Can you claim to be a great photographer when using modern high tech gear ?

[Phil V]

I don't think in any way that I'm a great photographer, sometimes I produce a photo that is pleasing to me which as it's my hobby that is all I'm looking for If it appeals to someone else then I'm happy for them . For me personally I have a better sense of achievement using low tech gear with no auto settings, the fact I have had to choose the settings for myself adds that little more to the pleasure. My ultimate camera would be a an old mechanical camera but with a digital insert replacing the film. I haven't seen the Beckham book what is it ? Sometimes I produce a pleasing photo with my digital high tech gear (more often than with the low tech gear) but just don't feel that sense of achievement and almost become bored with it.

And again, I’d suggest it’s because your photography is focussing on the process rather than the image. Fine if that’s what floats your boat, and it does for many people.

Personally I spent a hell of a long time perfecting my camera operating skills, and I’m chuffed to bits that I don’t have to put all that effort in anymore. Now I can concentrate on the important stuff, creating ‘interesting’ images.

For me there’s no sense of achievement from using a fully mechanical camera to create a very ordinary image. And missing a moment because I’m concentrating on camera craft would be the most frustrating thing i can imagine.

A camera is a tool, the end result is a photograph. It makes much more sense to me to put my effort into the photo rather than into faffing with the tool.

But if you’d rather faff with the tool, feel free.

Just don’t feel that it’s ok to pass judgement on others based on assumptions which are so obviously flawed though. creating great images is beyond most of us, And using auto cameras doesn’t make it easier, and using mechanical cameras doesn’t make it that much more difficult.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I guess if it's more about the process than the result then that makes you more a craftsman, for whom the craft is the thing, rather than the final output, although craftsmen are usually associated with producing the finest output possible, while this has been stated to be not the case here. Maybe it's more like playing a round of golf, never expecting to get near par and just being happy to be outside?

 

[ancient_mariner]

This thread is quite pertinent to the topic at hand: https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/wet-plate-bbq-take-2.684043/

The process of creating the image is well documented, and it illustrates that the fundamental stuff involved in creating a pleasing image - sorting out lighting, posing the model etc is just the same using a wet collodion process and full plate camera as it would be using a D850 or an A7III. Only the process of actually getting the image into a form that can be presented to the viewer is significantly different.

Phil and I don't always agree, but he said something in a comment to me a couple of years back about trying to get emotion and feeling into my pictures, and it's something that I've tried to take onboard. This, for me, is one of the fundamental differences between assuming that the camera takes the picture, rather than the photographer. I hope that's helpful to understand why there's quite a strong push-back against the idea that it's all in the camera and technology.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

Not rude at all and I'm 100% with you too

Whereas Fraser's not being bothered about the photo I find very hard to understand - but. each to their own

Dave

Hi Dave,

after 35+ years of loving 'photography' I have long since realised I will never take more than 'average' photographs - i am just not creative enough. We all like to think we are above average at a hobby but the truth be told statistically this is impossible as that is how an average is set!

Digital is used by most and quite frankly I find it very boring; cameras are so good these days you can just point & shoot, bit of PP and you end up with an 'average' photograph the same as most others produce. Modern technology may not produce great photographs but it certainly helps massively producing very good photographs.

With the above being my opinion I like to get my enjoyment from a different part of the hobby - I love the mechanical engineering of the older film cameras and the different skills to 'get the picture technically right' is so much more difficult with film and hence more satisfying for me.

 

[DG Phototraining]

Hi Dave,

after 35+ years of loving 'photography' I have long since realised I will never take more than 'average' photographs - i am just not creative enough. We all like to think we are above average at a hobby but the truth be told statistically this is impossible as that is how an average is set!

Digital is used by most and quite frankly I find it very boring; cameras are so good these days you can just point & shoot, bit of PP and you end up with an 'average' photograph the same as most others produce. Modern technology may not produce great photographs but it certainly helps massively producing very good photographs.

With the above being my opinion I like to get my enjoyment from a different part of the hobby - I love the mechanical engineering of the older film cameras and the different skills to 'get the picture technically right' is so much more difficult with film and hence more satisfying for me.

