Gear freak or artist?

[Sue Allen]

This is one of those old arguments there can be no definitive answer to because there are different reasons for taking photos, different approaches, different styles etc. - for some types of photography the right gear is everything for others it really is just about who's taking the shot. Not all photography is about producing 'art' - many people just enjoy capturing a moment. Of course that means a whole load of snapshots available for viewing online - but then, one persons snapshot is anothers pride and joy - one persons great masterpiece is anothers boring yawn. Just get what you want out of your hobby and don't beat yourself up if you prefer to be out there taking snaps in JPEG trying to get it right in camera rather than spending hours changing grey skies to blue in that 'must have' Photoshop - equally if you enjoy the challenge of producing head turning works of excellence using processing skills alongside your photographic ones then enjoy it. It's a personal thing in the end. Is equipment important? Well it can make things a whole lot more enjoyable if you have the right tools for the job!

[Gil Ritchie]

"Artist" - most certainly - every time - will leave "gear freak" to others - now where is my compact - Lisbon here I come.

[Scuba58]

Originally Posted by Gil Ritchie

"Artist" - most certainly - every time - will leave "gear freak" to others - now where is my compact - Lisbon here I come.

I agree Gil, an artists eye - regardless of the gear, will nearly always (fluke pics are always out there) produce interesting, refreshing, thought provoking and subtle images. Gear on its own will provide the technical ability, but never the "feel" or "soul" of an image.

[cosmicma]

it's all pots and pans isn't it

i once heard ( or read ) a story about a photographer having a meal at his local restaurant showing the chef some of his photographs
the chef looked at the photo's and said " these are fantastic you must have a very good camera to take photo's like those " ( or words to that effect )
when the photographer had finished his meal he called the chef over and said " that was a wonderfull meal you must have some extraordinary pots and pans in that kitchen of yours "
pots n pans don't make the meal in the same way as the camera you hold doesn't take the shot
granted better camera equipment can give better image quality but there's so much more involved than sheer image quality alone

horses for courses in my opinion you buy what you can afford or warrant spending and get on with it

[Scuba58]

Well said......

[Elvis Fontenot]

Sometimes, to get the photos you want, the gear is essential - if anyone's ever tried to take photos of bands in the Night and Day Cafe in Manchester, with its one red light for illumination and no flash, you'll know that a camera with high-ISO capability is essential to get anything worthwhile. I'd imagine there are many other shooting situations that require other gear variations. Gear is never an end in itself though and it's when it gets in the way, it becomes a hindrance, not a help.

[TerryGrealey]

Wow , what an interesting debate . My view on the subject is that photography, like art, is highly subjective. The amount of gear we tend to use only serves as a means to an end ,but without that special " something" , all the equipment in the world cannot produce a great shot or work of art . Take pinhole photography as an example , some stunning and thought provoking works of art have been produced with little "gear" and would be impossible to make with modern technology .
The only equipment I possess is a Sony Alpha A380 , 18-70mm kit lens , a polariser filter and a tripod . Sometimes I wish I had a wide angled lens , but I have learned to get by with what I have . At the end of the day , all the gear in the world could never replace the most important piece of equipment ..........The eye.

Regards

Terry

[AndyStevens]

Wish I'd seen this debate when it first started

Terry mentions that very valuable piece of equipment - the eye! Not available for purchase and can't really be trained or taught. Yes, you can enhance the eye through education and training - but, in my opinion, you have to have an element of artistic quality to see the image in the first place. Equipment and education can help enhance that vision, along with critique from other togs, but you need to be able to see the potential image in the first place.

I need to do some digging but there is a Magnum member who only uses compacts, other top pros have either no formal photographic training or many have 'only' done City & Guilds type courses. Most pros use the latest equipment - but there are also many out their with 'old' cameras (define 'old' in the digital age!).

I do smile when I nread the Forum posts along the lines of 'I want to be a pro so what camera and/or course should I do/get?'. Now, I have great admiration for anyone wanting to better themselves in photography but there does seem to be an element of 'how do I buy a Pro career'. Now, is that as a result of the digital age and people seeing fantastic imagery everywhere they look? Or are people generally looking for career changes? Personally, I think it's the digital age making photography more accessible and making the suggestion that we can all make a go of it - and that's great, the more photographers the better. But then there is the other side, the more photographers, the harder it is to make a career out of it through competition - so does this then mean you need better courses and cameras to stand out more?

NO! Know your camera inside out and develop your own photographic style. Yes, technology can help - Elvis mentions ISO/noise handling for his type of photography. But, for the majority of us, 15Mp doesn't give you a 'better' image than 6Mp - it might give a cleaner, bigger print, but does it make the subject matter stop someone in their stride and make them look at your print just because you used a Canon 1Ds MkIII? No, it goes back to what some of the great photographers say;

It's the difference between 'taking a photo' and 'making an image'.

And just for the record, I've been published many times and sold numerous prints through my website and exhibitions and I'm still using my Canon 300D from late 2004! Yes, Santa is helping with a body upgrade but...

Cheers
Andy

[karenoliver]

At the end of the day you make the most of what tools you have available. Whereas a flashy camera and lens kit might produce better shots in terms of low light, shutter speed or noise someone skilled could get an amazing shot on a camera phone or throwaway camera. I like to dabble with lens-less photography, photograms, rollei black magic and cyanotypes, no need for expensive gear there, just patience and imagination.

Karen

[GeoffWessex]

Reminds me of a famous - in his day - British photographer, Bert Hardy. He was an 'all-rounder' but became famous for his pictures in the wonderful magazine of the 30s, 40s and 50s, Picture Post. The question of photographic equipment came up and he wrote an article for amateur photographers suggesting you didn't need an expensive camera to take good pictures, and did a photo-shoot in Blackpool using a Box Brownie. One of the pictures from that shoot graced the front page of Picture Post and became one of his, and nation's, favourite pictures.
Check this page out.