In a predictable fashion I often read a flurry of activity in photo forums, social media sites and photography blogs about the latest and greatest camera body announcements. This predictability is dictated by the fact that modern cameras are as much computer as they are anything else and have a regular upgrade cycle much like traditional computers. Hard hitting discussion points about frames per second, megapixel resolution, battery life, image sharpness and so on fill the tubes of the Internet with bonus debates about one camera body/make being better than another. I’m sure you’ve seen the same as it’s incredibly difficult to avoid.
The funny thing about photography is that the majority of people viewing photographs don’t care about the gear. They care about the connection they make with the subject and the body of work produced by the photographer. I don’t recall ever reading how Edward Weston’s photos, for example, sucked more or less because he used a Graflex 4×5 camera versus an 8×10 camera. The same is true of Watkins, Muybridge, Adams, Hyde, Porter, Cartier-Bresson, Lange, Evans, etc. What mattered most in the great work of these and other artists was the vision, creativity and consistency of excellence.
Fretting over camera models and their specifications is great for the purchase decision, but it’s nothing more than a void of distraction when it comes to developing one’s creative vision. I’ve followed the development of digital cameras since 2000 and the same discussions predictably repeat themselves again and again. Yet I’ve never heard a conversation about older digital photographs being considered a classic or of historical significance because of the model of camera used. If anything such a conversation centers around the subject of the photo, the photographer’s creativity and body of work.
Imagine if we consistently talked about the creative merits of photographers as we do new camera models and their features. As an example Weston 1925-1935, Adams 1940-1945, and Gursky 1999-2001 versus Nikon 4D, Canon 1D X and Phase One IQ180. Talking about how and why a photographer was at their creative pinnacle is far more likely to inspire a photographer to think creatively than worrying if a camera has 21, 36 or 60 megapixels.
So my proposition to you is the next time you start up a debate about a camera model and its latest features ask yourself if you’d be better served having a more difficult discussion about photography styles, techniques, philosophies, approaches, etc. that might just enhance you’re development as a creative artist instead. If the answer is yes, then seek out and strike up a conversation with someone that will help you develop as a better photographer versus a camera model savant.
[tags]photography, philosophy, creativity[/tags]
I’m definitely having that conversation with myself, I’ll tell you that! The old “need vs. want” question, and also whether I’m willing to part with thousands of dollars to get an upgrade. I still remember when the Nikon F3 came out, back in the 70s. I thought it was the last camera I’d ever need, and in fact I was using one right up until I went digital in 2007! Now I’m asking myself if keeping up with technology is the way to go — or should I give up photography and take up drawing! 🙂
Totally agree that the technology is usually overemphasized, but when I first became involved in digital photography I was concerned with the long term life of my images which included capturing the best quality that the technology would allow at that time (and which I was disappointed that I couldn’t achieve due to financial reasons) and preserve the digital images by backing them up, usually more than once. When digital imaging had just started I didn’t like the idea that I could look back on images I had captured with a digital camera of that era and wish that I had used film instead. Now that digital quality has improved considerably that’s not such a big issue for me but I do have some images captured with a Canon 10D that I wish had been taken with a 5D MkII or similar camera.
Good article Jim. And hopefully it will prevent someone from missing out on creating some great photos using the equipment they already have because they were spending time worrying about whether they had the latest and greatest stuff.
I know a writer who swore by his DIXON Ticonderoga No. 2 Graphite and felt he could not write nearly as well using a BIC Select ballpoint.
Couldn’t agree more!
Good point Jim, but camera bodies aren’t the only thing distracting us. In this digital age we need to know how to process our images in Photoshop; we need to build and maintain a website; we need to write a blog; we need to have a presence on Facebook, LinkedIn etc. Sometimes I long for the film days. Back then I shot slides and concentrating on my creative vision was about all there was to do.
Brazilian nature photography page:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Natureza-Brasil/169029763212042?sk=wall
I tell myself the same thing every time I get stuck on dpreview.com. I try to keep my own blog on creativity vs gear — there is more than enough gear talk out there without me contributing.
Great point. I built a mind map of my online activity and it was disgusting. I am trying to cut it by 50%.