The gear wars are coming to an end

bullpost

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2009/archives/4647

Nice article which argues for a return to the essence of photography.

Trev M

very cool article it has to be said... as Tom Dunne would say .

I particularly like

"the Nikon versus Canon crusaders will lay down their swords and go create photographs instead "

AnCatDubh

Maybe technology is kinda getting as good as it gets (or maybe that is as good as it needs to be). Reading my camera manual the other day I was reminded that in burst mode I can take 21 frames a second (sacrifice on resolution) - wooooooooo!!!! I'm impressed but I had a problem. What the heck am I going to shoot at 21 frames a second. I'll have to figure that one out before its going to be of use to me. And just think of all the deleting that i'm going to *have to* do - maybe 20 of the 21 images

Its funny that most of the Canon V Nikon V Olympus V Sony V Pentax debates - no lets call them recommendations, usually end up in "look it doesn't really matter - no matter what you choose you will have a more than capable machine to advance with and just pay attention to the system that you are buying into and any limitations". Other differences may be apparent at the higher end of the spectrum but so few of us hit that kind of requirement that in reality there is very little difference.

What makes a good photograph? For a long time I thought that technical perfection made a good photograph - someone who had 'the gear', someone who's followed the rules and knows the appropriate settings to get that sharp, well exposed, nicely positioned image; but now i'm beginning to think it has very little to do with the settings, exposure, position within frame. I am constantly asking myself "does that image tell me anything. does it make me curious as to what's going on. can i take emotion from it. what is it actually portraying? has it purpose?". I find there can be great beauty in eliminating colour from an image but I find it can be very badly done too.

Maybe the bit that most of us miss out on - particularly those of us who haven't formally studied photography, is the art side of the discipline plus what actually drives us as photographers - do you just want to record the cat, dog, son or daughter, football player, someone's special day, a singer, a street scene, or record a momentous event as it enfolds.

My hypothesis at the moment with appropriate effort is that it is not overly difficult to technically take a great image however it is infinitely more troublesome to see the image in the first place and frame something that would "call out" to someone - to alter you your thinking, your community, or society in general.

Maybe and i'm sure for some it is just pretty pictures. Perhaps that is fine too.

I do wonder then with the war being over, when does the learning begin.

duffarama

Mission accomplished eh?

In any of the gear recommencation threads I've taken part in here I've always said that whatever you choose will far exceed your limits as a photographer. All DSLR's and indeed a lot of modern compacts too will be able to take stunning pictures, but only if you yourself are capable of seeing that opportunity in the first place.

ThOnda

All those threads about hardware are becoming more and more "what would you recommend me to fulfill my aim - idea." And I find most of them very interesting, especially reading personal experience with various hardware and software.
Keep on posting, we are all learning what works gor you!

FoxT

This is a refreshing thread.... the internet is full of GearHead Apartheid - dpreview threads are full of 'my camera is better than yours', There is a site called 'Nikonians' which I don't visit on a point of principle, not cos I dislike Nikon, but the ethos is all wrong, and Camera magazines generally focus on gear, gear, gear, all the time, conveniently overlooking the point that anybody with a decent P&S camera today is capable of shooting pics as good as Bill Brandt, Henri CB, etc ( at least up to about 10" by 8" ) Its all about eyeballs & imagination at the end of the day,

Cheers, FoxT

Dan Jaman

bullpost wrote: »

http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2009/archives/4647

Nice article which argues for a return to the essence of photography.

It's quite good, I agree, and it strikes a personal note here.

The 6MP digicam I used for a couple of years didn't suddenly become less useful because I upgraded to a newer 10MP with IS - it's still just as useful as it always was; only that I prefer working with the later one and I never sell my used gear nowadays.

Similarly, the shelf full of olden cameras within reach as I type this reminds me of a slower time, where every shot had to count (ok, we all had motor drives then, or aspired to) and there was a real cost involved in screwing it up.
Sometimes I take one of those old 35s or folders (a couple of them going back a century) out and set up a shot somewhere, working methodically and only taking one or two pics of a scene instead of a dozen or twenty; for the measured process of actually looking and doing what is needed to capture an image is, for me, more of what photography is about than machine-gunning until I'm sure that somewhere on the memory card is an image that's likely to suit. May as well get a good video cam if that's the case.

Of course, digital rapid-fire and rapid focus is wonderful for fast action stuff and I wish I'd had a digicam 30 years ago when I was doing a lot of motorsport coverage - what a tool it would have been Nobody could have read the images, though; bummer.

Now I've got a penchant for 5x4s and 9x12s - help.

eas

I'm not 100% sure this is in context, but I think in the past few years with the massive uptake in photography people took "learning" photography in the same way they would take leaning a new language, or driving a car. Meaning, people seemed to have taken things much too literally.

Reading the barrage of photography magazines aimed at the beginner will show you exactly how to make a clinical image. The histogram should look like this.....your subject should be here....the focus needs to be be here....ect. They never seem to leave much room for choice or decision.

I've always felt that there's no exact science or right way to produce any image. Much like what AnCatDubh said, the photo is up to the discretion and vision of the photographer, each in their own way. And that ability is what separates us, not the brand or MP count on the camera.

leche solara

While companies continue to have Marketing Departments there will always be gear wars