If I'm reading you right then, you'd rather produce your average photos in a more difficult way?

Fair enough

Dave

 

[Fraser Euan White]

And again, I’d suggest it’s because your photography is focussing on the process rather than the image. Fine if that’s what floats your boat, and it does for many people.

Personally I spent a hell of a long time perfecting my camera operating skills, and I’m chuffed to bits that I don’t have to put all that effort in anymore. Now I can concentrate on the important stuff, creating ‘interesting’ images.

For me there’s no sense of achievement from using a fully mechanical camera to create a very ordinary image. And missing a moment because I’m concentrating on camera craft would be the most frustrating thing i can imagine.

A camera is a tool, the end result is a photograph. It makes much more sense to me to put my effort into the photo rather than into faffing with the tool.

But if you’d rather faff with the tool, feel free.

Just don’t feel that it’s ok to pass judgement on others based on assumptions which are so obviously flawed though. creating great images is beyond most of us, And using auto cameras doesn’t make it easier, and using mechanical cameras doesn’t make it that much more difficult.

This is very accurate Phil, but you are a pro that is long past the enjoyment of 'faffing' with our gear. You want a tool that allows you to concentrate on something you can sell which is fully understandable. I still like the 'faff' because I haven't got the skill to make interesting images!

 

[Fraser Euan White]

If I'm reading you right then, you'd rather produce your average photos in a more difficult way?

Fair enough

Dave

I'll never be able to produce 'better than average' Dave; some of us just haven't got that talent/artistic touch to foresee the final image so the satisfaction gained in obtaining the 'average image' is greater for me using old school tech

 

[Phil V]

This is very accurate Phil, but you are a pro that is long past the enjoyment of 'faffing' with our gear. You want a tool that allows you to concentrate on something you can sell which is fully understandable. I still like the 'faff' because I haven't got the skill to make interesting images!

No I’m not.

I’m an amateur who sometimes shoots for cash.

But whether shooting for fun or for cash, the important thing is the end result, and more importantly- the end result is improved more by me spending my time planning and framing a shot or setting up lighting than by me calculating exposures or manually focussing.

There’s nothing wrong with being involved with the process, it’s just that I’d rather put the effort into doing something that will actually improve the image rather than twiddling with the knobs on the camera.

That’s why it’s called ‘photography’ and not ‘faffing with cameras’.

 

[BADGER.BRAD]

I would agree that a non photographer wouldn't give a stuff about the gear or the process , but photographers generally want to know all about it ! otherwise why are there so many how to pages/sites /videos on the net and books published on how to a be better photographer ?

 

[DG Phototraining]

I'll never be able to produce 'better than average' Dave; some of us just haven't got that talent/artistic touch to foresee the final image so the satisfaction gained in obtaining the 'average image' is greater for me using old school tech

As I said, fair enough

I've only ever been in a darkroom twice, the first time I thought it was boring as Hell and the second I kicked myself for not remembering how boring it was (it was about 10 years after the first foray); yet some of my camera club buddies really loved the process side of it, while it left me completely cold

More than one way to skin the old moggy as they say

Dave

 

[Phil V]

I would agree that a non photographer wouldn't give a stuff about the gear or the process , but photographers generally want to know all about it ! otherwise why are there so many how to pages/sites /videos on the net and books published on how to a be better photographer ?

And this is where you have to be careful of who your influences are!

Great photographers talk about philosophy, politics or art, and they obsess about their subjects, whether that’s people, landscapes, animals, whatever. But what they don’t do is make YouTube videos about camera settings.

People who create web pages about camera gear rarely create great photographs. Have a serious think about that.

 

[Bythesea]

I would agree that a non photographer wouldn't give a stuff about the gear or the process , but photographers generally want to know all about it ! otherwise why are there so many how to pages/sites /videos on the net and books published on how to a be better photographer ?

Because learning to take good photographs involves hard work, and most people are looking to bypass that hard work. They end up looking for tips, tricks and shortcuts. Those are what you see on the net, and in most books, and only apply to the equipment and not the end result.

