Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Take from a post in the RFF forum - have to admit that I agree with almost everything said below...

"You have to face the fact that 99% of the people who devote an enormous amount of time posting on forums are gear fetishists, and almost exclusively male.

They project their egos and aspirations to the gear they buy and use, they debate endlessly minor points of technical matters, and just like Japanese girls who hang cute animals and charms on their cell phones, they personalize their cameras like totems with accessories, paint jobs, straps, etc etc.

Of course, they must pretend that they are interested in shooting pictures, but this is clearly not the reality, even though they may not realize it themselves. Decorated, "legendary" gear is an end to itself. Hoarding mental facts about gear is the same, like the guys who know every baseball statistic and can recite what happened in every game in the last 100 years. Men like to do it. It's wired into your brains.

Why not embrace the fact that you just like owning esoteric cameras because it reinforces who you want to be? Once in a while you'll get lucky and perhaps take an interesting photo, but drop the pretense and admit you're all little boys with toys. You don't have to be photographers. The ownership of certain cameras lets you maintain the mental construct of who you want to be, not who you really are. The maintenance of a sense of self is hard to do. You need props. You needs objects which reinforce what you think you are and want to be. You'd never leave your house in a polyester leisure suit. You'd never be seen in public with a crummy camera, because you want to feel above the herd. You don't want to be one of them, one of those dopes with a Canon XT DSLR and plastic lens, you want to be special. You want something that makes you superior.

In reality, any name brand modern camera will take perfectly adequate, sharp, well-exposed photos.

OK, some will be more expensive, a bit sharper, what have you, but it doesn't matter. You either have the creative eye or you don't.

If the 50 or 60 year old man wants a Porsche, let him have it to drive to the supermarket. If he wants a Leica and it makes him feel superior, let him have it. If he wants to talk about bokeh or straps all day long, why not.

The man who cannot examine himself and perceive the truth is to be pitied. Deep down, you all know what you are and you aren't, but admitting what you are to yourself is what can put you on anti-depressants."

DISCUSS

I've always said boys never out grow toys, the toys just get more expensive.

I think one maybe two of the things said above are correct, but IMO the majority of it is wrong. I have lots of different 'facts' wired into my brain, whether it's engine sizes on cars, camera specs, computer facts, random data, or the the names of all the cover girls of playboy. These are things I enjoy so I study them, it has nothing to do with my ego.
I'm definitely not a photographer, I'm someone who enjoys photography. My car - just like my camera - are stock, undecorated.

And the only think that can put me on anti-depressants is my doctor

to me, this just reads like flame bait, written by a troll wanting to start an flame war.

I think photography requires both technical expertise and artistic vision, the left and right brains, put together to make the picture.

Sure, they are people who buy equipment because they can, and because they run of out of things to flaunt their wealth with.

But to dismiss "99% of people who devote an enormous amount of time posting on forums" as gear fetishists is just not fair.

And what's wrong with hoarding information, trivia, and specifications?

Why the need to reserve the title of 'photographer' to the exclusive rarefied few?

oh, and to be clear, I do not mean that Ken is a troll and inciting a flame war.

A former girlfriend was more a gearhead than I was (at least with computers)...she always had to get the latest and greatest, and always the newest software and OS with all their bugs, whereas I bought last year's technology and kept it for 3-5 years.

Even my camera equipment is almost all either open-box or used.

I just don't see the need to be the first person to own a product and pay a premium to find the bugs in a product.

OK, I have a 3rd party strap and a hand grip, but those are for personal comfort, not to show off!

Thanks for that, however I should have put the above quote in better context. It was posted on RFF - rangefinderforum.com and it is dominated by users/collectors of shooters of rangefinder cameras (primarily Leica) and the chatter there is disproportionately 'gear' focused. I think TPMG has a much better balance of gear/images/technique/off-topic and community vibe.

