-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Can better equipment make you.....
- Thread starter Thomas Gardner
- Start date
Thomas Gardner
Veteran Member
Kevin Omura
Senior Member
Good points Ben, I guess I fall somewhere between the artist and the technician.
When I was in Maine at the workshops I was checking out the store and noticed they were selling a small plastic camera called a Dories or something like that. They were using them as part of one of the workshops. When I was working on my degree in photography in our first year we built pinhole cameras.
Thinking back on this and on what you said I suspect the purpose of that was not to make fine art with these cameras though I know of some folks who do but to get an understanding of the basics and limitations of the medium and equipment. Those making 'art' have mastered the limitations of the equipment they choose to use.
Fast forward to 2002 and our department converting over to digital from film. I was looking forward to seeing some of our guys who aren't that great technically finally get a better handle on what they were doing because they could now see what they shot. Normally they would drop off their film and the techs would take over from there. Well some have really run with the technology and are doing great while others are just as inconsistant and poor technically as they were before the switch. So from my experience I would say better gear (read that as highly automated) will help to some degree but I would say no amount of money can help some....though I wonder about training monkeys to shoot.....hmmm.....
Kevin
When I was in Maine at the workshops I was checking out the store and noticed they were selling a small plastic camera called a Dories or something like that. They were using them as part of one of the workshops. When I was working on my degree in photography in our first year we built pinhole cameras.
Thinking back on this and on what you said I suspect the purpose of that was not to make fine art with these cameras though I know of some folks who do but to get an understanding of the basics and limitations of the medium and equipment. Those making 'art' have mastered the limitations of the equipment they choose to use.
Fast forward to 2002 and our department converting over to digital from film. I was looking forward to seeing some of our guys who aren't that great technically finally get a better handle on what they were doing because they could now see what they shot. Normally they would drop off their film and the techs would take over from there. Well some have really run with the technology and are doing great while others are just as inconsistant and poor technically as they were before the switch. So from my experience I would say better gear (read that as highly automated) will help to some degree but I would say no amount of money can help some....though I wonder about training monkeys to shoot.....hmmm.....
Kevin
Kevin Omura
Senior Member
When I worked retail I used to say to myself that there was no such thing as a bad picture. Just ones that didn't quite work out technically. But not bad because the photograph meant something to the photographer.
Thanks for reminding me..
Kevin
josef armendariz
Well-known member
Well, unfortunately, I don't have an ego running amok like you'd like to believe. I certainly don't recall making any comment vaguely similar to the own below unless your getting creative with the paraphrasing. It was my 'opinion' not ego that stated that just buying all the newest gadgets will not make you any better if you don't learn basics first.
Did you start this thread to hear two sides or just find people that disagree with you so you could blast them as egomaniacs?
Josef
Did you start this thread to hear two sides or just find people that disagree with you so you could blast them as egomaniacs?
Josef
josef armendariz
Well-known member
Well, yeah badly worded as I put that, I would have to agree. Let's see if I can put that thought so it makes more sense. If you know the technical side of photography, lighting, etc...it opens you up to focus on the art. That I speak from experience. After 5 years of technical industrial photography, I used to walk into a room without even thinking twice about how I was going to light or expose. It was second nature, so I was able to experiment more with the composition knowing that things would turn out.
Josef
Josef
Dana Jacobsen
Leading Member
Well, illustrating another problem with analogies, experience shows that if it were a modern Formula 1 car, it would make you very unlikely to get around the track in even one lap. Most very experienced drivers seem to find F1 cars a bit unwieldy. Was it last Goodwood or the one before where the guy got about 200 feet before pressing just a little too hard on the fast pedal and the car promptly slewed sideways and into the barriers. I've heard lots of stories like this.
Putting me in a Z06 in an autocross would maybe make me go faster, but I think it would be hard to be a better driver in it. It would be better to stay in a little Miata and learn how to be smooth, and I'd likely go faster anyway (remembering that autocrosses don't have long straights). It's a tough call -- in karting, most people hghly recommend not getting a 125cc shifter to start with since it's too much too soon, and generally you become a bad driver -- start with an 80cc and you end up much smoother. Having driven a 125cc kart briefly, I can see the point -- insane acceleration and braking.
Regarding cameras, it seems complicated. A 70-200 f/2.8 IS is not going to make me a better photographer, but it does enable some things I wouldn't be able to do without more work. Would that work be good for me? Maybe. Sure, using a tripod all the time (no need for that image stabilization) would be good, and working on lighting, subject motion, or different technique might make the f/2.8 unnecessary. But I'm more likely to just forget about it and take a bad picture, not bother, or go on to something more amenable to the equipment I have.
Bringing up another analogy, should we force software developers to use obsolete computers? Will it make them better programmers? Maybe we should restrict them to Fortran for a while. Better yet, Cobol -- then move them up to C++. Does a better computer make you a better programmer? Usually not. It might make you more productive, and it might enable new things (making a modern GUI using an Apple II would be quite a task). Do I think one should jump right in to the latest MS Visual B-Flat development studio? Not if you want a software engineer -- you need to understand the basics of data structures, algorithms, and a lot more. Sort of like understanding lighting, composition, exposure, etc. can turn a picture-taker into a photographer (well, I argue good photography has more art than most software engineering, but I've seen some artistic designs too).
Thomas Gardner
Veteran Member
Your above is an egotistical comment.
There was no intent to the thread. I made a comment with no thought in mind where it might go. I've responded to comments that countered my position directly and I've noticed that many here are having trouble with facts that support issues. Those people that have these problems are having these problems because of egotistical reasons. That comment is a fact whether you wish to accept the comment or not.
There is no intent to harm anybody when I make the comment. There's no intent in incest anybody when I make, what I believe to be truthful comments. I'm only using the English language to communicate that which to me is very obvious.
I've taken the time to post that people's comments are confusing. I've posted in response to clarifications. Other's are supporting of this contention. Other's are accepting of the middle ground and others refuse to budge. Okay, that's fine.
The above quote was a statement of a general nature. It was at no time directed towards you or any one person or comment. I don't see how you could think the above quote was directed at you personally. I stand by my quote above because my comment is based upon their strident refusal to see the facts before them, that's egotistical and can be construed as narsistic in nature.
If I offended you in anyway, my appologies.
andyfrazer
Leading Member
"There's no intent to INCEST anybody..."????
I assume (I hope) you meant to say "incite"....
Andy Frazer
http://www.gorillasites.com
nochance
Forum Enthusiast
Why, yes Virginia, you can make a very pretty sows ear out of an ugly, smelly one, but you aint' going to make a silk purse. (no offense intended)
My pictures are better with better equipment, but I'll never be a good photographer because I don't have the talent.
Bob
D60, CP5700, CP4500
My pictures are better with better equipment, but I'll never be a good photographer because I don't have the talent.
--
Bob
D60, CP5700, CP4500
Thomas Gardner
Veteran Member
Blusing as I write"There's no intent to INCEST anybody..."????
I assume (I hope) you meant to say "incite"....
I thought that incest had two meanings, the obvious aside, I thought it also ment, to upset a person.Soooooo, I'll be happy to, as you suggested, substitue "incite".
Ben Lanterman74611
Senior Member
....though I
It is a lot of fun though isn't it. At least in a digital workshop you might not have to make the sensor by hand.
--
http://webpages.charter.net/benlanterman/
Actually not a bad approach, the art is in the editing and that might be a lot of fun. The instructors in the workshops are probably looking out across a class of new students with the monkey concept formost in mind.
It is a lot of fun though isn't it. At least in a digital workshop you might not have to make the sensor by hand.
--
http://webpages.charter.net/benlanterman/
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum