It ain't always about the gear

[Picture North Carolina]

Here's a photographer who won a major contest using a 3-year old point and shoot and a $20 plastic tripod. He won among 55,000 entrants.

http://asia.cnet.com/crave/2008/12/15/photographer-wins-photo-contest-with-outdated-point-and-shoot/

[ssracer]

Much like anything else, all the expensive toys in the world can't make up for talent, and with photography, a good eye is vital.

[chauncey]

CannedHeat my friend, we've taken this road before and we won't alter each other's beliefs but...
Consider what he cannot do with the P&S that he could do with better gear. :D

[golfecho]

Sometimes it is timing and luck. My real job is one where years of training, experience and planning can be trumped by timing and luck. Sometimes photography is the same.

This guy has a great picture, but what about consistancy? Can he do superrior photos every time? With the proper gear, he would stand a much better chance. With the camera he has, good pictures will most likely be fewer and much farther between.

[Picture North Carolina]

Chauncey, my friend I made no judgment or comment. I posted an article I thought was interesting. Besides, I like the picture - sorta' 'artsy."

On the other hand, yes it's a road much taken because the thought opposite to yours has no less credibility and is:

Imagine what a much less talented individual could not do, even with better gear. The meat of the equation being talent, not gear.

A question for you and perhaps others: If you could make a choice which would you choose?:

Lesser talent with greater gear, or greater talent with lesser gear?

[chauncey]

If it's an either/or decision, and only that, talent trumphs gear every time, cannot debate that point. :D

[Steve In Kentucky]

The picture didn't do much for me.

[mspringfield]

Sometimes it is timing and luck. My real job is one where years of training, experience and planning can be trumped by timing and luck. Sometimes photography is the same.


I agree 100%. One of my favorite shots that I have ever taken in my life came when I had just moved to digital. It was a lake at night taken with a Nikon Coolpix 950 that I sat on a rock to steady the shot. I took one shot only. Looking back it was just dumb luck but as they say even a blind monkey finds a banana occasionally. While nothing replaces raw talent sometime nothing beats being at the right place at the right time...

Michael

[Nick_b]

It's a nice photo, good for the guy who won!! I love hearing stories like this one.

[Picture North Carolina]

... Nikon Coolpix 950 ...

Michael

Still got the Coolpix? And excellent camera for infrared!

[bzride]

gear is definitely no substitute for a good eye.

sometimes, luck and just being in the right place at the right time is a major factor too though.

nice capture though

[blonde]

i agree that talent > gear but again, think of how much better that same shot could have been if it was taken with a better camera and lens. it could have been cleaner, bigger, less DOF to really make the train pop etc.. again, gear is not a substitute for talent but it can help you bring to life what you see in your mind.

[Nick_b]

sometimes the little imperfections are what make a piece stand out from the rest. Hell the background in the Mona Lisa is all messed up and people think that painting is okay the way it is. ;)

[sjones]

You have a skilled photographer, only one, the same one, thus the same set of skills, perspective, creativity, experience and such. You have one subject, the same subject under the same lighting in the same studio.

The photographer takes a photo of the subject with a Nikon D3.

The photographer takes another photo of the same subject under the same conditions, basically employing the same composition. The photo is in most aspects similar to the one taken with the Nikon, but this time the photographer uses the lowly US$30 Holga toy camera.

Which photo is better?

Good, now we can all enjoy the concept of subjectivity together, because it is a concept that that is awash in the greater scope of photography.

As for the "what you could do if you had better gear" argument, so what; if the camera suits the needs and vision of the photographer, whether it's a US$1 million camera or a US$25 camera, that is all that matters.

sometimes the little imperfections are what make a piece stand out from the rest. Hell the background in the Mona Lisa is all messed up and people think that painting is okay the way it is. ;)

Exactly; what a sterile, soulless, fabricated, bland, and pointless world photography would be, if all photographs ever taken were technically perfect (at least by today's standards of technical perfection, which brings up the point that even 'objective' measures of perfection are fluid)

[shniks]

Point and shoots take good landscape shots because these cameras have so much DOF. But for anything else they are disadvantaged - you havent got the ability to use shallow DOF and that really limits your creativity.

