Now the dilemma becomes; am I a self-overestimating bad photographer or a self-underestimating good photographer.
It is simply absurd that digital cameras make images for photographers, any more than film cameras make images for photographers. This is the same tiresome and petty film vs. digital argument that infects and diminishes this forum every day. Enough.Everyone thinks they are a good photographer these days because technology makes the photos for them.
Also, Dunning & Kruger used the terms "competent/incompetent" not the words "good/bad".Dunning-Kruger also posits that high achievers may undervalue their accomplishments mistakenly assuming what is easy for them is easy for everyone. The title to this thread could just as easily be: "Dunning-Kruger Effect: Why you're a better photographer than you think you are."
It is simply absurd that digital cameras make images for photographers, any more than film cameras make images for photographers. This is the same tiresome and petty film vs. digital argument that infects and diminishes this forum every day. Enough.
Yes. I think that's part of what keeps me at it. There's always something to discover and learn."Have you ever noticed that as you learn more about the world of photography, you tend to realize just how little you actually know?"
99% of photographs taken since the inception of photography are not really very good. Prior to the web, they were safely hidden away from view in shoe boxes and photo albums and landfills. Now the truth is evident on the internet. Which is why I don't spend much time on social media looking for great images. I don't think digital photography has increased the keeper rate, certainly not in my photography. It is just a different tool....and its not hard to say that 99% of everything out there is not really very good. sure its the same percentage as it was 30 years ago, but in the last year or so more photographs have been uploaded to the inter webs than from the dawn of photographic image making until that time so its kind of like finding nutrition in a box of capt'n crunch with crunch berries ( of course ! )
99% of photographs taken since the inception of photography are not really very good. Prior to the web, they were safely hidden away from view in shoe boxes and photo albums. Now the truth is evident on the internet. Which is why I don't spend much time on social media looking for great images. I don't think digital photography has increased the keeper rate, certainly not in my photography. It is just a different tool.
Flowers grow in manure, yep.Kodak's R&D was financed by many crappy snapshots.
It is simply absurd that digital cameras make images for photographers, any more than film cameras make images for photographers. This is the same tiresome and petty film vs. digital argument that infects and diminishes this forum every day. Enough.
I agree with this. You especially see this effect with the "photographers" (OK, OK, the experts) who comment on the infamous Dpreview. The brash newbies know everything about megapixels, equivalence, bokeh and "cheating on the ISO" and can take 10^5 perfectly-sharp digital pictures on their weekend trip to Paris or New York. I feel sorry for their patient wives or travel partners. But if you asked them how to use a hand-held light meter.....Digital cameras magnify this effect 10000 fold. Everyone thinks they are a good photographer these days because technology makes the photos for them. We are basically living in a sea of mediocrity and egotism. The brashness of newbies overwhelms the cautious confidence of the experienced.
Certainly you are! You use a Hasselblad don't you? Whoops, sorry, I don't mean to try to start a Hasselblad Cult here. Belonging to one is enough for me........Regards!.......Hasselblad Cult! Does have a nice sound at that!Oh, I am the latter.
Hasselblad cult?? Wannabes. Now, the Linhof cult! Aahhh, that's a cult!!Certainly you are! You use a Hasselblad don't you? Whoops, sorry, I don't mean to try to start a Hasselblad Cult here. Belonging to one is enough for me........Regards!.......Hasselblad Cult! Does have a nice sound at that!
I have a lot to say on the subject. But I won’t.
The lack of compositioall skills a lot of photographers are victim to is scary. And what’s even more scary is their audience/followers with even less analysis skills.
This mix creates a vertigo of mediocrity. Or more aptly called a love fest where the stupid follows the blind, and by itself creates new standards. But mediocre standards, where all the players are intergalactic legends in their own minds.
It’s all quite pathetic.
"That's not writing, it's typing" Truman Capote on Jack KeruacThe typewriter made everyone a novelist, right?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?