 

[Phil V]

I'll never be able to produce 'better than average' Dave; some of us just haven't got that talent/artistic touch to foresee the final image so the satisfaction gained in obtaining the 'average image' is greater for me using old school tech

I think you might be able to produce better images if you put your effort into the image rather than faffing with a camera.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

That’s why it’s called ‘photography’ and not ‘faffing with cameras’.

Literally it means Photo (Greek for light) and graphe ( for drawing)

So includes the 'faffing with knobs' in the capture of the light

I'm probably just a nostalgic old fool that prefers a Supermarine Spitfire to a Eurofighter - one is quite clearly far better at it's role but I bet there are lots of pilots who would prefer the experience of flying the former over the later. (probably not in a dogfight though!)

 

[Ed Sutton]

I still like the 'faff' because I haven't got the skill to make interesting images!

It was looking at photographs (back in the 1970s) that made me pick up a camera to make my own pictures. It didn't take me long to work out enough technical knowledge to make the pictures I wanted to make. There's only framing, focus and exposure to get to grips with. And even with a modern camera you still have to decide on those - the camera can't pick where the focus point goes, how deep the focus is, how much over or under exposure from its meter you want, and it certainly can't frame the shots.

I would agree that a non photographer wouldn't give a stuff about the gear or the process , but photographers generally want to know all about it ! otherwise why are there so many how to pages/sites /videos on the net and books published on how to a be better photographer ?

What @Phil V and @Bythesea said.

The great thing about all the technology crammed into modern cameras is that they free you up to concentrate on making pictures.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

And this is where you have to be careful of who your influences are!

Great photographers talk about philosophy, politics or art, and they obsess about their subjects, whether that’s people, landscapes, animals, whatever. But what they don’t do is make YouTube videos about camera settings.

People who create web pages about camera gear rarely create great photographs. Have a serious think about that.

This says a lot of the things I was thinking that I struggle to articulate at times in text. I have been reading this thread with interest as someone who shoots on film but am of course concerned with the final image. I enjoy using film cameras and feel very disconnected to modern, digital stuff but that also doesn't mean I don't want to make good images.

Photography technique, with regards to camera settings (Aperture, ISO, Shutter) is easy to learn. I understand it takes some people longer than others but if I can teach my 72 year old Dad, which I have recently done, then anyone can learn it. Like Phil says, the great photographers don't ask what setting images are shot with by other great photographers. They appreciate the image. It's nuances. It's connection.

I CHOOSE to manually focus and dial in an exposure using a handheld light meter (far easier for me now than using a cameras auto setting) because the subjects I shoot aren't moving very fast and I enjoy the process, but I still want to make good photos ultimately. I want to learn to print in the dark room and take the process from beginning to end, and you can enjoy all that as well as desiring the final result.

It was Edward Weston who said "Consulting the rules of composition before taking a photograph, is like consulting the laws of gravity before going for a walk". The more photos you take, the more instinctive things like focussing and controlling exposure will become and you won't be 'faffing' with settings but looking at the light, engaging with your subject, loving what you do....that's what will lead to better photographs. Mine are still shocking by my standards, but I keep trying and have another 10 rolls to post off tomorrow. It's costing me a fortune and I may only get one or two keepers, but I'd rather cut my shutter finger off before going out and buying a digital camera.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

Brad,

It's 'horses for courses' work out where your enjoyment comes from with the hobby then follow what you find interesting don't just follow a crowd. I'm like you and enjoy 'the process' of capturing the image and the satisfaction it gives.

Cameras are so good these days it does make capturing good images easy but exceptional photographs are on a different level IMO.

 

[DG Phototraining]

but I'd rather cut my shutter finger off before going out and buying a digital camera.

Which is exactly how I feel about film cameras

Great that we can all do the 'same' thing and yet find enjoyment in so many different ways

Dave

 

[Fraser Euan White]

Which is exactly how I feel about film cameras

Great that we can all do the 'same' thing and yet find enjoyment in so many different ways

Dave

This

 

[Ed Sutton]

...exceptional photographs are on a different level IMO.