[TheHoff]

-- edit: don't want to sound jealous of the winner... critique deleted

[number six]

If it's an either/or decision, and only that, talent trumphs gear every time, cannot debate that point. :D

Well, how about those of us who don't have any talent? Gear is our only hope!

;)

[TheHoff]

oh hey, here is that shot on Flickr. Nicer to see it in proper resolution as it looks quite downgraded on the original link:

http://flickr.com/photos/uwajedi/3000236532/

Nice that he is from Toronto but I like other shots of his better. I wonder what it is about this one that twists peoples nipples the right way?

[mspringfield]

Still got the Coolpix? And excellent camera for infrared!

Nope. I was a great little camera. I actually gave it to a friend of mine when I "upgraded" and she won a photo contest in a local newspaper with a shot of her son.

[chauncey]

#6, You sound like my twin brother. that's the only reason that I shoot with a Ds3.

[eb314]

This is one of the rare imaging contests where cameras weren't part of the prizes.

Ouch.

[shniks]

Hoff I dont know what you wrote, but I have to say, I dont like the photo either. I really cant see what the fuss is about? I guess its all subjective.

[Picture North Carolina]

I really cant see what the fuss is about? I guess its all subjective.

Art? Subjective?? Hmmmm, that's a novel thought. I'll have to think about that one! :lol: ;)

[DStanic]

It's a really nice picture, better than I can take.. lol.. but think how awsome it would have looked with a 5D mkII !! :D

I have a hard time beleiving that there wasn't any better pictures out of the 55,000 entrys... I guess it's all subjective.

[Picture North Carolina]

It's a really nice picture, better than I can take.. lol.. but think how awsome it would have looked with a 5D mkII !! :D



Agree. Three black spots next to the three headlights on the trolly would have added a shadowy effect which would have given the image depth. ;)

[TheHoff]

Well definitely take a look at it on the Flickr link above -- it looks quite different without all of the JPG compression from the original link. The original post makes it look like some junk-cam outsider art. The Flickr version, I could see it printed large and it would look nice on a wall. I do wish it had a person in the photo for more interest and humanity.

[kiwichris]

If you look at the photostream you will see that voters went into a draw for cameras ;)

I quite like the pic but as for the other argument, a good photpgrapher with a point and shoot will generally get better pics than a bad photographer with the best of gear.

Point and shoots, Dslrs and Hasselblads all have their place.

[golfecho]

. . . a good photpgrapher with a point and shoot will generally get better pics than a bad photographer with the best of gear.

Point and shoots, Dslrs and Hasselblads all have their place.

Yup.

[shniks]

Well definitely take a look at it on the Flickr link above -- it looks quite different without all of the JPG compression from the original link. The original post makes it look like some junk-cam outsider art. The Flickr version, I could see it printed large and it would look nice on a wall. I do wish it had a person in the photo for more interest and humanity.

I did and I still dont find anything interesting about it. I saw the comments on flickr and people are talking about the moody lighting of the shot. But it just looks like a train under some street lights to me, an everyday scene, nothing moody from my point of view.

[sjones]

While I agree that the photo seemed a bit cliché (but then again, what isn't at this stage in the game), the overall point is that whatever faults the photo may or may not have centered on the subject matter and not on the camera used. More importantly, apparently enough folks enjoyed the photo despite the limitations of the camera used, which goes back to:

...a good photpgrapher with a point and shoot will generally get better pics than a bad photographer with the best of gear.

Point and shoots, Dslrs and Hasselblads all have their place.

As well as the Holga, of course...

[nicksan]

But did the guy need to blog about it?:rolleyes:

While I agree that the photo seemed a bit cliché (but then again, what isn't at this stage in the game), the overall point is that whatever faults the photo may or may not have centered on the subject matter and not on the camera used. More importantly, apparently enough folks enjoyed the photo despite the limitations of the camera used, which goes back to:



As well as the Holga, of course...

[sjones]

But did the guy need to blog about it?:rolleyes:

As to what motivated Goh to write about this is not really my concern; although I would argue that the gist of the article is relevant and something that newcomers, in particular, should consider.

