Ansel Adams on Camera Equipment

rick_reno wrote in post #14363196
I have a photography friend who lives in NYC (SoHo), she's had 5 books published of her photographic art. She shoots a lot with a pinhole camera, says she likes the effect and "stuff" doesn't get in her way.
Use whatever works for you, and you'll be happy.

I love the concept of pinhole photography, if only I had the time and creative juices in me to want to do it

airfrogusmc wrote in post #14362936
Adams had great cameras and lenses, He just didn't have all the cameras and lenses or always the latest greatest. He was clearly not on the gadget go round. He only had equipment that clearly worked with his vision.

Ralph Gibson shoots with a normal lens. He said he shoot with what he shoots with because its the way he sees. Bresson shot with a normal lens. Winogrand shot with a 35mm lens.

What I get sick and tired of is people suggesting that those who are "geared up" somehow lost touch with the artistic side of the equation. I find that laughable.

None of us need to justify what we own. Whether we own gear for the hell of it, want, need, or whatever other reason, it doesn't matter.

I get what Adams was saying. Hey, that's fine. He did it his way. It puzzles me why what he wrote has to be the rule of the land. It's just one man's opinion. Nothing more. Nothing less.

It's simple for me. If I see a piece of gear I want, need, or both, and it I can afford it, then gee wiz, I'm going to get that sucker.

Used to own 9 guitars too.

nicksan wrote in post #14364359
What I get sick and tired of is people suggesting that those who are "geared up" somehow lost touch with the artistic side of the equation. I find that laughable.

None of us need to justify what we own. Whether we own gear for the hell of it, want, need, or whatever other reason, it doesn't matter.

I get what Adams was saying. Hey, that's fine. He did it his way. It puzzles me why what he wrote has to be the rule of the land. It's just one man's opinion. Nothing more. Nothing less.

It's simple for me. If I see a piece of gear I want, need, or both, and it I can afford it, then gee wiz, I'm going to get that sucker.

Used to own 9 guitars too.

I don't recall anyone asking for any kind of justification.

Nothing wrong with ownership so long as there's an intent to create.

My beef is with das experten who seem to know everything about everything in gear land without so much as even one image post. A little "Proof Of Light" would be nice.

In automotive terms, people who know everything about cars but who've never turned a key are called mechanics, not drivers. I submit that we need a similar name for those folks here who insist on re-inventing the photography industry without ever (seemingly) pressing a shutter button because they sure aren't photographers.

Flame On...

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14364417
Nothing wrong with ownership so long as there's an intent to create.

My beef is with das experten who seem to know everything about everything in gear land without so much as even one image post. A little "Proof Of Light" would be nice.

In automotive terms, people who know everything about cars but who've never turned a key are called mechanics, not drivers. I submit that we need a similar name for those folks here who insist on re-inventing the photography industry without ever (seemingly) pressing a shutter button because they sure aren't photographers.

Flame On...

No flame here....

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14364417
Nothing wrong with ownership so long as there's an intent to create.

My beef is with das experten who seem to know everything about everything in gear land without so much as even one image post. A little "Proof Of Light" would be nice.

In automotive terms, people who know everything about cars but who've never turned a key are called mechanics, not drivers. I submit that we need a similar name for those folks here who insist on re-inventing the photography industry without ever (seemingly) pressing a shutter button because they sure aren't photographers.

Flame On...

Heh! Jay, here in POTN we have "technicians" and "engineers" who very well might br the parallel to "mechanics".

Of course, I can't imagine a mechanic who doesn't actually drive. There may be a few, but hey...and I figure POTN technicians and engineers do shoot, although the thought process just may not be the same...

Ah, well.

tonylong wrote in post #14364758
Heh! Jay, here in POTN we have "technicians" and "engineers" who very well might br the parallel to "mechanics".

Of course, I can't imagine a mechanic who doesn't actually drive. There may be a few, but hey...and I figure POTN technicians and engineers do shoot, although the thought process just may not be the same...

Ah, well.

All I'm asking those who claim advanced knowledge of the photo industry in general and gear in particular is to show me you can spin your advanced knowledge into photo gold...

The guys I've met at CPS through The International Society For Aviation Photography(several are also ISAP members) are all excellent photographers in their own right so it would seem to me that those here who claim to know better should be able to shoot better.

And yet, I see a distinct lack of website, Smuggie, Zen, Flickr or even Photobucket link from several of the squeakiest wheels.

<Shrug>

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14364837
All I'm asking those who claim advanced knowledge of the photo industry in general and gear in particular is to show me you can spin your advanced knowledge into photo gold...

The frenzy lately in regards to how good/crap such and such a body or brand is has been insane. People talking about the most minute this or that.

These cameras have more potential than 99% of the people who own them, yet gear debates go to 10-20 pages of clap trap.

I'd like to know how this or that body or brand stops someone from being a world class photographer.

There's a lot of world class camera owners, but world class photographers are fewer on the ground.

fotoworx wrote in post #14364861
There's a lot of world class camera owners, but world class photographers are fewer on the ground.

Deep pocket won't pocket deep at the end!

I honestly don't care if the images offered suck rocks... People can improve their photography (and just might help prove that it's the Indian and not the Arrow!)

At the very least, if you're going to pontificate about the state of the industry, show people that you're a willing participant.

Well, it's unfortunate that some photographer involve themselves almost entirely with equipment and lose sight of the final product - usually a large print that has emotional impact. The quote from Ansel seems to show how aware he was, even then, of the pitfalls we face in the world of gadgets and gizmos. I don't think it would be a bad idea to have a Holga and shoot with it from time to time just to release yourself from the gear craze. I think I'll buy one with my next B&H purchase.

frugivore wrote in post #14365428
Well, it's unfortunate that some photographer involve themselves almost entirely with equipment and lose sight of the final product - usually a large print that has emotional impact. The quote from Ansel seems to show how aware he was, even then, of the pitfalls we face in the world of gadgets and gizmos. I don't think it would be a bad idea to have a Holga and shoot with it from time to time just to release yourself from the gear craze. I think I'll buy one with my next B&H purchase.

Right On!

frugivore wrote in post #14365428
Well, it's unfortunate that some photographer involve themselves almost entirely with equipment and lose sight of the final product - usually a large print that has emotional impact. The quote from Ansel seems to show how aware he was, even then, of the pitfalls we face in the world of gadgets and gizmos. I don't think it would be a bad idea to have a Holga and shoot with it from time to time just to release yourself from the gear craze. I think I'll buy one with my next B&H purchase.

Got an iPhone?

http://www.geeky-gadgets.com …hone-case-kit-16-11-2011/

Yep there are many out there that wear their equipment like the stuff is an accessory.

Something else that I think is rather interesting to go along with this topic is to consider the kind of people a field/hobby such as photography can attract. Not everyone is here purely for the artwork that they can create. For some of us the focus of our interest is actually something more technical.

The things that draw me to photography are optics, mechanics, and digital image processing. Similar to what draws me to astronomy. In astronomy I really don't care what is out there, they could be balls of cheese no more than an AU away from us, but I would still want to build and design telescopes and related equipment to get better images of those balls of cheese, and work at ways to better map and track them. Why would I? Because they're out there, and I enjoy working with the tools.

For photography, while I do want to improve my skill and capture great images, it isn't the main driving point. Actually, the next time I plan to take out my camera is for this weekend, when I hope to be able to demonstrate an example of the double slit experiment that proved light travels as a wave. I'm also curious as to what happens if I try placing a water drop (Or series of water drops) in the path of the light.