Gear is irrelevant (Page 8): I mostly agree. Except with sharpness. A steady hand or tripod makes a huge difference with any degree of telephoto. But being in the right place at the...

Tom W Loc: Lincoln Co, WA

I mostly agree. Except with sharpness. A steady hand or tripod makes a huge difference with any degree of telephoto. But being in the right place at the right time helps one see the opportunity for a great photo as well.

Tom W Loc: Lincoln Co, WA

I mostly agree. Except with sharpness. A steady hand or tripod makes a huge difference with any degree of telephoto. But being in the right place at the right time helps one see the opportunity for a great photo as well.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

CrazyJane wrote:

And sharpness is overrated. The most important of all tools in photography is the eye. If you don't have an eye for it, there's nothing can help. And it's pretty easy to see who does and who doesn't, don't you think?

The eye of the artist is very important. The eye of the photographer 📸 is also a very crucial element in creating an outstanding image.

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

Explaining your images or work is never necessary, regardless of film size, megapixel count.

Jack 13088 Loc: Central NY

Irrelevant is too strong but before you press the button is where the photograph is created.

In no particular order a great (or even good) photograph when all these boxes are checked:

Select the subject - intent.
Choose the perspective.
Don’t overlook the lighting. “The key to available lighting is to have enough lighting available.”
Focus. On the subject? What is not in focus (soft) is just as important as what is sharp. DoF if you like.
Shutter speed. Stop the motion vs enhance the motion?

The “Be$t” gear cannot do any of the above for you.

See Ansel Adams quote below.

It is true that some lenses are noticeably sharper but lack ESP to know what you want. And some cameras have better image stabilization than others or “auto” focus but does not automate the choice of focus point. And you are fooling yourself if you think you can fix all mistakes in Post. You can often work around them with or without AI but give your camera and software a chance for goodness sake.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The math of a beautiful image is easy: it has twice the megapixels of your current sensor.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

To an extent, right on! You'll never get the shot you can't see!

whatdat Loc: Del Valle, Tx.

JohnSwanda wrote:

There is also a matter of learning good technique. A good eye and good equipment are not enough unless you learn to get the best from the equipment.

👍👍👍

TimmyKnowles Loc: Gallup, New Mexico

CHG_CANON wrote:

The freedom to do your best means nothing unless you are willing to buy the best camera.

Ah, just like the UHH ad on FB: It's Canon vs. Nikon vs. Sony.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Thoughts for the day.
AA had little or no competition. In today's world he might not have stood out from the crowd.
Moonshine took a YEAR of continuous development to get to be the image we know. Perhaps someone else could, today, have done better with PS in ten minutes. I suppose we all have to have a hero. AA would not be mine.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Thoughts for the day.
AA had little or no competition. In today's world he might not have stood out from the crowd.
Moonshine took a YEAR of continuous development to get to be the image we know. Perhaps someone else could, today, have done better with PS in ten minutes. I suppose we all have to have a hero. AA would not be mine.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

47greyfox wrote:

Now that expectations have been deemed irrelevant, the need for improvement has been dashed.

When my Instamatic 100 died and I got a 35mm rangefinder camera, my photography did improve, because now I control over both aperture and shutter speed.

User ID

vince1942 wrote:

As Ansel Adams said when asked what was the most important aspect of his photographs, he replied "the 12" behind the viewfinder"!

So very, very true.

Referencing Adams is the unIversally recognized Badge of of Cluelessness.

User ID

Canisdirus wrote:

I don't think the endeavor matters much...

In this world there are several types of people........

Several types !!??!?!? Such toadall BS.

Throughout ANY geography and throughout ALL time there exists exactly TWO types, or groups, of people: the Us and the Them.

Hip Coyote

CrazyJane wrote:

And sharpness is overrated. The most important of all tools in photography is the eye. If you don't have an eye for it, there's nothing can help. And it's pretty easy to see who does and who doesn't, don't you think?

Dear CJ, I took a quick look at a few of your photos that you posted. It seems you like a more abstract photo where sharpness is not an issue. In fact, you appear to avoid sharpness in some shots..to great effect, I might add. But for other instances or types of art, sharpness is absolutely a necessity. Birds in flight was an excellent example....generally. Certainly, the photo you showed of the D Day invasion needed sharpness!

Anytime anyone says something absolute, it is usually wrong. Professionals and advanced amateurs should live in the grey zone...knowing when to do one thing or the other. When absolute sharpness is needed and when it is a liability.

Case in point: I was having a professional portrait taken of me a few years ago. The pro used some old Canon 50D and an older lens. I asked why the old camera and lens when newer gear was available. He said, "not everyone needs nor should they have a very sharp portrait photo. For you, we're not worried about sharpness" I guess this old geezer needed a more fuzzy pic! Now, if he could only do something about the grey hair.