Better artistic photos with more expansive cameras and film

[Sirius Glass]

My belief is that more expensive cameras allow one to make 'equally artistic' photos as an inexpensive camera, but the expensive cameras permit a successful photograph to be taken in a much wider variety of (more challenging) circumstances.

Well said.

 

[wiltw]

Well said.

And I must also make it clear that a Leica is more expensive than a Pentax K1000, yet I cannot imagine a circumstance in which the photo taken with the Leica is not possible to also achieve with the Pentax K1000 (if we look past the fact that the Leica might have a faster top shutter speed), although it might well be 'not possible' to achieve with the box camera !

 

[removed account4]

If expensive gear really makes that much of a difference then all the people using expensive gear and bragging about it should be taking absolutely the most expressive, well composed, beautiful photographs around ! ( and visa versa )
I just don't see it. ..

 

[Don_ih]

I think there is a bit of inspiration that comes with getting a new camera or related thingy (lens, tube, photon gun) - that can maybe spark creativity for a while. I don't think the price tag has much to do with it, though.

 

[Sirius Glass]

And I must also make it clear that a Leica is more expensive than a Pentax K1000, yet I cannot imagine a circumstance in which the photo taken with the Leica is not possible to also achieve with the Pentax K1000 (if we look past the fact that the Leica might have a faster top shutter speed), although it might well be 'not possible' to achieve with the box camera !

The same could be said with Hasselblad and Mamiya C330f, simply because more lenses are available, one can see the depth of field, the see what you get with polarizer filters, ...

 

[RalphLambrecht]

the thing dropping a ton of coin on a camera and lens &c does is show people that you dropped a ton of coin an a camera and lens &c..
things might be ergonomically less challenging to use the camera, and it might be fun to use and show off, but IDK I don't think that anything
less fantastic can come out of something less expensive and a little more difficult to use.

of course fancy $$$ gear can be fun, but I don't know if that is what this thread is about.



I hope he had enough $ after wasting those jimmy Carter dollars to pay a good lawyer, bright flash is not good for new babies eyes, can cause some serious damage.

As they say in England: all the gear and no idea!

 

[Sirius Glass]

The same could be said with Hasselblad and Mamiya C330f, simply because more lenses are available, one can see the depth of field, the see what you get with polarizer filters, ...

As they say in England: all the gear and no idea!

Feel free to talk about yourself this way. Others not so much.

 

[removed account4]

As they say in England: all the gear and no idea!

Yup ..... oh well, at least people with all the fancy high end gear allegedly buy film ?

 

[Don_ih]

Yup ..... oh well, at least people with all the fancy high end gear allegedly buy film ?

Except for collectors. Many collectors don't use any film at all.

 

[removed account4]

Except for collectors. Many collectors don't use any film at all.

I never heard of a collector claiming a creative edge or telling somebody with "inferior" equipment "they should have used a Hasselhoff or Leeka or ... " ...

 

[VinceInMT]

Did a more expensive typewriter make someone a better writer?

 

[Don_ih]

Did a more expensive typewriter make someone a better writer?

No - buy lots of writers have coveted Underwoods.

I never heard of a collector claiming a creative edge or telling somebody with "inferior" equipment "they should have used a Hasselhoff or Leeka or ... " ...

I never heard that, either. But lots of HustleBads and Latkas are in the hands of collectors who are not buying film.

 

[removed account4]

No - buy lots of writers have coveted Underwoods.
I never heard that, either. But lots of HustleBads and Latkas are in the hands of collectors who are not buying film.

I guess, but my post was responding to this ...

In a camera store waiting to go to lunch with a salesman friend, I watched this: MD is new father and wants to take pictures of new baby. Friend suggested the latest version of Nikon F. Then suggested that baby will be moving, so motor drive is needed. Lighting not optimum, get the best (most expensive) flash equipment. And to hold camera steady an expensive tripod. Bill came to over $5,000. This is in early 1970 pre-Jimmy Carter dollars. What is serious money to some, is loose change for others. I often wonder if the MD ever used his new equipment.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Yea, your ego or whatever isn't paying attention to what you're doing and like magic you finally are free to make art. It just takes a lot more effort to get there with fancy gear.

few photographers are free from the 'love for the equipment'. It's part of photography. Who doesn't like to hold his prized possessions and look at them fondly?

