How do you guys handle the "Your camera takes good pics" comments on your photos?

Wow, I got a bigger response with this thread than I thought. And, definitely a lot of solid points and funny jokes.

When I wrote this, I was ticked off for a few reasons:

1) I was in my "Sketching for Communications" class when I pulled out my laptop on my break. That's when a fellow art student made the "good camera" comment. I wasn't too peeved until several others came around to see the pic, and then all agreed "Wow, you have a nice camera!"

2) I was also ticked off because one of the students (a "Fine Arts" major) was arguing with me that photography is not a "real" art because anybody could buy a nice camera and take pics just as good as anyone else. He even tried to make comments like "Paintbrushes don't have an auto mode!" and crap like that. After showing him examples of GOOD photos that have lined art galleries for decades, he still said things like "Why even take photos then if you can do a Google image search and have the SAME photos right there?"

So, I'm not trying to be self-righteous or a prick, but I'm tired of being in an Art school as a New Media/Photography double-major and constantly defending photography and photographers alike.

That's why the "good camera" comment, especially coming from other art students, drives me nuts.

JoePhotoOnline wrote in post #8997240
1) I was in my "Sketching for Communications" class when I pulled out my laptop on my break. That's when a fellow art student made the "good camera" comment. I wasn't too peeved until several others came around to see the pic, and then all agreed "Wow, you have a nice camera!".

So let me understand, you've got a group around you that is complimenting your work, and this bothers you? They mean well, get over it, and just say thanks, it's a Canon, and I love what I am able to do with it.

JoePhotoOnline wrote in post #8997240
2) I was also ticked off because one of the students (a "Fine Arts" major) was arguing with me that photography is not a "real" art because anybody could buy a nice camera and take pics just as good as anyone else. He even tried to make comments like "Paintbrushes don't have an auto mode!" and crap like that. After showing him examples of GOOD photos that have lined art galleries for decades, he still said things like "Why even take photos then if you can do a Google image search and have the SAME photos right there?"

Ah, so now we come to the root of the issue.

All he did was sucessfully bait you into an argument. It's probably likely he just got a kick out of getting you all fired up, for which it sounds like he did a very effective job. Forget the prick. He does not grade your work. Who gives a flip what one person thinks.

I also got this from a Senior-Level Painting teacher:

"Photography is nothing more than right place + right time. It's a documentary-type trade, not an 'art'."


I certainly did not expect that kind of ignorance from a University Professor.

so glad I just came across this thread. I have a good friend from my early college years who has a four year old daughter. I did a couple shoots with his daughter and the last one was with my home studio setup and everything. Once i started editing them and posted a couple for him to see, he made the same comment that he had previously made when i took some pics of his daughter... "wow that camera takes really good pictures". And this is the type of guy that is always doin some passive aggressive sh!t like that. So how do i deal with it? simple... I just didn't give him the pictures. I was doing it for free in the first place and now he's stuck like "hey man have you got a chance to finish those pictures yet?" Classic...

ct1co2 wrote in post #8997424
Who gives a flip what one person thinks.

I don't care what one person thinks, but this kind of attitude is not just him. It's a growing perspective on photography from most people these days because of digital cameras.

Maybe this all just boils down to my/our/photographer's frustration with how photography has completely changed in just 10 years.

There's a digicam in everyone's pocket and lots of idiots out there giving their mediocre work away for free to businesses/companies/o​rganizations that use to pay for good work from real photographers. The expectations for good photos keep dropping and dropping. Very few people actually recognize a good photo anymore, and it's incredibly hard to actually ask money for a photo. ( After all, we "Only had to push a button" right?)

This is why I'm double-majoring in photography and New Media (Which is Web Design, Graphic Design, Typography, Advertising, etc) because the work for photogs out there is getting smaller and smaller.

I agree Joe. In fact I just bought myself a Canon AE-1 so I can truly go out and learn how to take a good photograph. Film doesn't lie like a digital monitor usually does. I find it is the best way for me to truly learn and better my skills as a photographer.

iAMB wrote in post #8997676
Film doesn't lie like a digital monitor usually does.

This might be appropriate for another thread, but I wonder if you could elaborate on the ways that a digital monitor "lies" that film doesn't.

JoePhotoOnline wrote in post #8997460
I also got this from a Senior-Level Painting teacher:

"Photography is nothing more than right place + right time. It's a documentary-type trade, not an 'art'."


I certainly did not expect that kind of ignorance from a University Professor.

