I posted something about this a few days ago and it was deleted by accident.
Interestingly enough the forum appears to be getting a little more active. I suppose the big question is, what would you want to see more of on here? Postings of pretty pictures for critiques, or more discussion? Or, a great balance of both?
I have always thought about getting people together to discuss photography, share ideas, have actual critiques, more social events, gearhead talks, etc. Some of you remember the gallery co-op idea I had last year, which unfortunately, never came to fruition. That was a bummer, but hey it wasn't very well planned out by yours truly.
At any rate, how about a weekly discussion about a hot topic in photography? The discussions could range from topics such as the effect of the digital phenomenon's paradox, all the way to how to market your work to multinational corporations for their boardrooms.
Let's start today!
If it flops, then it flops, no more weekly discussion...
Here goes weekly discussion for 5/10-5/17 (I suppose we could start/end them on Tuesdays)
"What is it about your gear that makes you a photographer? Do you feel like your camera and lens are an 'extension' of who you are as an artist? Why is it that we upgrade our gear so often, when at the time, the gear you have is sufficient for you? Does your camera do all that you anticipated? If you had to go back to your old system, would you be upset?
So there goes... lets see if this works!!! I'll try to answer in a further reply.
I don't think the gear is what makes you a photographer, there are certainly a bunch of people out there with cameras that I wouldn't call 'photographers'. For reference I'm using 'Photographer' in the same sense as 'Artist'. For me, the gear helps make me a better photographer in that I am more able to achieve my vision for a particular image with the gear I have than I could with a disposable film camera loaded with cheap ISO800 film. This is not to say you can't make great images with a disposable camera or a cell phone, they just restrict what type of images you can achieve. It's funny how many times I've been out shooting and run into people and they say "Wow, that's a big camera, I bet it takes great pictures", and I always want to tell them "yes it does, I just point it and try to stay out of it's way."
I upgrade when I think it will help do something that I feel I can't do adequately at the present time. There is a difference between gear that is "sufficient" as you say and gear that is more capable. Then I need to determine if I can afford it. If I don't have cash in pocket to buy something I don't buy it.
My camera is all that I anticipated and more. I probably only use 3/4 of the capabilities of the camera. And yes I would be a bit disappointed if I had to go back to my old gear as it would mean a lot more work to achieve the same results I get now.
I think this is a cool idea, Chris. If you come up with the topics, I'm sure you'll get thoughtful responses from this crowd.
NOTHING about my camera gear makes me a photographer. To me, the best gear is, in a way, transparent. It does a job, but lets me see without having to think too much about the gear I'm seeing through. But I do have my favorite pieces of gear. Sometimes they're favorites because they make my job easier, or they produce higher quality results, or they just feel good in the hand to work with. These feelings are important to me because they help me focus on seeing and not fussing and fiddling with the tools of image making. Most of my gear upgrades are for these reasons. I admit that I'd be a little upset if I had to trade in my DSLR for my old 4x5 field. I switched, or upgraded, or whatever you want to call it for good reasons - ease of use mostly - and going back would make the functional process of making images more difficult. That would be a bummer, especially considering the limited time I can devote to photography these days.
I like the way Scott put it that the best gear is transparent. The main reason I upgrade (software and gear) is to focus more of my attention on my creative process and less on the mechanics. When taking the long list of gear into account, I don't actually upgrade all that often. I've learned the hard and expensive way, that if I buy quality gear to begin with, the individual pieces will wear out (or suffer an accident!) before I am done with them.
Great idea, Chris!
I just did go back to my old system, a holga similar to what I have messed around with when I was 12. But that's just because I was bored with what I had and wanted to push myself creatively. I don't see that as a set back, it's light and easy, albeit limited in use which makes it a lot of fun. I still plan on using the digital system for many different reasons But my thing is I don't want the viewer to know whether my work was captured on a holga, iPhone or my 5D2 with some fancy new plug in at 15% discount if you mention a name. Nobody questioned Picasso on what size brush he used.
Chris, keep up the discussions, it gets us involved and thinking about why we do what we do
I agree with both Scotts; gear does not make one a photographer. Photo gear and software are tools just like a pipe wrench for a plumber, a scalpel for a surgeon, a hammer and saw for a carpenter, etc., etc., etc. In the hands of a skilled person (one who studies and learns the nuances of what makes a great photo) properly framed, focused, exposed, and post-processed images (utilizing gear and software) will be rendered; in the hands of a beginner or the typical "snap-shooter" the images, for the most part, will leave a lot to be desired.
As far as upgrading gear wise, I haven't upgraded in several years and I'm perfectly happy. Would I be upset switching back to my old stuff? Yes and no. No, not unless they quit making 35mm slide film; yes because of the cost of film and developing. In fact, I'm able to utilize my 70s and early 80s manual focus only lenses (thanks to a recent purchase of an adapter) on my DSLRs. OK, so maybe the aforementioned purchase is an "upgrade". Or is it a downgrade?
Another 30+ years added onto the 30+ years under my belt and I might, just might, get the hang of this thing called photography!
EDIT: By proper framing, exposure, focus, etc., I mean techniques that will render images that will be as close as possible to reality or are creative, such as abstracts, intentional motion blurring, composites - just to name a few - depending on what one has in mind for the viewer.
I like to experiment and be creative. The gear and software are the tools that get me to starting point, but knowing how to use those tools, along with the techniques, will get me to the final result I want to present.
Awesome, thanks everyone that responded, these are fantastic answers.
I agree wholeheartedly that the gear doesn't make the photographer. However, the photographer 'makes' the gear. The choices you make for your creativity dictate your style. If I want to shoot panoramics, I may choose a pano camera - quite simply the right tools for the job.
While the camera does a great job at the time, I'll be damned theres another iteration available. Scott F said the gear is always sufficient - yet more capable. This is exactly right. Unfortunately, we are living in a time where these digital devices are basically computers, which are designed for only a few years' use. What a huge difference from the film world where cameras were meant to last. such as life and the pressures of the marketplace. Look for the Canon 5DMark3 to be in stores in September. Damn you Canon. Simply put, the new stuff is more enjoyable to use as its evolution has adapted to the needs of photographers.
For me, I use the digital camera like a manual film camera. I shoot manually, although I use AF because its better then my eye. I would say the best thing that Canon did with the 5D2 is the live view zoom. I had no idea about it until CAZ showed me this when we were in Steamboat last summer. Other than that, the system is perfect for me at this point. The low light capabilities are extraordinary, and make photography enjoyable rather than frustrating.
If I had to go back to my old 5D, no problem. That was a remarkable achievement. The 10D, however, would be a slight challenge for many reasons.
Discussion
6 repliesInterestingly enough the forum appears to be getting a little more active. I suppose the big question is, what would you want to see more of on here? Postings of pretty pictures for critiques, or more discussion? Or, a great balance of both?
I have always thought about getting people together to discuss photography, share ideas, have actual critiques, more social events, gearhead talks, etc. Some of you remember the gallery co-op idea I had last year, which unfortunately, never came to fruition. That was a bummer, but hey it wasn't very well planned out by yours truly.
At any rate, how about a weekly discussion about a hot topic in photography? The discussions could range from topics such as the effect of the digital phenomenon's paradox, all the way to how to market your work to multinational corporations for their boardrooms.
Let's start today!
If it flops, then it flops, no more weekly discussion...
Here goes weekly discussion for 5/10-5/17 (I suppose we could start/end them on Tuesdays)
"What is it about your gear that makes you a photographer? Do you feel like your camera and lens are an 'extension' of who you are as an artist? Why is it that we upgrade our gear so often, when at the time, the gear you have is sufficient for you? Does your camera do all that you anticipated? If you had to go back to your old system, would you be upset?
So there goes... lets see if this works!!! I'll try to answer in a further reply.
I upgrade when I think it will help do something that I feel I can't do adequately at the present time. There is a difference between gear that is "sufficient" as you say and gear that is more capable. Then I need to determine if I can afford it. If I don't have cash in pocket to buy something I don't buy it.
My camera is all that I anticipated and more. I probably only use 3/4 of the capabilities of the camera. And yes I would be a bit disappointed if I had to go back to my old gear as it would mean a lot more work to achieve the same results I get now.
NOTHING about my camera gear makes me a photographer. To me, the best gear is, in a way, transparent. It does a job, but lets me see without having to think too much about the gear I'm seeing through. But I do have my favorite pieces of gear. Sometimes they're favorites because they make my job easier, or they produce higher quality results, or they just feel good in the hand to work with. These feelings are important to me because they help me focus on seeing and not fussing and fiddling with the tools of image making. Most of my gear upgrades are for these reasons. I admit that I'd be a little upset if I had to trade in my DSLR for my old 4x5 field. I switched, or upgraded, or whatever you want to call it for good reasons - ease of use mostly - and going back would make the functional process of making images more difficult. That would be a bummer, especially considering the limited time I can devote to photography these days.
Great idea, Chris!
Chris, keep up the discussions, it gets us involved and thinking about why we do what we do
I agree with both Scotts; gear does not make one a photographer. Photo gear and software are tools just like a pipe wrench for a plumber, a scalpel for a surgeon, a hammer and saw for a carpenter, etc., etc., etc. In the hands of a skilled person (one who studies and learns the nuances of what makes a great photo) properly framed, focused, exposed, and post-processed images (utilizing gear and software) will be rendered; in the hands of a beginner or the typical "snap-shooter" the images, for the most part, will leave a lot to be desired.
As far as upgrading gear wise, I haven't upgraded in several years and I'm perfectly happy. Would I be upset switching back to my old stuff? Yes and no. No, not unless they quit making 35mm slide film; yes because of the cost of film and developing. In fact, I'm able to utilize my 70s and early 80s manual focus only lenses (thanks to a recent purchase of an adapter) on my DSLRs. OK, so maybe the aforementioned purchase is an "upgrade". Or is it a downgrade?
Another 30+ years added onto the 30+ years under my belt and I might, just might, get the hang of this thing called photography!
EDIT: By proper framing, exposure, focus, etc., I mean techniques that will render images that will be as close as possible to reality or are creative, such as abstracts, intentional motion blurring, composites - just to name a few - depending on what one has in mind for the viewer.
I like to experiment and be creative. The gear and software are the tools that get me to starting point, but knowing how to use those tools, along with the techniques, will get me to the final result I want to present.
I agree wholeheartedly that the gear doesn't make the photographer. However, the photographer 'makes' the gear. The choices you make for your creativity dictate your style. If I want to shoot panoramics, I may choose a pano camera - quite simply the right tools for the job.
While the camera does a great job at the time, I'll be damned theres another iteration available. Scott F said the gear is always sufficient - yet more capable. This is exactly right. Unfortunately, we are living in a time where these digital devices are basically computers, which are designed for only a few years' use. What a huge difference from the film world where cameras were meant to last. such as life and the pressures of the marketplace. Look for the Canon 5DMark3 to be in stores in September. Damn you Canon. Simply put, the new stuff is more enjoyable to use as its evolution has adapted to the needs of photographers.
For me, I use the digital camera like a manual film camera. I shoot manually, although I use AF because its better then my eye. I would say the best thing that Canon did with the 5D2 is the live view zoom. I had no idea about it until CAZ showed me this when we were in Steamboat last summer. Other than that, the system is perfect for me at this point. The low light capabilities are extraordinary, and make photography enjoyable rather than frustrating.
If I had to go back to my old 5D, no problem. That was a remarkable achievement. The 10D, however, would be a slight challenge for many reasons.