Does the Camera Even Matter Anymore? Or is it about software/software skills?

[Phil_F_NM]

Another technical masterpiece, Nick!

And a great thread too!

Phil Forrest

[jan normandale]

Interesting post Nick. I've watched the decline of professional photography as pros are replaced by amateurs with high end cameras with in camera processing. I watch and read about people saving images and printed photographs that were previously garbage. Several things are happening first is the digital world is slowly stamping it's profile onto image making. With settings in camera for film profiles or lens profiles the photographer is really not much more that an image collector. The image is made by digital processes. The post processing is capable of doing the same or even more to an image imported into it.

What people are discussing is composition; or your SO; or your choice of words.. but the crunch is the image. People use Canon Mark II 5D cameras with in camera processing to make "Holga" images … these camera manufacturers and software makers are overwhelming the world of the camera. I think if you had chosen to convert the image to a "Holga" or Hipstamatic people would have a hard time disagreeing. Mainly because their sensibilities wouldn't be hurt based on a financial decision to purchase a $1,000.00 camera and a $1,500.00 lens. At the far end of the spectrum would be the decision to purchase an M9 and a Noctilux.

What matters in your illustration is the fact that these acts are being performed as I write and publishers are buying images thru Getty Images feeds from flickr. The world continues to change. I still don't like HDR though!!

Jan

[celluloidprop]

Why would Holgafying or Hipstamatic make a difference?

Here's the gist of most comments: it's a bad photo. Bad light, bad composition, bad mise-en-scene. No amount of processing, in any style, can change those things.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by NickTrop

Does gear - bodies, lenses even matter anymore? Or are we kidding ourselves? This is a cheap 5-6 year old banged up average, consumer digicam - think I paid $80 bucks for it.

To an extent, they don't matter... meaning a good photo can be made with a bad camera. However, can it do it consistently in a variety of situations? Also, I'm a true believer that being very comfortable with your camera and actually liking your tool can help you get better photos consistently.

Software doesn't frame the photo...

[aldobonnard]

Not a so odd question, thanks for asking.
What matters is knowing your equipment well and what/how it delivers, and then forgetting about it when you shoot, but shooting subjects with having in mind its rendering and limitations.
Agree with Sparrow, he adequately summed up the issue!

[emraphoto]

It all matters, in varying degrees, depending on the individual.

[unixrevolution]

The photograph matters. How you get there is up to you.

[Jamie Pillers]

This is a totally different scene, with completely different intentions by the photographer. I mean... where's the couch??

This photograph can easily be done with most modern p&s digital cameras. Its the photographer's skill/vision that made this image lovely. Gear had very little to do with it... in my opinion, of course. :-)

[Keith]

This thread is a storm in a teacup!

[alistair.o]

Originally Posted by Keith

This thread is a storm in a teacup!

Yes, but is it a complete storm without the saucer ?

[Sparrow]

... with a teaspoon, and being stirred ?

[benlees]

It only needs to be stirred if there is sugar. Should we add some? This thread could use some sugar.

[alistair.o]

Originally Posted by benlees

It only needs to be stirred if there is sugar. Should we add some? This thread could use some sugar.

Sugar is so passe - it's all sweeteners now. I'm open to a sweetener or two...

[Sparrow]

... well with all these sweeteners, Does Sugar Even Matter Anymore?

[Pete B]

Originally Posted by Pete B

Check out these photos taken on a 4mmx5mm sensor in an android phone using a Kodachrome plug-in.
Pete

Originally Posted by Crazy Fedya

I think they were taken with 4"x5" Kodachrome film in 1942.

Just my little joke. I was pointing out that it is unlikely anyone would think these are taken with a cheap point and shoot digital i.e. for certain work, quality equipment has its advantages.
Pete

[jan normandale]

Originally Posted by celluloidprop

Why would Holgafying or Hipstamatic make a difference?

Here's the gist of most comments: it's a bad photo. Bad light, bad composition, bad mise-en-scene. No amount of processing, in any style, can change those things.

OP: "Does the Camera Even Matter Anymore? Or is it about software/software skills?"… "Does gear - bodies, lenses even matter anymore?"

The point Nick discussed was not about his S/O, the quality of the photo, light, composition or mise en scene. So if you're discussing those topics you are not discussing the point he has raised. You might as well be discussing the hockey playoffs.

In regard to my comment about using a Holga or Hipstamatic image processing template the point was it is a software manipulation of an image. The point Nick has made was in regard to the image processing power of computers and software upon images captured with "point and shoot" cameras vs high end DSLRs with in camera image processing.

BTW: I agree with your "Point 7" signature line

[ferider]

Nick, next time you have guests for dinner, buy Big Macs for all, and ask them if the Damascene kitchen knives are really needed for the prep of a three star dinner.

[eric rose]

What a troll thread! It's never been about the camera, or it's lenses, or whether it's film or digi IT'S ABOUT THE PHOTOGRAHERS VISION!

[DougFord]

There's no accounting for taste, in either content or PP.

[celluloidprop]

Originally Posted by jan normandale

OP: "Does the Camera Even Matter Anymore? Or is it about software/software skills?"… "Does gear - bodies, lenses even matter anymore?"

The point Nick discussed was not about his S/O, the quality of the photo, light, composition or mise en scene. So if you're discussing those topics you are not discussing the point he has raised. You might as well be discussing the hockey playoffs.

He used the photograph as an example of his point, that his post-processing made up for cheap equipment. The 'point he raised' is inseparable from the image presented - the quality of the photograph and the post-processing. Both of which are failures.

In regard to my comment about using a Holga or Hipstamatic image processing template the point was it is a software manipulation of an image.

Yes, and as with the original image presented, software manipulation - and equipment - only matters insofar as the post-processing and the image itself are good. A bad image is a bad image, regardless.

Which is the point being repeatedly stressed here.

[jan normandale]

Originally Posted by celluloidprop

....The 'point he raised' is inseparable from the image presented.....

If you want to read it that way then that's fine. To me it's similar to reading Aesop's fables.. I don't really believe the "the ant and the grasshopper" speak. So I don't say that the concepts being illustrated in Aesop are 'inseparable' and therefore impossible because the example has a speaking ant.

If the example for the point becomes the point then I guess that's how you see it. I don't see it that way.

And no this post by Nick is not a troll post. Sheesh!!

[jsirevaag]

"A camera is a mirror with a memory, but it cannot think." -Arnold Newman

The implication here is that while every photograph (of any technical quality) is, to a degree, a true representation of its subject, not every photograph is effective at conveying meaning or the qualities that inspired the photographer to make the exposure. Great images are produced by insightful minds -not precision equipment. Give a master of photographic expression a Holga and watch the magic unfold. Give a duffer a Hasselblad and prepare to be bored!

We need special equipment to capture an image, beyond the basics, everything else is a matter of degree.

[Sparrow]

... more like twaddle than fable I feel

[MikeL]

Camera does matter, cause, like, on RFF, I read that if the camera has batteries it will be a brick if the battery dies. Software skills can't help brick.

So Nick, you should have an MP not an M7 or Hexar RF.

[Teuthida]

Originally Posted by jsirevaag

"A camera is a mirror with a memory, but it cannot think." -Arnold Newman

The implication here is that while every photograph (of any technical quality) is, to a degree, a true representation of its subject, not every photograph is effective at conveying meaning or the qualities that inspired the photographer to make the exposure. Great images are produced by insightful minds -not precision equipment. Give a master of photographic expression a Holga and watch the magic unfold. Give a duffer a Hasselblad and prepare to be bored!

We need special equipment to capture an image, beyond the basics, everything else is a matter of degree.

Thank you.