Having said that, I found the comments all too relevant in many ways. I've been shooting for many years, used and owned countless types/formats/brands of cameras, mastered most technical aspects of image capture (printing is much more difficult work in progress), and yet often find myself sidetracked by the next piece of gear/lens/ etc... As much as I like to think of myself as more of shooter, I know that I spend more time reading about shooting than I do actually shooting.

The post, although a bit accusatory and extreme at points, did remind me to spend less time worrying/reading/lusting after gear and more time actually using the gear I have.

I thought most people talk more about gears or shooting instead of shooting since they're just killing time. When I'm at work I can't really be shooting, but I can easily browse the web and talk about stuff.

If you are on a forum that talks primarily about gear then its pretty natural that the posters are going to be gear heads, it certainly doesn't preclude that same person from taking good photographs. In most area of things there are collectors that hardly use or don't use what they collect. I don't see whats wrong with that, no need for a shrink it's just a hobby after all.

If you want to be a "good photographer" of course mastering composition skills is at least as important as master the technical side. Gear forums are more of an end to themselves they don't usually help that much in a quest to become a better photographer.

The last 2 paragraphs taken together is basically a rant against people that are perfectly happy to spend their day talking gear, plus with some of the writer's personal issues thrown in for good measure.

This is an interesting discussion, and one that has been had on other forums many many times! I know they are constantly discussing this over at Fred Miranda's forum, as there is quite a mixture of serious shooters and gearheads there. I would agree with Ken's statement that TPMG has a good balance of discussion/images/events, etc. That's what makes TPMG a good place to be.

I would count myself lucky, that while I might like to talk gear from time to time, I am not someone who spends 99% of the time talking on the forum and 1% of the time shooting. I'd rather say its a 20% forum to 80% shooting scenerio with myself. I have several photography projects I am working on, for example yesterday, I was out in the morning shooting fall colour at Edward Gardens, then last night shooting amateur female boxing. I spent the majority of yesterday doing photography! What a great day it was. Today I am off to Black Creek - another project I have been working on.

I think no matter what forum or group you belong to, there will always be individuals who are gear heads. Its the nature of the hobby. Some people are in it for the technology, and some people are in it for the art, and some like a mixture of both. I guess that is the nature of the beast.

I think that us males DO have the gear bug wired into us. however its when that knowledge is not channeled towards using the tools you have spent countless hours researching towards using them when problems occur.

For example im sure if i landed a million dollars right now id bye me a house & probably spend the other half on camera stuff, almost exclusively (and id probably be able to name off what i would get too).

Yet instead of spending time on a forum debating what greatness i could achive with that Canon EF 50 f/1.0L, i'm editing the images that were captured with what i have & they look quite nice. I would like to think i have used the tools i have to their strengths.

And finally, what would the market be without the gearheads who just NEED to get the new camera the moment it comes out they make the Craigslist market go round & i would like to extend my dearest thanks to them for that.

It seems to me that that original post (not Ken's post but the original RF post), in a bit of an abrasive way, has identified two hobbies/motivations for people:

a) Making photographs; and

b) collecting cameras/reveling in the technical aspects of camera equipment (ie. being a gear head)

With respect to a), being a good photographer in most cases requires knowing the technical characteristics of your gear (and how to use it)- and knowing what gear is appropriate for the purpose and how to use it to achieve that purpose. Sometimes one tries other gear to shake up your process for making photographs it may facilitate changing your compositions - or help you to focus on certain aspects of composition - or it may allow you to accomplish something that you were not able to accomplish with the original gear. Often there is a technical solution to a problem- one needs to know the technical aspects to find those technical solutions.

The latter b), is probably enjoying the technical aspects (or workmanship etc.) of the camera equipment- not for the images that you produce with it but for the sake of enjoying the equipment/technical aspects, or what one can produce with it.

I agree with metrix, that being a gear head and a good photographer are not mutually exclusive- one can do both, and I suspect a lot of people do both- camera equipment can be fascinating. It may be just important to recognize what motivates you- and govern yourself accordingly.

