Jump to content

Search Photo by Equipment


dougbrill

Recommended Posts

I know people want equipment info, and that alone is enough reason to provide it, but it's really not that useful.

 

Give a typical image size (anything up to 1200 pixels), you can't tell much about lens quality, you can't tell much about camera quality and most images will have been edited with photoshop anyway so even things like color, contrast, saturation and shapness probably don't reflect a whole lot about the image which the camera/lens produced.

 

As I said, if people want it, that's enough reason to provide it, I just hope people don't try to read things into images that simply aren't there. A really good image is far more likely to be produced by a really good photographer with Photoshop skills than simply by using the "best" camera with the "best" lens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howard, I'd like to know why yo think this would have any impact on ratings?<br><br>

Bob, I tend to disagree about the image quality. This image, though most likely taken by a good photographer also most likely is taken with a good lens, one that I would not hesitate to buy (if I used canon) after seeing this image.<A href="http://www.photo.net/photo/6915346"><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6915346-md.jpg"></a>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Douglas: I started here at Photo.net in 2003. Back then, the equipment fields were being filled in by people, and in the main gallery most of the photos had listings right underneath of the equipment used. After a while, after I'd read a few hundred posts about equipment I began to get the impression that certain equipment had more "snob appeal" than other equipment here. I happened to be (and still am) using Kodak digital and 35mm cameras. I saw quite a bit of dissing of Kodak hardware in the forums,and at the same time I also noticed that fewer and fewer people were listing their camera equipment with their photos. It seemed that the top dollar latest large sensor digitals were still appearing, but now I'm not sure I see anything much in those fields when I click on "Details".

 

My average ratings have climbed over the past four years. I don't really know if I'm that much better a photog. I think it's partly because people subliminally expect to see better photos from bigger sensored, and more expensive cameras from Canon or Nikon. If they don't know that my stuff comes out of a lowly Kodak Z612 and Panasonic LS75 I think that I probably miss getting the slightly lower score in some cases.

 

To risk going long here, I recently had a photo exhibit in our town. One of those who stopped by said he really liked my photos a lot. He uses a Nikon APS sensored camera. A way into our conversation I pulled out my little Panasonic LS75 to take a picture of another friend/artist across the aisle talking to an important person who was looking at her paintings. Then this guy says, "Gee, I hope you're not taking all of these with THAT CAMERA!" I really didn't know what to say to this poor guy who'd thought that you have to spend a thousand bucks to make a decent photo. So, that's what I mean. I'd rather not advertise my inferior taste in cameras and lowly financial state when ratings will be received. I'm not asking for therapy, just giving the reason for my earlier post. Thanks, for asking. I still love coming here, but am usually staying beneath the radar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howard, Thanks for the explanation and I can completely see how that would affect ratings.<br><br>

I do try to enter all of my equipment used on my images. Some of my older film stuff I may have forgotten what lens I used. But I see this site as a place to learn, one aspect of that is equipment, like knowing that a certain perspective was achieved by using a 12mm lens.<br><br>

I looked at your portfolio and your images, and really, your composition is outstanding. Equipment will have no impact on that aspect of photography but I think you would agree with me that it does have an impact on technical quality.<br><br>

I also do not have a budget for expensive equipment. I'll steal a sentence from you "To risk going long here"; When I decided to move to digital the Nikon D80 had just come onto the market at somewhere around $800 for the body. A fellow photographer asked me if I would have been happy with a D50 when it was new on the market and my answer was "of course". Then why would I not be happy with it now. So I bought a used D50 for $300 and am very happy with it.<br>

My point is, if I am going to spend some money on equipment I would really like to see the results that other photographers are getting with the same setup. I know Nikon is going to get great shots for their adds even with their worst equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...