Yes. It is the Photographer: I'm putting together a photo book through Adorama, and I'm looking at our dog pictures from about 2006 to the present. I'll click on a thumbnail to get a...

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I'm putting together a photo book through Adorama, and I'm looking at our dog pictures from about 2006 to the present. I'll click on a thumbnail to get a better look at a shot I like. Sometimes, it's sharp and beautifully exposed. When I check the Exif data, I find that it's been taken with a cheap Canon P&S, a better Canon P&S, a D70s, or a D90. Regardless what camera someone was shooting, some images are perfect, and some are so-so. Interesting.

mremery Loc: From Maine, living in Virginia

Sometimes the image may not load completely and the view seems to be pixelated or fuzzy. It's not the image, but more the server feeding the image, your connection at the time, or who knows what.

PrairieSeasons Loc: Red River of the North

I took a bad picture once, but I'm not going to admit it to anyone.

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

Some photos take a lot of time to fully display, getting a little better at each stage, probably my Absent Minded Dummy computer, Bob.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

praireseasons wrote:

"I took a bad picture once, but I'm not going to admit it to anyone"

No need, we can just look at your avatar and see it... :-)

Rip Tragle Loc: Estes Park, CO

I find some of my best pictures were taken with my old
20D. There is a practical limit to "all you need"......
but I doubt any us us will believe it..... the innovations
as cameras progress in complexity and innovation is
just too interesting. You all know the "I gotta" have it"
syndrome. We are all sick I tell you!

bikinkawboy Loc: north central Missouri

Quote PrarieSeasons, "I took a bad picture once, but I'm not going to admit it to anyone"

Quote Bikinkawboy, "I took a good picture once and I'm still talking about it!"

Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine

"Yes. It is the Photographer."

Sort of.

But some cameras and some lenses suit some subjects, and some photographers, much better than others. For the sort of pictures I take, I'm happier with rangefinder cameras. For the sort of pictures someone else takes, they may be happier with a DSLR. This means that a rangefinder is a better camera for me and a DSLR is a better camera for someone else.

Cheers,

R.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

Roger, does it also mean that if you had your range finder and a DSLR to hand and you took the same image seconds apart, one with the DSLR and one with the range finder, both with exactly the same focal length lens on them, that the range finder camera image would be superior or better in some way?

Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine

Lucian wrote:

Roger, does it also mean that if you had your range finder and a DSLR to hand and you took the same image seconds apart, one with the DSLR and one with the range finder, both with exactly the same focal length lens on them, that the range finder camera image would be superior or better in some way?

No. It means that (a) I'd be more likely to have the RF to hand and (b) because I was more comfortable using the RF, I'd be more likely to get good pictures with it.

There's also the point that different lenses render in different ways, so, for example, I'd probably like the pictures more if I used my Zeiss 1,5/50 C-Sonnar on a Leica, or my 2/58 Biotar on an Exakta, than if I used my 2/50 or 1,8/50 Nikkors.

In other words, to a large extent it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. That does not, however, mean that it's a worthless prophecy...

Cheers,

R.

wrobart

I recall reading about the photographers that shot the Sports Illustrated - Swimsuit magazine one year. One of them had used disposable cameras to take his pictures. It sure is the photographer that has the most impact on a picture. The subject matter sure helps too.

2 Dog Don Loc: Virginia Beach VA

wrobart wrote:

I recall reading about the photographers that shot the Sports Illustrated - Swimsuit magazine one year. One of them had used disposable cameras to take his pictures. It sure is the photographer that has the most impact on a picture. The subject matter sure helps too.

Do you know where he disposed of the cameras? I am retired and in need of a quest!

olcoach Loc: Oregon

Hi, It proves that "it ain't the fiddle, its the fiddler". There was a thread somewhere where a pro photographer took a inexpensive P&S camera and took a series of shots that anyone would be proud of. Have fun and keep shootin'. Mike

Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine

olcoach wrote:

Hi, It proves that "it ain't the fiddle, its the fiddler". There was a thread somewhere where a pro photographer took a inexpensive P&S camera and took a series of shots that anyone would be proud of. Have fun and keep shootin'. Mike

Google 'Bert Hardy' and 'Brownie' and you'll see that this is an old, old stunt: I think the famous Hardy shot dates from the late 1940s.

Yes, a Box Brownie, or a disposable, or a camera phone, or just about anything else, can be used to create very good pìctures under ideal conditions: plenty of light, no need for variable shutter speeds or apertures, no need for wide angle or long focus lenses.

But a second's thought will reveal that if such cameras were all professionals needed, they'd be all that professionals used. That they use other cameras is something of a clue that "Yes. It is the Photographer" is at best a half truth.

Cheers,

R.