Always have been.

 

[Phil V]

Literally in means Photo (Greek for light) and graphe ( for drawing)

So includes the 'faffing with knobs' in the capture of the light

I'm probably just a nostalgic old fool that prefers a Supermarine Spitfire to a Eurofighter - one is quite clearly far better at it's role but I bet there are lots of pilots who would prefer the experience of flying the former over the later. (probably not in a dogfight though!)

Sure it includes the actual taking process, but what is the point of the picture.

A spitfire is awesome, but it’s at its best when flying, and more to the point, it was at its best when fighting the Luftwaffe.

I love cooking, but what’s the point of sharpening my Japanese knives and carefully selecting the best ingredients if the food I produce isn’t going to be better than a supermarket microwave meal?

Sure the journey is fun, but driving an e type to Scunthorpe still lands you in Scunthorpe.

There’s nothing wrong with enjoying your cameras, but there is something wrong with settling for

I'll never be able to produce 'better than average'

You just need to target your efforts in the right direction.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

Which is exactly how I feel about film cameras

Great that we can all do the 'same' thing and yet find enjoyment in so many different ways

Dave

Absolutely agree. Some folk just love talking about the latest, greatest gear and there's nothing wrong with that at all, it's all part of the hobby. The thing with the great photographers is, they could get great photos from camera's without all the features. Yes, they may not be what a lot of people would regard as technically great with regards to ultimate sharpness, pixel peeping at 400% or whatever, but they would be great photos due to the content, light and emotion.

 

[DG Phototraining]

Absolutely agree. Some folk just love talking about the latest, greatest gear and there's nothing wrong with that at all, it's all part of the hobby. The thing with the great photographers is, they could get great photos from camera's without all the features. Yes, they may not be what a lot of people would regard as technically great with regards to ultimate sharpness, pixel peeping at 400% or whatever, but they would be great photos due to the content, light and emotion.

Yup

Although I'm a devoted digital camera fan I don't give a toss about the techie side, and I rarely read camera reviews until I actually want to buy one - so about every 2-3 years

When I've bought a new one I generally set it up to work like my Chinon CE4 did - 30 years ago! So most of the 'clever' things modern cameras do I just ignore anyway. The camera is very much a means to an end for me

Dave

 

[Deleted member 3428]

I was a great photographer before Digital, but now I'm just like everyone else.

 

[Ed Sutton]

There are people who say there is more to fishing than catching fish. And there is. I can appreciate the 'being there' thing, and the pleasure of a well executed cast. Just as I can appreciate the experience of using a manual film camera. But...

If you aren't catching fish you're birdwatching.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

You just need to target your efforts in the right direction.

This is difficult to explain Phil, but for instance I look at your website and some other Pro's on here and i think the images are superb. Some people seem to have a real talent for 'seeing' the final image before they set-up the lighting/composition etc to be able to achieve what they want in that image. I know it has still taken a hell of a lot of hard work to be able to do that but the 'bar at which you start' appears much higher than someone like myself was at.

Say, for example i went to a snooker hall everyday of my life and practised for 10hrs a day I still wouldn't be exceptional, i would be good but never at a high level.

Just like the pro snooker players, some start with a natural talent then still work hard to get that talent to a level others couldn't get to! The final image relies on so many skills it is great to see really good final images from a talented 'photographer'.

Don't get me wrong - I've been 'practising photography' for a long time and now I'm just resigned to the fact that my images are about as good as they get but my enjoyment comes from elsewhere in the hobby now.

As Clint Eastwood once said "a man's gotta know his limitations"!

 

[Raymond Lin]

There are people who say there is more to fishing than catching fish. And there is. I can appreciate the 'being there' thing, and the pleasure of a well executed cast. Just as I can appreciate the experience of using a manual film camera. But...

If you aren't catching fish you're birdwatching.

The buzz for me isn’t clicking the shutter, I don’t find joy in turning that aperture dial or holding a camera or setting up the tripod. The buzz is when you see the back of the screen come out with something you have in your head, you have made something imaginary into real and now you can share with the world. The euphoria of that moment when the image pops up is like a high that I chase every time I pick up a camera.