Where I think the original RF post is off is in attributing motives to people who post technical information on websites. - and in a lot of cases I'm sure it is people passing time between opportunities to shoot as was mentioned before. In any event, I find it very generous when other people share the information they acquire.

Cheers!

-J

Online, I like to talk gear. Offline, I'm shooting, and do not like to talk gear. There's only a few people that I will talk gear with when I see them

Anything I put on a DSLR is always for a practical reason, but dressing up the older cameras is more for fun, I find the older RF's, manual SLRs etc to have nice classic lines, chrome actually fits, paint wear looks cool and the accessories often have more style than function.

If we did everything for just practical reasons, then we'd all be fine wearing ugly clothes

Balance in all things. I "try" to follow that mantra in life but it can be difficult. Often times to learn things in a rapid fashion it is most efficient to immerse yourself in the subject matter. You have to become addicted, so to speak, at least for a short period of time. Then you need to control yourself and find the balance again -- easier said than done.

Photographic gear is only a means to an end. It can be fun to talk about but you can't lose sight of the goal - taking good pictures. If you can't produce decent pictures after years of learning the "theory" then you should be disappointed, at least I would be.

I tend to respect those who have fabulous pictures and talk little, rather than those who talk a lot and only have "so so" pictures. As they say, the proof is in the putting.

If you really want a challenge in photography learn to improve your composition, creativity, timing, etc. Try to understand why a picture looks good or doesn't look good. These are the things I struggle with every day and what keeps me interested. There is nothing better than looking at a photograph and being captivated by its artistic beauty. This is the Art of Photography and not merely the mechanics of it.

Sorry, I talk too much and shoot too little.

Hey Ken, I also share the frustrations of Hector. Some people are more proud of their gear than their photos. As you know, I've got a lot of gear, and I sometimes think I wouldve been a better photographer if I ony had one camera (Daido and sakura_love come to mind).

One of the fetishes/fantasies is seeing someone elses photo, taken with such-and-such gear, and wanting to produce the same kind of photos, so you need to get that gear. It's not ideal, but I'm sure we all do it to some extent. A Magnum photographer, a Leica makes you not. But let's take a step back and see if we're really limited by the abilites of out cameras or ourselves.

Sorry..meant to write... pudding, not "putting" ..

when I was shopping for camera I haunted numerous sites, equipment forums. After buying I continued to visit a couple of them: curiosity, growing familiarity, perchance to learn.

I realized that on brand specific fora, regardless of brand, the quality of image making is universally bad. Comments and critiques were beyond comprehension: extremely poor images garnering numerous complements.

Of course many people are beginners or at various stages of skills development, technical, creative and critical.

But it remains a universal truth: brand specific fora = terrible photography.

I'm sure there's people who love and hate this topic... lol...
for the ones w/o the gears would brag about their skills.. (infact their skills make me scratch my head) and for the ones with no skills would brag about their FF cameras...
like some full frame fanboys brag about this good and that good full frame gives them..

interesting topic, sometimes im thinking if upgrading my camera will it possibly gives me better pictures.. let's say upgrading a 1d mk3 to a 1d mk4..

i was shooting both 40D and 1D mk3 for the whole summer, the 1D definetly gives me better hit rate and better iso performance.. but image quality wise both are pretty much the same... infact im still planning to upgrade my 40D to a 7D.. yes im a guy and im a gear head

Does all this pertain to professional photographers or hobbyists? Cheers.

not sure the original poster made the distinction.. clearly the OP made some broad generalizations which clearly don't apply to all photographers, however I think that since gear is a necessary aspect of photography each person has to find the right balance between gear and the technical aspects of photography and actually 'doing' ... I can only speak of my own experience and have learned primarily through trial and error, not reading about someone else's experience with a particular piece of gear, but by using it. What I have learned is that most 'improvements' in lens technology (with exceptions) is incremental and for most practical purposes (as a hobbiest), the next generation of whatever lens, isn't going to make a difference in my photography.

