Things that make a better photographer

[manaheim]

As a side note, I see Josh changed his avatar to flaunt how much cooler looking he is than me.

Hey, you brought it on yourself...

See, because of you, I've had to grow out my facial hair so I look manly. Check out the results!

[Ads]

[O|||||||O]

You're almost there...!

[Bitter Jeweler]

^^^ I agree with the jeweler, but lots of people spit blood over remarks like that.

Why would they spit blood over that? That's stupid.
People do amazing things, making do with minimum/cheaper tools. Artists often work with what they have. But give that artist better tools, and their creative language will increase.

This is true of the medium as well. Cheap watercolors vs. expensive. Cheap watercolor paper vs. expensive. It doesn't say that great art can't be made with the cheaper medium. Look at film choices. CVS Brand vs. all the better stuff.

As a side note, I see Josh changed his avatar to flaunt how much cooler looking he is than me.

I have a better beard than both of you.

[captainkimo]

Do you guys think having an expensive camera makes a better photographer? As the camera is what makes the picture good isn't it?

A good picture is made by a talented photographer who thinks what settings s/he will be using, how will s/he frame the subject, etc. etc. The camera does not do the thinking. It is just a tool to produce a good picture.

and will people take my work seriously if I don't have an expensive film or digital camera? Right now I just have an older 35mm pentax.

People will take your work seriously if they see quality in it.. regardless of the camera you used.

Cheers!

Captain Kimo

[Overread]

Why would they spit blood over that? That's stupid.

There is always someone in these such talks who comes along and says something along the lines of
"Give A. Adams a disposable point and shoot and he would take Pulzer winning shots with it"

Which is to say that they consider gear to be a pointless/unimportant part of photography when compared to the compositional vision of the photography (irony is many of these such people tend to have rather a nice selection of expensive gear ).

Honestly its mostly because people tend to divide into two broad groups - the technical and the compositional - and some members of each are always trying to push that their side is the more important over the other.
OF course it is as you say - both sides are important, and whilst lower end gear can get a good result with the proper skills, give that same person a better set of gear and they will take even better shots - if this were not the case then "pros" would not use "pro" gear (note that this is true of all art from photography to watercolours to sketching etc...)

PS its good to see more beards!
IMG_0016 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[manaheim]

^^^ wow. Well said. Best summary of it I've seen in the least amount of words. Someone sticky this. Oh wait... we never do that.

[Bitter Jeweler]

Thanks for the clarification Overread.

Facial hair is an art form too.

[Torus34]

Responding to the IP:

The goal is to make a picture - to convert what you see into something you say. You must make the choice of the subject, how it is composed and under what lighting it is photographed. You must also choose the equipment used to form the image.

The final picture that you envision will dictate the gear. It may be anything from a pinhole camera to the latest DSLR or 8x10 view camera. The equipment serves the image. The photographer chooses both.

[Battou]

It's all in the gear, Just imagine how much better this super macro shot of my zippo lighter would have turned out if I had used a real camera instead of a crappy little Easy Share Kodak.


On a more serious note:

Gear is irrelevant untill you know how to use that, that is in your hand. Simply owning a 400mm 2.8L does not mean you are just going to step out side and shoot superior photos to a 400mm 5.6. It's not untill you know how to use the 400mm that you will see any difference between the 2.8L and the 5.6. Truth is it's the photographer that makes the better gear and not the gear that makes the better photographer. It is true that better equipment can give you more creative scope and make the whole process easier but a good tool in the wrong hands will never produce anything nearly as good as the worst tool in the right hands.

[farmerj]

Manaheim and farmerj are morons...

1. no you don't need an expensive camera, just a creative eye
2. you only need a $700 Tripod
3. Canon RULES ALL!!!

oh and you need cs4,photomatix,lightroom, and photoshop.

hehe

Everyone KNOWS you aren't a photographer until you get one of these.

Not like you can take any good pictures without one.

[Battou]

Manaheim and farmerj are morons...

1. no you don't need an expensive camera, just a creative eye
2. you only need a $700 Tripod
3. Canon RULES ALL!!!

oh and you need cs4,photomatix,lightroom, and photoshop.

hehe

Everyone KNOWS you aren't a photographer until you get one of these.

Not like you can take any good pictures without one.

I'd rather have Piccaso's pencil

[farmerj]

Everyone KNOWS you aren't a photographer until you get one of these.

Not like you can take any good pictures without one.

I'd rather have Piccaso's pencil

Picasso's Pencil would probably cost you just as much.

[In2daBlue]

"Does a better camera make better pictures?"

Yes, but it depends on what you're shooting. If you're trying to snap a nice sunset than you will notice very little difference between a $300 point and shoot and a D3. If you are trying to take photos of a band on an indoor stage with crazy artificial light that is low-lit, than hell yeah you will see a HUGE difference in image quality between even a D60 and a D3.

It's all relative.

[Bitter Jeweler]

Gear is irrelevant untill you know how to use that, that is in your hand. Simply owning a 400mm 2.8L does not mean you are just going to step out side and shoot superior photos to a 400mm 5.6. It's not untill you know how to use the 400mm that you will see any difference between the 2.8L and the 5.6. Truth is it's the photographer that makes the better gear and not the gear that makes the better photographer. It is true that better equipment can give you more creative scope and make the whole process easier but a good tool in the wrong hands will never produce anything nearly as good as the worst tool in the right hands.

It's pretty much a given that if you have no talent, it doesn't matter what you use.

[Hertz van Rental]

Then there are those rare photographers who achieve a level of such enlightenment that they don't even need a camera at all