That’s the joy, the joy of creating something, something a few seconds ago doesn’t exist and then something hopefully i think other people can also appreciate.

Even as hobby I still want that image, otherwise I might as well put in the same roll of film in and out of my SLR and never develop it ever.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

There are people who say there is more to fishing than catching fish. And there is. I can appreciate the 'being there' thing, and the pleasure of a well executed cast. Just as I can appreciate the experience of using a manual film camera. But...

If you aren't catching fish you're birdwatching.

I'm crap at fishing as well but still love it (or birdwatching!).

 

[Fraser Euan White]

The buzz for me isn’t clicking the shutter, I don’t find joy in turning that aperture dial or holding a camera or setting up the tripod. The buzz is when you see the back of the screen come out with something you have in your head, you have made something imaginary into real and now you can share with the world. The euphoria of that moment when the image pops up is like a high that I chase every time I pick up a camera.

That’s the joy, the joy of creating something, something a few seconds ago doesn’t exist and then something hopefully i think other people can also appreciate.

Even as hobby I still want that image, otherwise I might as well put in the same roll of film in and out of my SLR and never develop it ever.

The buzz of seeing the negatives appear is even greater though Raymond - especially since it's not just electronics but chemical magic that you have brewed

 

[Ed Sutton]

I'm crap at fishing as well but still love it (or birdwatching!).

There's no hope for you!

 

[Raymond Lin]

The buzz of seeing the negatives appear is even greater though Raymond - especially since it's not just electronics but chemical magic that you have brewed

Been there, done that, got the T-Shirt.

As much as I want a dark room at home...ultimately I want to share the photo and these days the avenue for that is online (as opposed a gallery exhibition) so you end up scanning it all and digitise it anyway.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

There's no hope for you!

Can we talk Golf or Clay Shooting - something I am good at?

 

[sirch]

Can we not enjoy the whole thing?

 

[Ed Sutton]

Can we talk Golf or Clay Shooting - something I am good at?

Golf?

 

[ancient_mariner]

Sure the journey is fun, but driving an e type to Scunthorpe still lands you in Scunthorpe.

That made me chuckle.

 

[geejgee]

I'm not suggesting for one minute that modern gear etc doesn't help us get to the final product, the image. But two sayings ring true today as they always will. "The camera is only 10% of it" and "It's not the camera but who's behind it". But I have to admit to enjoying all aspects of photography.

 

[Phil V]

Literally it means Photo (Greek for light) and graphe ( for drawing)

I use this as advanced lesson one:

Photography is the art and science of painting with light.

Gear freaks have a tendency to concentrate on the science side of that sentence.

As I said here previously, if I’m going to be faffing about with gear, then setting up lighting has a greater impact on the final image than fiddling with cameras. (Like careful use of herbs spices and seasoning rather than pots and pans)

Or indeed the old adage:

Beginners think it’s all about cameras
Enthusiasts think it’s all about lenses
Photographers know it’s about light

 

[Fraser Euan White]

I use this as advanced lesson one:

Photography is the art and science of painting with light.

Photographers know it’s about light

...........and you (plus other good photographers) have the skill/ability/ experience through hard work to be able to see that/ modify it well before pressing the shutter button! For me it is more trial and error!

I think good photographers flatter themselves by saying this as there is a hell of a lot more as well like posing/composition/scene choice/conveying a story etc.

 

[sirch]

Photography is the art and science of painting with light.

Gear freaks have a tendency to concentrate on the science side of that sentence.

And we have all seen what happens when people on here try to concentrate on art...

 

[Phil V]

...........and you (plus other good photographers) have the skill/ability/ experience through hard work to be able to see that/ modify it well before pressing the shutter button! For me it is more trial and error!

It took me ten minutes to teach a mate who’d never used a camera before to ‘see’ the light.

I’ve had long conversations with some ‘photographers’ who refuse to accept the concept, who prefer to believe that other photographers have some inbuilt magic ability that they don’t possess.

It’s like feeling the balance of a car, once you recognise it, it becomes instinctive.