An Interesting Point Regarding Amateur vs. Accomplished Photographers
I was watching an interview with Daniel Milnor. He's a documentary photographer. One of the statements he made was in regard to the successful high-end photographers is their lack of being obsessed with equipment. It appears that amateurs are the equipment-obsessed group. The successful photographers will discuss techniques, aspects of projects in which they are currently engaged, etc. Equipment is not a primary concern.
That makes a great deal of sense in that working with equipment that one has had for a considerable length of time provides the comfort of familiarity. That allows one to concentrate on the project at hand.
--Bob
If they gave Pulitzers for the equipment, we'd all be winners.
rmalarz wrote:
I was watching an interview with Daniel Milnor. He's a documentary photographer. One of the statements he made was in regard to the successful high-end photographers is their lack of being obsessed with equipment. It appears that amateurs are the equipment-obsessed group. The successful photographers will discuss techniques, aspects of projects in which they are currently engaged, etc. Equipment is not a primary concern.
That makes a great deal of sense in that working with equipment that one has had for a considerable length of time provides the comfort of familiarity. That allows one to concentrate on the project at hand.
--Bob
I was watching an interview with Daniel Milnor. He... (
show quote)
That's right vision and creativity is the most important element of photography. One does need, however, the right equipment for the task at hand which may narrow the selection of cameras and lenses.
Professional photographers are photographers who get paid for their photography.
Amateur photographers pursue photography for non-pecuniary interests.
Neither classification suggests a level of accomplishment.
Just tools. As long as you have what you need to perform the tasks that you require, you're good. Pros are sometimes practicing in a limited range of genres, consequently may not need a macro, or long tele, etc.
I don't think Van Gogh, Picasso and Renoir had better brushes.
I would think that a high-end photographer would already have an arsenal of glass and accessories therefor, he can devote his thoughts and discussions on techniques-
That's the argument I make with the better half anyway...
rmalarz wrote:
I was watching an interview with Daniel Milnor. He's a documentary photographer. One of the statements he made was in regard to the successful high-end photographers is their lack of being obsessed with equipment. It appears that amateurs are the equipment-obsessed group. The successful photographers will discuss techniques, aspects of projects in which they are currently engaged, etc. Equipment is not a primary concern.
That makes a great deal of sense in that working with equipment that one has had for a considerable length of time provides the comfort of familiarity. That allows one to concentrate on the project at hand.
--Bob
I was watching an interview with Daniel Milnor. He... (
show quote)
A very succinct way to express the truth about photography. Knowledge is priceless.
True, but most professional photographers I'm familiar with, already shoot with advanced equipment. For example, prior to digital, most studio/wedding photographers used Hasselblad. That being said, I once knew a studio photographer who produced very decent work, and he shot on a Canon AE1.
In all actuality, the post referred to accomplished photographers. This does not necessarily embody solely professionals.
The person in the interview referred to cameras he's used for years.
--Bob
rmalarz wrote:
In all actuality, the post referred to accomplished photographers. This does not necessarily embody solely professionals.
The person in the interview referred to cameras he's used for years.
--Bob
So it does. I suppose I was sidetracked by his comment about successful high-end photographers, which I interpreted to mean professionals.
I had a desk accessory for a long time with this quote:
Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people.
I know several accomplished artists. They all focus on their process more than on their equipment. None of them use cheap, crummy brushes. I doubt that van Gough or any other accomplished artist did (or does) either. And I've written elsewhere about my friend who was very proud to have found the really good watercolor paints, with less binder and more pigment. She told me about them at length after receiving the first set of them a year of so ago. But now they are part of her process. She has not mentioned them for months.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.