Why your camera doesn't matter
© 2005 Ken Rockwell (Why Your Camera Does Not Matter)
Why is it that after sixty years of improving cameras, lens quality, grain, resolution and dynamic range of film, no one can compare with what Ansel Adams did back in the forties of the last century? He didn't even have Photoshop! How did he do it? Most of the attempts are far below the reach, others are just as good, but still others are different, like those of Jack Dykings, and no one can create the same.
Why are photographers packed with the most unique equipment, who with the help of the Internet can determine absolutely exact geographic coordinates of the points Jack and Ansel took off from and who can get to these places with original photos on their hands in order to make an exact copy (which is illegal from the point of view US copyright law, and ugly from the point of view of common sense), nevertheless, get something similar, but not possessing the depth and emotional fullness of the original, which they tried so hard to copy Th?
')
I am not kidding. You can read about these peppers right here. Professional astronomers calculated for them the moment of complete coincidence of conditions, the best for almost twenty years, and 300 of these blind men were dragged at exactly the calculated time to the exactly calculated place. And still, neither clouds, nor snow, nor illumination turned out as they should. That's why Ansel is cool. Naturally, they did not get what they wanted: the best photos are generated by inspiration, not by copying.
Why, even though everyone knows that Photoshop can turn any spoiled frame into a masterpiece, anyway, after hours of “dancing with a tambourine,” the photo gets even worse than it was?
Perhaps this is due to the fact that only the ability to see, the patience and skills of the artist create an image, not his tools.
Walker Evans once said, “People constantly ask me what kind of camera I use. It's not about the camera, but this is it, ”and tapped his temple with his index finger.
The spirit of the father of Jesus Christ, the carpenter Joseph, is credited with creating a marvelous wooden staircase in a church in New Mexico in 1873, and even if anyone is interested in what tools were used. Look where you want, you will find a bunch of scientific discussions on this topic, but nobody is interested in the tools.
Your equipment DOES NOT affect the quality of your photos. The less time and effort you spend on messing around with the equipment, the more time and effort will remain to create good photos. Good equipment simply makes the process of getting results more convenient, quick and easy.
“Any good modern lens is designed to give maximum resolution on large apertures. Using smaller apertures only increases the depth of field ... ”Ansel Adams, June 3, 1937, in response to Edward Weston’s appeal for lenses, pp. 244 of Ansel’s autobiography. 70 years ago, Ansel Adams took stunningly clear pictures without wasting time worrying about the sharpness of his lenses. After seventy years of progress, we would certainly have to pay more attention to creating good photos than comparing photographic tests.
The only thing that is required from the camera is to get out of your way to good photos.
Ernst Haas commented on this idea at a seminar in 1985:
Two guys from Nova Scotia struggled through to this seminar, they are Leika fans, they worked in the photo shop, saved money on Leiki and respected Ernst very much for using Leiki (although he used Nikon for his famous photos to advertise Marlboro, when they came across on hand).
After two days of the seminar, Ernst, up to the limit, endeavored the efforts of these guys to express their adoration to Leika, and when one of them asked another question that implied her superiority, Ernst said: “Lake, shmeyka. The camera does not matter a penny. They only capture what you see. And you should SEE. "
And after that, until the very end of the seminar, no one mentioned Leica, Nikon, Canon, or any other brand of equipment.
He also said: “What is the best wide angle lens? Step back two steps. ”And“ look for Heuricus! ”
(This story about Haas comes from Murad Sayon, a famous photographer from Oxford, Maine, about whom there is so much talk. Some say that this story was previously attributed to Eliot Porter and Cartier Bresson. I found at least three sites claiming to be the official site Haas here, here and here.)
You can admire some of the best photography creations in the world here, they belong to the person who says the same thing here. Here is a lot of evidence that the presence of a large number of lenses only worsens the results. I took these black and white photographs of a three-dollar fifty-year-old camera, more primitive than today's disposable ones. On this site you will find truly amazing work made by the Olympus 8080 soap box.
People know that the cars themselves do not drive, the typewriters themselves do not print the novels, and that Rembrandt’s brushes didn’t paint the pictures themselves, so why do some people think that the cameras are walking around and taking pictures by themselves? The most modern, exotic and expensive car in itself can not even keep the right lane, and you certainly will not get home. No matter how sophisticated your camera is, you are still responsible for arriving at the right place at the right time and for directing the camera in the right direction to get the picture you need. Any camera from time to time requires manual settings, regardless of its perfection. Never blame the camera for not being able to do anything in the world, or for choosing the wrong exposure in difficult conditions.
Here is how I discovered it all for myself:
When it comes to art, be it music, photography, surfing or anything else, there are mountains to be overcome. In the first 20 years, or so, of studying art you are sure that if you had a better tool, camera or board, your results would be no worse than that of a pro. You spend a lot of time fussing with the equipment and trying to get the best tools. After 20 years, you reach the level of other representatives of world-class art, and when one day they come to you for advice on equipment, you suddenly realize for yourself that it’s not about her, and never has been.
You finally understand that the equipment, the accumulation of which you spent so much time and effort, only simplifies the extraction of sounds, or photographing, or movement on the waves, but now you can do the same, albeit with a little more effort, on the junk with which they started. You understand that the main thing is that the equipment does not block your path. You also understand that if the time spent in the romp with the equipment, you would have spent rehearsing, photographing, riding the waves, you would have achieved what you wanted, much earlier.
I met with Phil Collins auditions in 2003. A question came up that his style and sound were easily recognizable. Several people decided to play his drums until he went out somewhere, and you know what? Nothing like they did not work. On the contrary, on the rented instruments, Phil still sounded like Phil. And you still think that these instruments gave him that very sound?
There is one lover of racing in Michigan, he teaches racing driving. The daughter of one of his students came to study with him. She rolled onto the track in a rented Chevy Cavalier and furnished all the other students balding middle-aged men on their Corvette and Porsche 911. And why? It's simple - she listened attentively to the instructor, calmly and confidently drove the car along the right lanes, instead of trying to drown out the lack of patience and skills with the roar of powerful engines, as others did. The men felt in a deep pool, especially because they furnished them with a 16-year-old girl.
Of course, if you are a pro, you can squeeze every drop of productivity from your car, and a weak machine will limit your capabilities, but if you are an ordinary person, your car, camera, sneakers have very little real impact on your capabilities, because you are determining factor, not your tools.
Catch any virtuoso of his craft, and he, if his sponsors do not hear, will tell you exactly that.
Why are masters whose works you admire so often use all sorts of sophisticated and expensive tools if these tools mean so little? It's simple:
1. Good tools do not block your path, simplifying the way to results. Tools easier require more effort.
2. Due to their greater reliability, they are more suitable for intensive everyday use.
3. Experienced users may find some additional features of expensive equipment convenient. They simplify life, but do not improve results.
4. And in the end, there is nothing wrong with good tools, and if you have money for them, then why not? Just avoid thinking that your tools are responsible for your work.
So, why am I on my pages posing with a giant lens? Yes, because it saves me from the name “Photos by Ken Rowkella”, which sounds clumsy and takes up extra space. The view of the big camera conveys the essence much better and faster, so I can just say “Ken Rockwell.”
Here are photos taken by a guy from the Philippines just with a camera on his cell phone!
And the last example: I bought a used camera, which has not worked correctly autofocus. Two times he traveled to the dealer and back for repairs, and both times returned in the same condition. As an artist, I know how to compensate for this mistake, and it was not easy, because every time I had to make an amendment when focusing. Well, testing this device, I made my best shot of all time. This frame brought me a bunch of awards, and even hung in a gallery in Los Angeles on the site of the original photo of Ansel Adams. When my time came to take a picture, Adamsovuyu photo hoisted into place. Let me remind you that this photo was taken by the device, which, in the end, was returned to the dealer, who agreed that it was impossible to fix it.
The most important thing for this shot was that all my friends had already gone for dinner, and I stayed in that place, suspecting that such a natural phenomenon would occur (crimson sky, as in the picture.) I made a 4-minute exposition with the most ordinary lens. I could make this frame with the same three-dollar camera as these pictures, and it would look the same.
From time to time, hot photographers call me (and only men are always) who disagree with my choice of technology. They accept it as a personal tragedy only because I use something that is not what they use. And who cares? These guys just did not cross their mountain, and still believe that the tools have some kind of abstract value, independent of their use. They consider the tools to be the physical continuation of their body and, of course, they take to my own account my jokes and statements that these tools are not useful for what I do. For example, Leek collectors here hate this page. Any equipment has a different value depending on what you do with it. What suits you may not suit me, and vice versa.
Virtually any camera, no matter how bad or good, can be used to create outstanding photos for magazine covers, winning photo contests and hanging out in art galleries. The quality of a lens or camera has little in common with the quality of the photos they create.
