Depends on your budget and connections. Poor and don't "know" anyone use a kite. Rich and connected CIA spy satellite.
Pictures OF cameras looked down upon
-
- Thread starter frank
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Want to Buy WTB: Pentax LX for parts, or.
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
For Sale FS: Voigtlander Helomar 240mm f/3.5 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Kodak TMax 400, expired, 150 ft rolls
- Started by MCB18
-
For Sale FS: TTH Cooke Series V 12x10 Lens Eq. Focus 16.3 inch
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
Sold SOLD!
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
Depends on your budget and connections. Poor and don't "know" anyone use a kite. Rich and connected CIA spy satellite.
TheFlyingCamera
Membership Council
I don't know that I've seen so much of the 'it's the image, not the gear' attitude pertaining to pictures OF gear, but rather to discussions of gear being used being placed above the quality of the image - ie folks thinking that an image is inherently better because it was taken with a Hasselblad/Leica/etc. I love looking at well-made pictures of great (and even not-so-great) cameras too, and I appreciate conversations about gear to the extent that it explains how using that gear makes it possible/easier to make the image, but gear snobbery is boring at best.
It's easier to buy more gear than take a good picture. It's what makes manufacturers rich and the number of great photographers small.
If I have the best equipment that I can get, then I have no one but myself to blame for poor photographs. Great equipment helps answer where the screw ups came from.
But it's not necessarily one or the other. I have over 50 working cameras, way more than I need, but I'm quite happy with my photo results.
I have no where near 50 cameras and I'm quite happy with my photo results.
So, based one our sample size of 2: no correlation, positive or negative, found.
Well that is one fine mess we are in!
A more useful comparison would be how many great photographers are associated with numerous types of camera, compared to the greats who are known for their work one or two cameras. My observation would be the calibre of photograph is not associated with diversity or profusion of camera types.
It doesn't matter.
Even if it were the case that the 100 Greatest Photographers of All Time used one and only one camera model, that has nothing to do with our enjoyment of our hobby. For those aspiring to be the next great photographer, fine, they can choose their own tools. My profession is engineering; for that I need to be good. But the enjoyment of photography and its tools is my hobby. I'm more than happy with my landscapes, cityscapes, tree, flower, and historical photographs. I like and use all my cameras. I will buy more. It doesn't bother me that I'm not the next Ansel Adams or an artist in the darkroom. What's important is that I enjoy what I do.
I'm not denying that collecting cameras is a hobby - it self evidently is. I'm questioning whether acquiring multiple cameras allows the user to make photographs that are of interest to people other than him/herself. This is not only a film issue, people spend considerable sums on the latest digital camera and I don't believe I'm sticking my neck out in saying most believe they'll become a better photographer by doing so.
There are people who are primarily or exclusively collectors of historic cameras, but I still think most believe their next photographic acquisition will endow their pictures with ingredient X that others have thus far failed to provide. History suggests the route to better photographs is to become instinctively familiar with the smallest number of cameras. Those for whom the aesthetic quality of the finished image is of little or no consequence, will not be troubled by such considerations either way.
"I'm questioning whether acquiring multiple cameras allows the user to make photographs that are of interest to people other than him/herself."
You are questioning something that I am not suggesting. Whether or not anyone can make images that are of interest to others has very little to do with the number of cameras acquired (beyond offering a basic capability to capture an image in various situations.) You are offering a straw man argument.
I'm simply saying that one can be a collector and a photographer at the same time without detriment to either aspect of photography.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324715704578481214024861412
Do you have any of your images to share? Some of mine are in my signature link.
You are questioning something that I am not suggesting. Whether or not anyone can make images that are of interest to others has very little to do with the number of cameras acquired (beyond offering a basic capability to capture an image in various situations.) You are offering a straw man argument.
I'm simply saying that one can be a collector and a photographer at the same time without detriment to either aspect of photography.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324715704578481214024861412
Do you have any of your images to share? Some of mine are in my signature link.