 

[guangong]

few photographers are free from the 'love for the equipment'. It's part of photography. Who doesn't like to hold his prized possessions and look at them fondly?

Indeed, some equipment is admirable purely for its high level of craftsmanship, mechanical precision, and design. And in turn, is a pleasure to use. Unfortunately,some on this thread not only have no appreciation for the aesthetics of mechanical design and use, but carp about those that do. Must be difficult going through life with a grumpy attitude. But be thankful for small favors. Imagine the prices our fine equipment would be is so many more were potential buyers.

 

[removed account4]

Indeed, some equipment is admirable purely for its high level of craftsmanship, mechanical precision, and design. And in turn, is a pleasure to use. Unfortunately,some on this thread not only have no appreciation for the aesthetics of mechanical design and use, but carp about those that do. Must be difficult going through life with a grumpy attitude. But be thankful for small favors. Imagine the prices our fine equipment would be is so many more were potential buyers.

if you are referring to me ? I have no problem with craftsmanship and beauty of objects, what I have a problem with is people insisting that their photographs are works of beauty because they were made with well crafted and beautiful objects, I can't speak for they photographs. As noted previously I have known people who spent all sorts of $$ on gear and it really didn't give them better photographs, just moths in their wallets. I have objection to gear and photography snobs claiming superiority because they have expensive gear, and putting people down who don't have expensive gear, don't want expensive gear or can't afford expensive gear. Its one thing to enjoy yourself and enjoy objects you enjoy for whatever reasons, but to consistently go on and on about high end gear and how one's images are too beautiful for the internet, ... and then tell people how they are unworthy to even suggest they make photographs because they don't use the right gear, film or style of shooting is a bit much for me. I couldn't care less what equipment, film &c someone uses, buy a $30,000 camera $30.000 lenses, enjoy your self with your darkroom that cost $200,000 to build out, but stop making it seem as though people who don't share your aesthetics or wealth are dolts.
Go to any thread that has to do with "lomo" or "holga" or "diana" or other "lo-fi" cameras, or cellphones or digital image making you will read all sorts of BS compensation chest puffing about fautography, pixel peepers, machine-gun aesthetic garbage in garbage out nonsense and how the fautographer should have been using high-liner Hasselblad, Leica or an whatever .

 

[Auer]

No gear I ever had had any impact on the artistic value of any images I took, up or down.

 

[removed account4]

John, instead of having a problem with it, consider it a useful tip off. I mean, anyone who would actually think or say something like that - you know right away what kind of yutz you’re dealing with.

word.

 

[Arthurwg]

Is it possible to make a Hasselblad take pictures like a Holga? I know that using a tighter lens hood on my 60mm lens will create a vignette, but beyond that I'm stumped.

 

[faberryman]

Is it possible to make a Hasselblad take pictures like a Holga? I know that using a tighter lens hood on my 60mm lens will create a vignette, but beyond that I'm stumped.

A Softar filter perhaps?

 

[Deleted member 88956]

A Softar filter perhaps?

Pantyhose stretched over the front element will do. Just have to get the right brand ... and it's not cheap.

 

[macfred]

Is it possible to make a Hasselblad take pictures like a Holga? I know that using a tighter lens hood on my 60mm lens will create a vignette, but beyond that I'm stumped.

The 'John Nanian Schmuutz-filter' will do it for you ...

 

[warden]

Is it possible to make a Hasselblad take pictures like a Holga? I know that using a tighter lens hood on my 60mm lens will create a vignette, but beyond that I'm stumped.

I don't think so. But Holgas are so cheap you could just get one. There is really no need to make a Hasselblad into a Holga.

I love my Holga, btw.

 

[removed account4]

The 'John Nanian Schmuutz-filter' will do it for you ...

LOL. it can only help,

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is it possible to make a Hasselblad take pictures like a Holga? I know that using a tighter lens hood on my 60mm lens will create a vignette, but beyond that I'm stumped.

Use course sand paper on the front and rear lens surfaces and then pound the body frame with a sledge hammer.