Well it does depend on the type of photography. I would agree that news photography, and many other types of photography, are not art.

iAMB wrote in post #8997676
I agree Joe. In fact I just bought myself a Canon AE-1 so I can truly go out and learn how to take a good photograph. Film doesn't lie like a digital monitor usually does. I find it is the best way for me to truly learn and better my skills as a photographer.

Yeah,

And you should buy a Model T Ford, with a crank start, manual timing advance, wet clutch, band brakes, and an external choke.

That's the best way to truly learn and better your skills as a driver.

JoePhotoOnline wrote in post #8997460
I certainly did not expect that kind of ignorance from a University Professor.

You didn't? Why do you think he's a University Professor and not working out in the field?

iAMB wrote in post #8997676
I agree Joe. In fact I just bought myself a Canon AE-1 so I can truly go out and learn how to take a good photograph. Film doesn't lie like a digital monitor usually does. I find it is the best way for me to truly learn and better my skills as a photographer.

Funny...or it could be that folks hang on to film because they feel it's some sort of sanctuary for them with all these people coming into photography these days?

Either way, it's backwards thinking...

Honestly folks. Do you think when people say "Your camera takes nice pictures" they say that to insult you? Of course not. It's just semantics really. Get over it. Sheesh.

Photography as a technical discipline is NOT rocket science. It just isn't. It doesn't take too much to take a technically sound photograph so let's stop pretending that we are a special breed of people here.

Of course, other aspect of it such as composition, visualization and materialization is an entirely different beast.

It's the same with music. It doesn't take much to play a piece note for note. It really doesn't. It's more about muscle memory than it is art. But hearing something original in your head and then being able to play it takes a different level of skill.

I like you, Nicksan!

JoePhotoOnline wrote in post #8997240
1) I was in my "Sketching for Communications" class when I pulled out my laptop on my break. That's when a fellow art student made the "good camera" comment. I wasn't too peeved until several others came around to see the pic, and then all agreed "Wow, you have a nice camera!"

All art students aren't photographers, and all photographers aren't art students. It's quite possible (obviously, from the above) for art students to be just as ignorant about photography as joe non-photographer citizen on the street. It still doesn't sound like they meant anything malicious or insulting by it.

JoePhotoOnline wrote in post #8997240
2) I was also ticked off because one of the students (a "Fine Arts" major) was arguing with me that photography is not a "real" art because anybody could buy a nice camera and take pics just as good as anyone else. He even tried to make comments like "Paintbrushes don't have an auto mode!" and crap like that. After showing him examples of GOOD photos that have lined art galleries for decades, he still said things like "Why even take photos then if you can do a Google image search and have the SAME photos right there?"

While I don't agree with his sentiments, I do believe that it takes more talent (and talent of a different kind) to create a good painting than it does to create a good photograph. Both require visualization and a certain touch, but translating the medium via a camera is (IMO) much easier than translating it via a brush and paints.
Of course, his same argument about Google Images could apply to paintings - I could easily go on line and find more landscapes, still lifes, portraits, abstracts, etc. than I'd ever care to look at. It's not exactly like a painter is breaking new ground every time he puts a brush to a canvas, either....this stuff has been done before.

JoePhotoOnline wrote in post #8997240
So, I'm not trying to be self-righteous or a prick, but I'm tired of being in an Art school as a New Media/Photography double-major and constantly defending photography and photographers alike.

I guess I don't understand the need to "defend" photography and photographers. Everyone has an opinion, whether it's bred from ignorance or not, and you're unlikely to change many of them no matter how much or how fervently you argue. It's akin to trying to convince a domestic "muscle car" enthusiast that he should go buy a sub-compact import, or debating Japanese motorcycles with a hardcore Harley guy....you can extoll their virtues and maybe even mount a compelling argument for your point, but when you finally walk away they're still going to shake their heads in disbelief and think to themselves, "What an ignorant idiot!". Their minds are set, so why even bother?

nicksan wrote in post #8998070
You didn't? Why do you think he's a University Professor and not working out in the field?

I was thinking that myself!

JoePhotoOnline wrote in post #8997460
I also got this from a Senior-Level Painting teacher:

"Photography is nothing more than right place + right time. It's a documentary-type trade, not an 'art'."


I certainly did not expect that kind of ignorance from a University Professor.

By that logic, painting is for people to lazy to go out and photograph the real thing at the right time. They have to make stuff up instead.

Also, crappy painting is only slightly harder than crappy photography. Good photography and good painting takes about the same amount of talent and practice to master.