Last edited by a moderator:
If I recall correctly your initial point was that people "look down" on pictures of cameras. That may be so if you post an image on a photographic site, but on a collectors site people will lap them up. By and large people only get shirty with photographers who don't get it, folk who post group shots with plenty of surroundings on a portrait site, or assume that a photograph taken on a street is the only criterion of street photography, or that HDR is the epitome of photographic creativity.
I do not post or link to images on this forum because I would have to trust the judgement of the viewer to know whether a photograph is aesthetically interesting (and such discernment is far from universal, especially on gear and technical sites like apug), and I certainly don't intend having my work pulled apart to devalue my self evident point that photographs of things other than cameras are the defining point of photography for most photographers. FWIW I just did a tally of my Flickr pages, and on average one in every four images makes it to Explore, if an algorithm can be said to denote anything artistic, and in the days I did photography as a job I picked up a few awards, again, for what that's worth which ain't much. None of those are/were pictures of cameras.
People see what they want to see and read what they want to read. On a gear site I recently saw a post that claimed Henri Cartier-Bresson was one of the worst photographers ever. Not overrated, or more than usually privileged, but among the worst photographers who picked up a camera.
When you're dealing with such judgements it pays to take more than a pinch of salt. Revisionists and curmudgeons are no strangers to the internet.
I just think it would be fair for you to back up your assertion with pics of your own if you are taking the stand that many/multiple cameras are detrimental to photographic output, given that you have access to mine and i'm taking the opposing stand.
again: I'm simply saying that one can be a collector and a photographer at the same time without detriment to either aspect of photography.
again: I'm simply saying that one can be a collector and a photographer at the same time without detriment to either aspect of photography.
I didn't request you made your images public and I haven't accessed them because it would be irrelevant to the wider point. My position is not based on my work versus your work, but whether photographs of cameras are of interest to non-collectors. Your initial inference was that people who didn't appreciate images of cameras were photo snobs. I don't see how you arrived at that position.
Well, I think photos of cameras are mostly of interest to camera collectors and of somewhat lesser interest to people who just like gear but are not collectors. People who say they "like photography" are probably not interested in photos of cameras or gear at all.
However, aside from total beginners, I've not seen people buying camera after camera in the pursuit of better photos. Those I've seen who buy into one system, then another, I've often noted are looking to optimize their equipment for their type of photography (e.g. birds, birds in flight). At the age of us geezers (speaking for myself) I'm quite aware that adding or subtracting equipment doesn't affect the quality of what I produce (unless I perhaps go to 8x10).
BTW, I just bought another Leicaflex SL. I wasn't intending to buy anything this month at all, but this one was near mint and I couldn't pass it up.
However, aside from total beginners, I've not seen people buying camera after camera in the pursuit of better photos. Those I've seen who buy into one system, then another, I've often noted are looking to optimize their equipment for their type of photography (e.g. birds, birds in flight). At the age of us geezers (speaking for myself) I'm quite aware that adding or subtracting equipment doesn't affect the quality of what I produce (unless I perhaps go to 8x10).
BTW, I just bought another Leicaflex SL. I wasn't intending to buy anything this month at all, but this one was near mint and I couldn't pass it up.
"Your initial inference was that people who didn't appreciate images of cameras were photo snobs. I don't see how you arrived at that position."
Simple: it is an attitude found in the photography forums I frequent, including this one. "Are you a real photographer, or just a camera collector/fondler?" is often implied or sometimes outright asked. My point, which you seem to be arguing against, is that one can be both, that one does not detract from the other, and that collecting is nothing to be ashamed of.
Simple: it is an attitude found in the photography forums I frequent, including this one. "Are you a real photographer, or just a camera collector/fondler?" is often implied or sometimes outright asked. My point, which you seem to be arguing against, is that one can be both, that one does not detract from the other, and that collecting is nothing to be ashamed of.
For the record Frank I understood what you meant from the start........
Thank you!
As did I. I have been waiting for others to catch up. Do not change your style.
| 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:  |