Excellent story...

[Tronhard]

SO true...

[James G]

Yes ... true.....but...we do tend to have this 'thing' about technology and the 'best kit' for the job.

I suppose that if you are thinking/seeing photography as simply a recording medium for 'images' it can lead into an assumption that it is the kit that is important.... I remember the late 50's and 60's and the discussions I got into about Hi-Hi recordings and the best decks, amps, speakers etc. Better kit related to better 'recorded' music.

I have a few friends who definitely have a good 'eye', one in particular is a rather good artist. But when it comes to photography and the 'technical' stuff around exposure DoF etc, they are clueless. They are not however crass enough though to attribute the intelligence and art involved in a shot to the equipment.

But they do love their modern P&S which enable them to capture what they see (more or less), in a way that doesn't freak them out..... And they do rave about what their P&S is capable of.... as opposed to themselves..

[Tronhard]

As an anecdote I think it has merit!

In our materialistic society there is a tendency to focus on the gear rather than the technique, especially by the uninitiated. Oddly one does not hear of people saying to painters that they must have good brushes, or sculptors that they must have a great chisel and hammer! So the perception exists that because the camera is a piece of technology it must be the important element, and not only in the minds of lay people. Just go to DP review and watch them argue passionately about the shortcomings of the latest camera, lamenting it does not have this or that - as if the gear will make them better photographers...

[Wavelength]

Lolz

[bnnrcn]