[seawallrunner]

A useful online resource about digital cameras: The Beginner's FAQ

[Allison]

Here is another good book on the subject: Digital Photography Outdoors

[greg]

Seawallrunner Will look that book up too.

[Allison]

This is a great bit of commentary:

[l]

I'd be curious to know what type of equipment Mr. Hamilton uses. I'll bet his disdain for cameras is especially high for low-end gear.

[Allison]

Some of the photog hobbyists with the best/most expensive gear turn out to be the worst photogs.

[Tom]

Was summit44 an amateur or professional?

[l]

[Allison]

[l]

Sure Adams shot stuff with a Brownie. But did he sell any of it? I have three of his books and don't recall seeing any. And Ansel was legendary for tweaking a single photo for days on end until getting it perfect. Just as we use photoshop to enhance our pics. As I stated in my last post - I agree with you, it's mostly the person, not the camera. I'm referring mainly to professionals, which I assume Mr. Hamilton is. Like 99% of his tribe, I'm sure he uses expensive gear. And photoshop.

[Tom]

I don't know what gear he uses. His soft focus photography appears to have an artistic element applied. http://web.chi.es/isidro/fotografia/retratos/hamilton_01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hamilton_%28British_photographer%29

[l]

I just perused the site and he obviously is an artist. And that begs the question, when does enough manipulation of an image transition it from a photograph to a painting? ML, I've reviewed our little debate and think we're discussing apples and oranges. I agree that a talentless hack could never produce quality pics no matter how expensive the equipment he/she buys. Also, if you give the exact same camera and lens to 10 different people on the same day, in the same location, etc. and compare their respective photos later, the creme will be self-evident. Here's what I'm saying: If, say, you were at an art fair and there were 2 identical photos at equal price for sale - exposed at the exact same moment with the same composition and filter - but one was taken with a $300.00 digital and the other a large format camera, which print would you buy? Ergo, the quality of gear does matter when comparing apples with apples.

[John]

I treat my photography gear with reverence because it costs too damn much to replace! I imagine the real reason Mr. Hamilton and other pros can toss their gear around is because they're filthy rich. But I agree with the point he is making. It is the artist, not his tools, that ultimately determines the quality of the work. It's the same with any other art form. There are many styles of photography, just as there are many styles of music, sculpture, painting, theater and architecture. In each of those mediums, it is not how much that is spent on instruments, chisels, brushes, costumes or bricks that defines the beauty of the work... Personally, I'd rather listen to the street musician banging away on recycled plastic buckets and glass bottles than Yo-Yo Ma playing his million dollar cello. Different styles of art appeal to different people, and sometimes different styles do require different, more expensive tools. A print from a $30,000 Hasseblad is not automatically better than one taken from a $5 disposable camera, but the Hasselblad offers the master photographer many, many, many more options. Likewise, a painting from an artist with a variety of fine brushes and many colors is not automatically better than a painting from an artist with a single brush and a single color. More expensive tools or gear often enable greater ease, control, efficiency, latitude and, depending on the type of expression desired, quality. But to take full advantage of the tool, the artist must master how to use them to successfully translate his or her vision and message into the medium chosen. I hope to get there someday... Then again, people will pay thousands for a painting by a chimp. Perhaps I just need to hire a chimp to shoot my photos for me. Then I'll be a millionaire! John

[wbs]

In reading in one of Art Wolfe's newer books "Vanishing Act", it was interesting that 95% of the photos were taken on 35mm film. The rest digital captures. In both cases, highest end Canon out of the reach of most of us however. Amazing book I might add with a different angle on wildlife. Check it out (next time your in Barnes & Noble on a rainy day - like, uhh.. anytime this week). http://www.artwolfe.com/cgi/shop/detail.cgi?r=BO69