You probably already have everything you really need, just learn how to extract every drop from what is. The best technique will not bring you the best photos, and will not be able to make you the best photographer.
Photographers take photos, not cameras.
It is sad to see how few people understand this, and blame the equipment for their poor results, instead of taking this time to train their vision and ability to manipulate the light and use it.
Buying a new camera will help you get the results you already received. Studying will lead you to the best results.
Do not dump the shortcomings of your photos on the equipment. If in doubt, go to a good photo museum or take a book on the history of photos and see what good technical quality people achieved 50 and 100 years ago. The advantage of modern technology is convenience, not quality. Take another look at my photos of Death Valley. Well, sharp? They are made by a camera, which is 50 years old, and which is more primitive than the current disposable.
I made excellent, both from a technical and artistic point of view, camera shots for $ 10 from Goodwill, and I got to the devil nowhere good garbage with a lens for $ 10,000 and an automatic Nikon.
You need to learn to see and assemble. The more time you worry about the hardware, the less you have to create good photos. Worry about photos, not about equipment.
Everyone knows that a typewriter brand (or the ability to repair this typewriter) has nothing to do with the ability to write an exciting novel, although a better typewriter will make this process more enjoyable. So why do so many perfectly sane people think that a particular type of camera, or a deep knowledge of the characteristics of shutter speeds, lens designs, or camera, has something in common with the ability to create interesting photos other than creating convenience for the photographer?
Just as you need to know how to use a typewriter to type text, you need to be able to use a camera to take pictures, but this is a very small part of the process. Do you know on which computer and which software I created what you are reading now? Of course not, unless you read the relevant page. It matters to me, but not to you, the readers. Those who look at your photos, do not know and do not think about what kind of camera they are made of. It just doesn't matter.
There is a big difference between knowing how and what to do, and the ability to do it, and even a big difference in order to do it well.
We all know how to play the piano: you need to press the keys and, from time to time, on the pedals. The ability to play, and the more so the ability to put the soul into the game, is another topic.
Do not think that the most expensive equipment is the best. Having too much equipment is a direct way to poor results.
More expensive cameras and lenses do not provide anything significant, costing a huge difference in price.
Translation from English by Anton Kovalenko
Source with all the links listed in this article: www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera_russian.htm
Why is it that after sixty years of improving cameras, lens quality, grain, resolution and dynamic range of film, no one can compare with what Ansel Adams did back in the forties of the last century? He didn't even have Photoshop! How did he do it? Most of the attempts are far below the reach, others are just as good, but still others are different, like those of Jack Dykings, and no one can create the same.
Why are photographers packed with the most unique equipment, who with the help of the Internet can determine absolutely exact geographic coordinates of the points Jack and Ansel took off from and who can get to these places with original photos on their hands in order to make an exact copy (which is illegal from the point of view US copyright law, and ugly from the point of view of common sense), nevertheless, get something similar, but not possessing the depth and emotional fullness of the original, which they tried so hard to copy Th?
')
I am not kidding. You can read about these peppers right here. Professional astronomers calculated for them the moment of complete coincidence of conditions, the best for almost twenty years, and 300 of these blind men were dragged at exactly the calculated time to the exactly calculated place. And still, neither clouds, nor snow, nor illumination turned out as they should. That's why Ansel is cool. Naturally, they did not get what they wanted: the best photos are generated by inspiration, not by copying.
Why, even though everyone knows that Photoshop can turn any spoiled frame into a masterpiece, anyway, after hours of “dancing with a tambourine,” the photo gets even worse than it was?
Perhaps this is due to the fact that only the ability to see, the patience and skills of the artist create an image, not his tools.
Walker Evans once said, “People constantly ask me what kind of camera I use. It's not about the camera, but this is it, ”and tapped his temple with his index finger.
The spirit of the father of Jesus Christ, the carpenter Joseph, is credited with creating a marvelous wooden staircase in a church in New Mexico in 1873, and even if anyone is interested in what tools were used. Look where you want, you will find a bunch of scientific discussions on this topic, but nobody is interested in the tools.
Your equipment DOES NOT affect the quality of your photos. The less time and effort you spend on messing around with the equipment, the more time and effort will remain to create good photos. Good equipment simply makes the process of getting results more convenient, quick and easy.
“Any good modern lens is designed to give maximum resolution on large apertures. Using smaller apertures only increases the depth of field ... ”Ansel Adams, June 3, 1937, in response to Edward Weston’s appeal for lenses, pp. 244 of Ansel’s autobiography. 70 years ago, Ansel Adams took stunningly clear pictures without wasting time worrying about the sharpness of his lenses. After seventy years of progress, we would certainly have to pay more attention to creating good photos than comparing photographic tests.
The only thing that is required from the camera is to get out of your way to good photos.
Ernst Haas commented on this idea at a seminar in 1985:
Two guys from Nova Scotia struggled through to this seminar, they are Leika fans, they worked in the photo shop, saved money on Leiki and respected Ernst very much for using Leiki (although he used Nikon for his famous photos to advertise Marlboro, when they came across on hand).
After two days of the seminar, Ernst, up to the limit, endeavored the efforts of these guys to express their adoration to Leika, and when one of them asked another question that implied her superiority, Ernst said: “Lake, shmeyka. The camera does not matter a penny. They only capture what you see. And you should SEE. "
And after that, until the very end of the seminar, no one mentioned Leica, Nikon, Canon, or any other brand of equipment.
He also said: “What is the best wide angle lens? Step back two steps. ”And“ look for Heuricus! ”
(This story about Haas comes from Murad Sayon, a famous photographer from Oxford, Maine, about whom there is so much talk. Some say that this story was previously attributed to Eliot Porter and Cartier Bresson. I found at least three sites claiming to be the official site Haas here, here and here.)
You can admire some of the best photography creations in the world here, they belong to the person who says the same thing here. Here is a lot of evidence that the presence of a large number of lenses only worsens the results. I took these black and white photographs of a three-dollar fifty-year-old camera, more primitive than today's disposable ones. On this site you will find truly amazing work made by the Olympus 8080 soap box.
People know that the cars themselves do not drive, the typewriters themselves do not print the novels, and that Rembrandt’s brushes didn’t paint the pictures themselves, so why do some people think that the cameras are walking around and taking pictures by themselves? The most modern, exotic and expensive car in itself can not even keep the right lane, and you certainly will not get home. No matter how sophisticated your camera is, you are still responsible for arriving at the right place at the right time and for directing the camera in the right direction to get the picture you need. Any camera from time to time requires manual settings, regardless of its perfection. Never blame the camera for not being able to do anything in the world, or for choosing the wrong exposure in difficult conditions.
Here is how I discovered it all for myself:
When it comes to art, be it music, photography, surfing or anything else, there are mountains to be overcome. In the first 20 years, or so, of studying art you are sure that if you had a better tool, camera or board, your results would be no worse than that of a pro. You spend a lot of time fussing with the equipment and trying to get the best tools. After 20 years, you reach the level of other representatives of world-class art, and when one day they come to you for advice on equipment, you suddenly realize for yourself that it’s not about her, and never has been.
You finally understand that the equipment, the accumulation of which you spent so much time and effort, only simplifies the extraction of sounds, or photographing, or movement on the waves, but now you can do the same, albeit with a little more effort, on the junk with which they started. You understand that the main thing is that the equipment does not block your path. You also understand that if the time spent in the romp with the equipment, you would have spent rehearsing, photographing, riding the waves, you would have achieved what you wanted, much earlier.
I met with Phil Collins auditions in 2003. A question came up that his style and sound were easily recognizable. Several people decided to play his drums until he went out somewhere, and you know what? Nothing like they did not work. On the contrary, on the rented instruments, Phil still sounded like Phil. And you still think that these instruments gave him that very sound?
There is one lover of racing in Michigan, he teaches racing driving. The daughter of one of his students came to study with him. She rolled onto the track in a rented Chevy Cavalier and furnished all the other students balding middle-aged men on their Corvette and Porsche 911. And why? It's simple - she listened attentively to the instructor, calmly and confidently drove the car along the right lanes, instead of trying to drown out the lack of patience and skills with the roar of powerful engines, as others did. The men felt in a deep pool, especially because they furnished them with a 16-year-old girl.
Of course, if you are a pro, you can squeeze every drop of productivity from your car, and a weak machine will limit your capabilities, but if you are an ordinary person, your car, camera, sneakers have very little real impact on your capabilities, because you are determining factor, not your tools.
Catch any virtuoso of his craft, and he, if his sponsors do not hear, will tell you exactly that.
Why are masters whose works you admire so often use all sorts of sophisticated and expensive tools if these tools mean so little? It's simple:
1. Good tools do not block your path, simplifying the way to results. Tools easier require more effort.
2. Due to their greater reliability, they are more suitable for intensive everyday use.
3. Experienced users may find some additional features of expensive equipment convenient. They simplify life, but do not improve results.
4. And in the end, there is nothing wrong with good tools, and if you have money for them, then why not? Just avoid thinking that your tools are responsible for your work.
So, why am I on my pages posing with a giant lens? Yes, because it saves me from the name “Photos by Ken Rowkella”, which sounds clumsy and takes up extra space. The view of the big camera conveys the essence much better and faster, so I can just say “Ken Rockwell.”
Here are photos taken by a guy from the Philippines just with a camera on his cell phone!
And the last example: I bought a used camera, which has not worked correctly autofocus. Two times he traveled to the dealer and back for repairs, and both times returned in the same condition. As an artist, I know how to compensate for this mistake, and it was not easy, because every time I had to make an amendment when focusing. Well, testing this device, I made my best shot of all time. This frame brought me a bunch of awards, and even hung in a gallery in Los Angeles on the site of the original photo of Ansel Adams. When my time came to take a picture, Adamsovuyu photo hoisted into place. Let me remind you that this photo was taken by the device, which, in the end, was returned to the dealer, who agreed that it was impossible to fix it.
The most important thing for this shot was that all my friends had already gone for dinner, and I stayed in that place, suspecting that such a natural phenomenon would occur (crimson sky, as in the picture.) I made a 4-minute exposition with the most ordinary lens. I could make this frame with the same three-dollar camera as these pictures, and it would look the same.
From time to time, hot photographers call me (and only men are always) who disagree with my choice of technology. They accept it as a personal tragedy only because I use something that is not what they use. And who cares? These guys just did not cross their mountain, and still believe that the tools have some kind of abstract value, independent of their use. They consider the tools to be the physical continuation of their body and, of course, they take to my own account my jokes and statements that these tools are not useful for what I do. For example, Leek collectors here hate this page. Any equipment has a different value depending on what you do with it. What suits you may not suit me, and vice versa.
Virtually any camera, no matter how bad or good, can be used to create outstanding photos for magazine covers, winning photo contests and hanging out in art galleries. The quality of a lens or camera has little in common with the quality of the photos they create.
You probably already have everything you really need, just learn how to extract every drop from what is. The best technique will not bring you the best photos, and will not be able to make you the best photographer.
Photographers take photos, not cameras.
It is sad to see how few people understand this, and blame the equipment for their poor results, instead of taking this time to train their vision and ability to manipulate the light and use it.
Buying a new camera will help you get the results you already received. Studying will lead you to the best results.
Do not dump the shortcomings of your photos on the equipment. If in doubt, go to a good photo museum or take a book on the history of photos and see what good technical quality people achieved 50 and 100 years ago. The advantage of modern technology is convenience, not quality. Take another look at my photos of Death Valley. Well, sharp? They are made by a camera, which is 50 years old, and which is more primitive than the current disposable.
I made excellent, both from a technical and artistic point of view, camera shots for $ 10 from Goodwill, and I got to the devil nowhere good garbage with a lens for $ 10,000 and an automatic Nikon.
You need to learn to see and assemble. The more time you worry about the hardware, the less you have to create good photos. Worry about photos, not about equipment.
Everyone knows that a typewriter brand (or the ability to repair this typewriter) has nothing to do with the ability to write an exciting novel, although a better typewriter will make this process more enjoyable. So why do so many perfectly sane people think that a particular type of camera, or a deep knowledge of the characteristics of shutter speeds, lens designs, or camera, has something in common with the ability to create interesting photos other than creating convenience for the photographer?
Just as you need to know how to use a typewriter to type text, you need to be able to use a camera to take pictures, but this is a very small part of the process. Do you know on which computer and which software I created what you are reading now? Of course not, unless you read the relevant page. It matters to me, but not to you, the readers. Those who look at your photos, do not know and do not think about what kind of camera they are made of. It just doesn't matter.
There is a big difference between knowing how and what to do, and the ability to do it, and even a big difference in order to do it well.
We all know how to play the piano: you need to press the keys and, from time to time, on the pedals. The ability to play, and the more so the ability to put the soul into the game, is another topic.
Do not think that the most expensive equipment is the best. Having too much equipment is a direct way to poor results.
More expensive cameras and lenses do not provide anything significant, costing a huge difference in price.
Translation from English by Anton Kovalenko
Source with all the links listed in this article: www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera_russian.htm
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/11145/
All Articles