I'm not as familiar with developments in sensor technology and although the D700/D3 and even the D300 offer improvements (significant in the case of the D700/D3), my D200 does pretty much everything I ask of it and I'm under no illusions that an upgraded body will improve my image making.

I think that some online forums tend to perpetuate gear lust through dissecting technological developments, often times to the exclusion of discussion about picture making. I think there is room for both types of discussions on online forums, however I personally prefer looking at images.

So next time you plan to post/debate something of a technical nature, try to remember to post a couple of pictures and encourage discussion about them as well.

Most Pro photographers are I know are also gear heads. They take great pics, but always somehow justify getting more than what they need or even switch systems entirely.

This is modern human nature. Why not debate about "minor points of technical matters"? If they enjoy it, so be it. Those who don't enjoy it can simply stay away from the conversation. Why does it bother people so? There's room for both camps. Cheers.

In all honesty I can see both sides. I just upgraded my 10D to a 40D. Both used both at the time of purchase 2 generations behind.

I got a lot of good years out of that camera. 2 major reasons for the upgrade. ISO quality (the 10d cannot compete) and just raw speed. It took about 10 seconds to display a raw image in the camera. Reasons I did not upgrade for was sharpness and picture quality (ISO 200and less). In fact the 10D rocks in those areas.

My other major purchase was a decent lens ($800 used). You cannot fake a quality lens.

I have been building studio equipment over the last 2 years too.

So in some respects YES I am a gear head. But I try to balance needs over wants. Value over specs. I could not justify $1700-2000 for a new camera. Some reviewers saying the newest camera has some minor feature that I will never use. Like do you really need 18 megapixels? Do you need a camera that can take 10 frames a second? Is a full frame camera what you really need? You just need to put it in perspective. Enjoy your toys and have fun if this is a hobby.

Take from a discussion from facebook - have to remind you to read the title first.

"You have to face the fact that 99% of the people who devote an enormous amount of time surfing on facebook are Prada fetishists, and almost exclusively female.

They project their egos and aspirations to the LV hand bags they buy and use, they debate endlessly minor points of design and style, and just like Leica fans who personalizes their cameras, they demand their dresses to be unique in the world.

Of course, they must pretend that they are truely hot, but this is clearly not the reality, even though they may not realize it themselves. Decorated, "legendary" Gucci wallet is an end to itself. Hoarding mental facts about is the same, like the girls who know all the hobbies of the male celebrities and can recite all the results in every Annual MuchMusic Awards in the last 100 years. Women like to do it. It's wired into your brains.

Why not embrace the fact that you just like owning esoteric brandnames because it reinforces who you want to be? Once in a while you'll get lucky and perhaps have a guy who thinks you are pretty, but drop the pretense and admit you're all little ugly whores with brandname covers. You don't have to be beautiful. The ownership of Victoria Secret lets you maintain the mental construct of who you want to be, not who you really are. The maintenance of a sense of self is hard to do. You need props. You needs objects which reinforce what you think you are and want to be. You'd never leave your house in cotton underwears. You'd never be seen in public with Nike backpack, because you want to feel above the herd. You don't want to be one of them, one of those dopes wears a pair of Geordino blue jeans and Converse sneakers, you want to be special. You want something that makes you superior.

In reality, any name brand clothings will show the sweetness, elegance, femininity of a beauty.

OK, some will be more expensive, a bit sexier, what have you, but it doesn't matter. You either have the true beauty or you don't.

If the 50 or 60 year old woman wants a 4 caret diamond ring , let her have it to attract free drinks at a pub. If she wants a De Beers and it makes her feel superior, let her have it. If she wants to talk about clarity, colour and cut all day long, why not.

The woman who cannot examine herself and perceive the truth is to be pitied. Deep down, you all know what you are and you aren't, but admitting what you are to yourself is what can put you on anti-depressants."

END


I know the above fictional fiction doesn't make sense.
I just couldn't help but making this post.

LOL, I was thinking about the exact same parallelism but I would never have done an outstanding job as you did! :clap: