Are we a bit misdirected?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
tt321
Senior MemberPosts: 3,494Gear list
Like?
Re: Correct
In reply to Steven Wandy, 2 months ago

Steven Wandy wrote:

tt321 wrote:

Steven Wandy wrote:

So perhaps the OP's point - and yes I do realize that this is primarily a TECH forum - is valid. Too many people here do poo-poo the more aesthetic aspect of photography while bowing at the almighty alter of the technical aspects of current cameras and lenses. I have no issues or problem with his starting this discussion.

This is out of line, for me, with my understanding of the spirit and the name of the forum. People "poo-pooing the more aesthetic aspect of photography while bowing at the almighty altar of the technical aspects of cameras and lenses" are exactly at home in this forum and should not be denigrated in their home territory. I don't believe there are gear heads going into photography art forums to denigrate the photographer in favour of the gear, but if there were and if I read in a forum where this happened, this would be the exact same response I would have produced.

Why "out of line"? I admitted that this was a TECH FORUM and have accepted the fact that the vast majority of discussions/thread are of a TECH nature. But in my opinion the OP did not "denigrate" anyone, just pointed out that perhaps we are sometimes looking too much at the technical aspect of photography.

This is exactly what I am objecting to. Such opinions are best aired in other forums, for instance, in the very top forum 1018, than here at lowly 1041.

This forum's discussions, no matter how gear-centric, even to the point of ignoring the purpose of the gear, is not out of place. There may be people who do use their gear to make excellent photographs but come here exclusively to talk about gear and not their photography; there may even be people who are not at all interested in making good photographs at all. They don't need to be educated about maybe they should not concentrate on the gear so much. They are adults and have, or should be assumed to have, done the required thinking at this philosophical level before deciding it's enjoyable to come to 1041 to talk about gear and tech. In other words, wondering "that perhaps we are sometimes looking too much at the technical aspect of photography" is out of context here.

An advantage on concentrating on gear and not art is that art is very subjective, and often difficult to use precise language to even construct a meaningful dialog about, mostly because art is a language in itself, whilst gear and tech tend to be more amenable to commonly agreed and well defined terminology. If someone needs to describe/explain/discuss a photograph in so many words, why did they make the photograph in the first place? Compare this to discussing whether the DoF is suitable, whether shutter shock has affected the sharpness, whether the ISO is set too high, etc. and to me the latter are much more tangible and discuss-able.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow