old gear will perform and the new stuff may surprise me. I don't like most surprises, I want consistency.. SO, I DON'T HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT! I need/want to concentrate on the image at hand, not the equipment I'm using to make it.
I made a post to CW about Jim Marshall yesterday. I knew Marshall. Jim used M Leicas. He didn't switch between models. When the M6 came out his 4's were retired or sold. He even had an M6 license plate on his ford SHO. He didn't use artificial lighting much if at all, but he could call off the concert stage lighting in various venues from memory. In short, none of his gear got in his way of making pictures. He used Leicas , but the whole Leica promotion on his web site was a money deal with Leica. I think they have his old M2's in their museum. When he put his camera to his eye, do you think he didn't know where the speed and aperture were set? Or if he had to think about in which direction to move them to change the settings .. without removing his eye from the finder? Jim would tell you that he liked his cameras, but they were just a tool that enabled the archiving of what He saw and how He saw it. Simple as that.
As for titles, i.e. Amateur or Pro, they are complete BS in image making. Again, The Image is Paramount, regardless of who made it. I made a comment recently about a Banker I knew who had more time for personal photography than I have. To be polite, and only to apply this to those who understand it, Pro Photography is in some form: prostitution. The Amateur is more true to the pure task of making photos. Amateur is used as in "love of" , and most photo artists fall into this group. I think it was Avedon or someone similar who defined pro photography as prostitution with an analogy to sex: fist, I did it with myself, then I did it with another, now I do it for money!
pkr
back alley
IMAGES
gdi
Veteran
..........
ptpdprinter
Veteran
icebear
Veteran
this makes sense...it is not what i understood from some of the earlier posts so you either said it more clearly or i got a bit smarter...
glad we had this chat.
Joe,
you and PKR chatted and clarified it nicely already.
I completely agree with PKR on the main point "the camera is just a tool, the image matters" ... I'd like to add my $0.02.
If you take a look at my gallery, or the Monochrom thread, you might notice a significant change in style and vision and subjects in general since last August. I took a photoclass (it was a Leica Akademie class and yes, I do use Leica cameras and lenses) and something happened during first two of hours of shooting. I literally "saw the light":angel:, yeah I know sounds just a little cheesy
... but this is what happened. Once you've realized that, then the equipment doesn't matter. You need to have a vision. Before I was taking what I describe as "technically proficient photos" but I was lacking a vision. I was drifting, catching some nice images here and there, lacking a concept and a point of departure. Suddenly all this changed and I became aware that once you have gotten a vision, then the camera doesn't matter as long as it doesn't get in the way and you know how to use to capture your vision.
Obviously it will take time and everyone will have a different kind of experience that will make him "see the light". I think until you get there ... gear still matters. Taking extreme low light pictures at 50k ISO or freezing some flying object with tack sharp focus with ultra low shutter speed and super duper predictive matrix autofocus ... yeah, you have an idea how to show off the features of the camera and produce an image that you would not have been able to take w/o that fancy camera. The image won't really matter for too long though, I guess.
Just my personal experience... and it took me roughly 35+ years of taking pictures to get there.
I trust you won't feel offended, in case you might, I'll buy you a beer of choice the next time you are in NYC.
I can buy you a beer anyway
back alley
IMAGES
i think i am part way there...to understanding my vision...and as i said before i am more comfortable with gear than ever before. i know i have quite a few lenses now but the bigger thing is that i am not selling any and i choose one lens a day for my 365 project.
and i have no interest in looking at different brands...
beginning to become content...
and i have no interest in looking at different brands...
beginning to become content...
PKR
Veteran
Joe,
you and PKR chatted and clarified it nicely already.
I completely agree with PKR on the main point "the camera is just a tool, the image matters" ... I'd like to add my $0.02.
If you take a look at my gallery, or the Monochrom thread, you might notice a significant change in style and vision and subjects in general since last August. I took a photoclass (it was a Leica Akademie class and yes, I do use Leica cameras and lenses) and something happened during first two of hours of shooting. I literally "saw the light":angel:, yeah I know sounds just a little cheesy
Once you've realized that, then the equipment doesn't matter. You need to have a vision. Before I was taking what I describe as "technically proficient photos" but I was lacking a vision. I was drifting, catching some nice images here and there, lacking a concept and a point of departure. Suddenly all this changed and I became aware that once you have gotten a vision, then the camera doesn't matter as long as it doesn't get in the way and you know how to use to capture your vision.
Obviously it will take time and everyone will have a different kind of experience that will make him "see the light". I think until you get there ... gear still matters. Taking extreme low light pictures at 50k ISO or freezing some flying object with tack sharp focus with ultra low shutter speed and super duper predictive matrix autofocus ... yeah, you have an idea how to show off the features of the camera and produce an image that you would not have been able to take w/o that fancy camera. The image won't really matter for too long though, I guess.
Just my personal experience... and it took me roughly 35+ years of taking pictures to get there.
I trust you won't feel offended, in case you might, I'll buy you a beer of choice the next time you are in NYC.
I can buy you a beer anyway
Ice; in the club.. that's the club of "photographers" who have figured it out.. (I may catch hell for this) it's called learning to SEE. Dorothea Lang said it best, The camera is an instrument that teaches people to see without a camera.. I think I got that right? You have figured this out. You are on your way to your own view of reality, captured by the photo tool you choose to use.
I'll look for a link and add it to this comment.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16283783-road-to-seeing
Disclaimer: I am not Dan Winters and I profit (monetarily) in no way from his book.
PKR
Veteran
Yeah, I agree and understand. When working in the Kodachrome days, I traveled with about 8-10 lenses, ranging between 18-400mm. I knew them all well but not as intimately as my most used 35 and 55 micro. I think when archiving my past Kodachrome work, 75% of my pictures were made with those two lenses.. which changed in model over time, but not in focal length. I probably could have done all my work with 6 lenses rather than the 15 I owned. What a waste of money and physical effort, lugging a good part of that stuff along with lights, through airports. I was ignorant, but learned over time. I could have gotten by with half the lighting gear too. I was afraid of equipment failures. In all those years, nothing ever failed. Nikon and Dyalite both made reliable equipment.
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
I was invited to join a Facebook page that has you post One New Picture every day...
So far it's been interesting in that it's got me thinking more and more what I'm going to post, if I'll have time to take and post a shot and what if I don't have anything super interesting to post...
I have yet to read or see is what these people are using to photograph...I also haven't read any negative comments on anyone's post...
Posting your work can be very intimidating if you feel your talent is less-than others in the same forum...talking about gear can level the playing field and can lead to safer conversations and less hurt feelings...that is until someone calls your favorite camera the biggest joke ever brought upon mankind...
Interesting discussion Aizan...
So far it's been interesting in that it's got me thinking more and more what I'm going to post, if I'll have time to take and post a shot and what if I don't have anything super interesting to post...
I have yet to read or see is what these people are using to photograph...I also haven't read any negative comments on anyone's post...
Posting your work can be very intimidating if you feel your talent is less-than others in the same forum...talking about gear can level the playing field and can lead to safer conversations and less hurt feelings...that is until someone calls your favorite camera the biggest joke ever brought upon mankind...
Interesting discussion Aizan...