[irishman]

From the article:
" . . .having a good eye for pictures is more important than having the best camera."

Sacrelige!

But, hey, I could take a picture just like that if we had electric trams here in Phoenix. But we don't. And, of course, we don't have fog either.

[400dabuser]

Here's a photographer who won a major contest using a 3-year old point and shoot and a $20 plastic tripod. He won among 55,000 entrants.

http://asia.cnet.com/crave/2008/12/15/photographer-wins-photo-contest-with-outdated-point-and-shoot/


It is like Chelsea football club buying themselves the Premier League, if they buy themselves into winning competitions. I always knew it wasn't about the gear you had, just about the imagination you have, plus the opportunities

Also, I bet he will be upgrading the camera

[Luminodio]

i actually felt the same as Hoff when i saw the seriously compressed save of this shot, but once he posted the flickr version my thoughts on the shot immediately changed. i actually love everything about the shot minus the white car on the right side of the frame; i wouldn't want a person in the shot as i think the lighting gives it a cold and mechanical element that i doubt i could really describe accurately.

i'm curious onto where in the world you could actually purchase a $20.00USD tripod that wasn't a foot tall when the legs were fully extended.

[TheHoff]

i actually felt the same as Hoff when i saw the seriously compressed save of this shot, but once he posted the flickr version my thoughts on the shot immediately changed. i actually love everything about the shot minus the white car on the right side of the frame; i wouldn't want a person in the shot as i think the lighting gives it a cold and mechanical element that i doubt i could really describe accurately.

i'm curious onto where in the world you could actually purchase a $20.00USD tripod that wasn't a foot tall when the legs were fully extended.


I hate that I like this shot now. It grew on me. I don't even mind the car in back.

One big key, at least for me, is that mix of street lights -- how dull would it be with just the typical orange glow? He found a location with a mix of halide and sodium lamps to give it a mix of colour in the fog and in the overall scene.

[yogestee]

I hate that I like this shot now. It grew on me. I don't even mind the car in back.

One big key, at least for me, is that mix of street lights -- how dull would it be with just the typical orange glow? He found a location with a mix of halide and sodium lamps to give it a mix of colour in the fog and in the overall scene.

Yep Hoff,,, photo-op is very important as is the skill to recognise a great photo-op..

[Picture North Carolina]

He found a location with a mix of halide and sodium lamps to give it a mix of colour in the fog and in the overall scene.

Yep Hoff,,, photo-op is very important as is the skill to recognise a great photo-op..

Exactly. It ain't always about the gear, and it ain't always about timing and luck.

I have some shots that, on the surface, could easily be perceived as being "timing and luck." But they were not. Locations were scouted and noted on previous outings. And on the day they were shot, I pulled my pathetic butt out of bed at 3 in the morning, and drove 3 hours to get to a location before sunrise. I have done that dozens of times. One time I drove 5 hours to get to a location before sunrise.

And no, I'm not talking about myself here, only as an example that while it may be convenient to declare an image a "lucky shot" it often is not. Often it is the result of a vision, planning, and very hard work and sacrifice.

[Luminodio]

Last edited by CannedHeat : 22 Minutes Ago at 05:41. Reason: sphelling

hahaha. sorry, but that's great.

[Tom O]

Well, how about those of us who don't have any talent? Gear is our only hope!

;)


ROFLMAO:lol::lol:

[sjones]

....t while it may be convenient to declare an image a "lucky shot" it often is not. Often it is the result of a vision, planning, and very hard work and sacrifice.

True, sometimes a photo is the result of arduous planning, but in many cases, it is luck. However, there is nothing pejorative about luck, so attempts to diminish the quality of a photograph by claiming that the photographer just happened to be in the right place at the right time are misguided.

That is, even if it was just luck, so what, all the more power. Taking this further, and back to your point, even if "luck" was involved on some level, the photographer still needs to get out there, and knowledge of the surroundings and honed predictive skills can dramatically reduce the reliance on luck.

In the end, whether lucky or not, a good photograph is a good photograph.