Their existing photos are exactly the same quality the day before and the day after the upgrade.
In that case the new camera is not an upgrade in quality.Their existing photos are exactly the same quality the day before and the day after the upgrade.
My point was addressed to digital churn, the habitual buying of the next big thing that - if camera forums are to be believed - obsess the camera buying public. I don't accept that photographers are simply buying something different (which is generally what they are buying), they think their acquisition will take them better pictures. Objectively this is madness, few people print at the limits of 18mp cameras never mind 50mp ones, but that doesn't stop the feeling they're missing something.What does "new equipment" have to do with either technique or creativity. Technique is just a method used to apply creativity. Your creative level is what it is, and no matter what you employ.
Why does it bother you what other people spend their money on? Some people replace their cars before they have run them into the ground. Some people replace their shoes before the soles are completely worn through. Some people replace their cameras before they are broken. If a new camera gives a photographer greater confidence, even though it may not be warranted, he may make "better" photographs. Why not just let everyone do their own thing without moralizing about it.My point was addressed to digital churn, the habitual buying of the next big thing that - if camera forums are to be believed - obsess the camera buying public. I don't accept that photographers are simply buying something different (which is generally what they are buying), they think their acquisition will take them better pictures. Objectively this is madness, few people print at the limits of 18mp cameras never mind 50mp ones, but that doesn't stop the feeling they're missing something.
Clearly if a new camera has better autofocus, and your favoured subject requires lightning fast autofocus (which it rarely does and there's nearly always a workaround), then there's an objective element to your purchase, but mostly they're buying a dream. Or perhaps a hope. If they really do believe their new camera takes better pictures, the conclusion that their old one took worse photos is unavoidable. Better and worse may only exist in their heads, but it can be the only reason for unpaid amateurs to regularly sink a thousand or two on yet another camera, which appears to be what's going on.
not sure if this makes sense to anyone but me, but
where does technique end and creativity begin ?
when i say technique i mean composition &c
and this is an equal opportunity thread so is someone
wants to talk about gadgets feel free !
I often wondered why this forum is predominantly male....Old-and-feeble has it right. The painter Eugene Delacroix , in a very un- pic way of expression, had the essential idea correct. He noted that there were many great female writers all the way back into antiquity but no great women painters. His explanation: the process of writing is linear with one element following another, but painting required that subject, composition, color, drawing, size, emotion, etc, etc. all be done simultaneously and was just to difficult for women. Overlooking his bias , the general point is quite true. It is the knack of being able to find o all of these things at one time that separates the great artist from the rest. But that is the quest of the artist.
+1Technique is how you push the button. Creativity is why.
This implies that creativity is essentially "instant". I'm not sure that is the case.Technique is how you push the button. Creativity is why.
What people spend their money on is nobody's business. My point is addressed to amateur photographers who think a new camera will make their photography better. After a while you think they'd get it. There are many ways to make your photographs more interesting of which a new camera is one of the least successful. I'd suggest a course with someone who knows what they're talking about and other talented students, studying books by great photographers, or a serious desire to improve and stretch their mental boundaries and physical comfort zones. I don't consider that advice preaching, it's tried and tested.Why does it bother you what other people spend their money on? Some people replace their cars before they have run them into the ground. Some people replace their shoes before the soles are completely worn through. Some people replace their cameras before they are broken. If a new camera gives a photographer greater confidence, even though it may not be warranted, he may make "better" photographs. Why not just let everyone do their own thing without moralizing about it.
Matt,This implies that creativity is essentially "instant". I'm not sure that is the case.
Some times it is. But other times, the creation is something that you build.
Ask anyone who carefully adjusts the lighting for a portrait or a product shot whether there is a disconnect between their technique and their creative vision.
Did Yosuf Karsh or Jane Bown just guess about how to photograph their subjects?
Technique includes interacting photographically with one's subjects, and that interaction can itself be a highly creative endeavour.
When technique recedes to background. How often do you think about a door knob? Only when it doesn't work. All the technical stuff has to be freed from the conscious propositional mind, from rules governing action, and become what some might call intuition. This is the argument for one camera one lens one film, etc until it's like opening a door.
plus 1Creativity is what blends technique and process to make art.
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?