I fully understand the point, and would like to offer a slightly different slant... The trouble with gear is that it produces a *skew* in your thinking. You get to the stage that you believe that you need *this gear* to produce *that shot*. The skew is that in linking *the gear* with *the shot* you begin to concentrate on the difference the gear makes, you begin to learn to see and judge a shot by the performance of the gear. You photography begins to represent your understanding of equipment. The point that the vid makes is that the public do not judge or categorise images in that way. They measure them purely against their experience and understanding of being human rather than the photographers understanding of the *correct* implementation of equipment. In other words all you need to do is understand that you are human and that all you need is *your imagination* to produce *that response* in your audience. See the image from their understanding of life, rather than your's of a camera. This is why I got so fed up with Dgearview, all they ever discuss is their understanding of gear to the point that all photographic knowledge is contained within it... This comes with the bias of somebody who still regularly uses a 60 year old camera with a 100+ year old lens.