Vaughn
Subscriber
Everything is a preset for gripes sake -- can we forget about presets now?
Otherwise, what Matt wrote...
Otherwise, what Matt wrote...
Same same, although I made all my own hifi components so I could have a unique looking system that also sounds great. Working towards the same with making pictures all takes time and effort.Very true. I found the same to be the case when I was into stereo equipment. Some people are more attracted to the gear than what the gear can actually do.
Incredibly wrong. Have you ever used one?Diana, Lomography for art; Puh-leez. They have some cache for creativity for some reason. Gimmicks. All they produce are artifacts you cannot control so art becomes a coin-toss.
Diana, Lomography for art; Puh-leez. They have some cache for creativity for some reason. Gimmicks. All they produce are artifacts you cannot control so art becomes a coin-toss.
To be able to predict the outcome equals control of that outcome. I know how my Diana camera and its plastic lens 'sees' as well as my 11x14 with the Fuji W 360mm/6.8 lens and FP4+. Both occasionally surprises me...thankfully! However, I do not see myself being more or less creative using one tool over the other, but I had as much pleasure printing that little image of two 1.75" sq frames as I did printing a 5.5"x14" negative from Zion NP yesterday (pt/pd)...I also printed a three 6x10cm negative panorama of Kyoto from my son's apartment. I used a Brooks Veriwide 100 -- it has an aftermarket viewfinder for its 47mm lens...a wonderful challenge to use...forced me to think creatively. A friend lent it to me right before I left for Kyoto.Diana, Lomography for art; Puh-leez. They have some cache for creativity for some reason. Gimmicks. All they produce are artifacts you cannot control so art becomes a coin-toss.
Of course. Would we ever allow a roulette wheel to decide SS, f, ISO lens integrity or consistency of medium so that we can be "creative?"Incredibly wrong. Have you ever used one?
Maybe now is the time to repeat the Photrio-Analog Motto (as I understand it). "The Camera Does Not Make The Picture, The photographer Does".........Regards!Of course. Would we ever allow a roulette wheel to decide SS, f, ISO lens integrity or consistency of medium so that we can be "creative?"
I like very much to shoot with different cameras, I buy and sell often many plastic fantastic. Right now I have Espio superzoom, and some "focus free" are there as well. I use cheaper cameras let's say in 20-30% of the time. Maybe as a test once I should use cheap stuff 80%, and Leica 20% of the time?
I use cheaper cameras for couple of reasons: main is that I simply like to use different cameras, it is a fun and enjoyment for me. For the viewer only what counts is the final image, but for me as a maker also the whole process is important, fun when using camera, developing prints and so on. For me it is not only about the final print (which is the most important part, of course). Second reason is that plastic cameras are light, if I compare Espio zoom with F2 and 180mm f2.8...I can understand why I take Espio with me. Even if I have "happy accident", and missed focus form time to time - I like using them. Would this be better photo if I took exact the same photo with Nikon/Leica (not in technical sense, but artistic)? Probably not. But would I be on some or other position, made the same photo, or would I take different photo with Leica/Nikon, and would it be better or worse? This I don't know.
Here is one example: on one of my trip to Haiti I had M3 with LTM Elmar 5cm f3.5, Nikon F3 with 105mm/2.5 and Espio zoom point and shoot, and below are 3 pictures from the trip with 3 different cameras.
That's a great axiom I had not heard. I, too, choose the camera based on what I am going to be photographing. As much as I love my RB, I will not be using it to chase kids around.A bad carpenter blames his tools, as the saying goes.
As an artist, I try to choose the right tool for the job. It's not always my best camera, but it's the one I think will work best for the shot I have in mind.
My sentiment exactly, they are fine pictures do what works for you, my street photography favorite is a Olympus trip 35, its light, fast and pretty sharp as you say its all about the content and final print, expensive cameras dont help me with that.....and for what its worth carpenters buy the cheapest tool that will do the job and when it wears out they hold them together with duct tape and blame the plumber. Would make a great photo series, carpenters and their drop saws.I use cheaper cameras for couple of reasons: main is that I simply like to use different cameras, it is a fun and enjoyment for me. For the viewer only what counts is the final image, but for me as a maker also the whole process is important, fun when using camera, developing prints and so on. For me it is not only about the final print (which is the most important part, of course). Second reason is that plastic cameras are light, if I compare Espio zoom with F2 and 180mm f2.8...I can understand why I take Espio with me. Even if I have "happy accident", and missed focus form time to time - I like using them. Would this be better photo if I took exact the same photo with Nikon/Leica (not in technical sense, but artistic)? Probably not. But would I be on some or other position, made the same photo, or would I take different photo with Leica/Nikon, and would it be better or worse? This I don't know.
Here is one example: on one of my trip to Haiti I had M3 with LTM Elmar 5cm f3.5, Nikon F3 with 105mm/2.5 and Espio zoom point and shoot, and below are 3 pictures from the trip with 3 different cameras.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY: ![]() |