[ChristianRock]

Just on a percentage basis, most of us probably should never think of buying a new camera to improve our photography if we are shooting 16 MP or more. Most of us are shooting far below the max levels of the camera we own. I's hard to recommend gear over training to more than 1 in 20, especially on forums like this where the level of excellence in the gear is common to all, and the choice is great gear, or even greater gear.

I went and read your post with all the added stuff and, you know, you talk just way too much sense

[photoptimist]

As important as composition is, a big reason that people want to buy better gear is what might be called "keeper weeping."

That is, the person takes what they think is an awesome "keeper" photo (in their opinion which may be shared by others or not). But then they look more closely, try to bring up the shadows, or think about printing the image really large and confront the limitations of their gear. They then "weep" over what might have been if only they had more megapixels, better dynamic range, a sharper lens, better lens coatings.

Thus, people obsess over better gear to ensure that when they do get a keeper, it will have the detail, clarity, and pixel count to look great.

[pepperberry farm]

I went and read your post with all the added stuff and, you know, you talk just way too much sense

and that should not be allowed at all when we are trying to spend each others' money....

[ChristianRock]

As important as composition is, a big reason that people want to buy better gear is what might be called "keeper weeping."

That is, the person takes what they think is an awesome "keeper" photo (in their opinion which may be shared by others or not). But then they look more closely, try to bring up the shadows, or think about printing the image really large and confront the limitations of their gear. They then "weep" over what might have been if only they had more megapixels, better dynamic range, a sharper lens, better lens coatings.

Thus, people obsess over better gear to ensure that when they do get a keeper, it will have the detail, clarity, and pixel count to look great.

That makes a lot of sense and it's what made me move on from the K20D, for example.

I find that now, however, despite not having a K-1 yet , my gear isn't limiting me... so I should stop looking at new gear...









(ahahhaha yes that was a good one!!!)

[normhead]

Agreed - but don't go knocking old point and shoots I keep a Sony DSC-P200 (2004) in the house, mostly for nostalgia these days. But back in the 2000s it gave me a lot of good pictures, some that I printed quite large...

I know a photographer who still has a thing for old CCD point and shoots... and gets good results from them. And then there was this piece from Ming Thein... (that was a Nikon Coolpix L25 with a tiny 1/2.9" sensor, smaller than a lot of cell phones nowadays...)

And some of my favourite images were taken with my *ist D, and our best seller ever was taken with T's Optio W80 water proof shock proof point and shoot.

That's what the knowledgeable say all the time. A good photographer can get good interesting images from almost anything. A poor photographer can get bad images from almost anything.

You say it over and over, it hits the wall, but it doesn't stick.
I have no idea why not.

Honestly, the reason I buy most lenses and cameras , is to have something new to shoot with. Hobby shooting, being able to go out everyday for a week with different lenses and bodies keeps things fresh and gives you a whole new perspective. There are those who claim shooting with primes forces you to see differently. I'd suggest shooting with different lenses, zooms and primes and becoming familiar with both increase your perspective exponentially more than that. You end up looking for compelling pictures, instead of forcing an image into the framing of the lens you have today.

But of course, that's a whole different debate.

[pepperberry farm]

I find that now, however, despite not having a K-1 yet , my gear isn't limiting me... so I should stop looking at new gear...

my gear isn't limiting me - but I am curious about that next lens....

[normhead]

As important as composition is, a big reason that people want to buy better gear is what might be called "keeper weeping."

That is, the person takes what they think is an awesome "keeper" photo (in their opinion which may be shared by others or not). But then they look more closely, try to bring up the shadows, or think about printing the image really large and confront the limitations of their gear. They then "weep" over what might have been if only they had more megapixels, better dynamic range, a sharper lens, better lens coatings.

Thus, people obsess over better gear to ensure that when they do get a keeper, it will have the detail, clarity, and pixel count to look great.

Ya, they blame the gear not the photographer. It doesn't work.
Full frame or APS-c, you be the judge. - PentaxForums.com

It's very rare that an average shooter will take a picture that will be better with better gear.

There's just too much chance that, it wasn't the camera, if they lack shadow detail, they didn't expose for the shadows.

If the images lack resolution, they should have used a tripod, or a lower ISO. There are a myriad of reasons why a picture is in some way lacking, and a very small percentage is "I need a better camera."

When I bought my K-5 to replace the K-20D it was for sunset shadow detail, and yet a year later looking back at the photos that helped me make the decision, I can definitely say there was a difference, but the images were very close to identical, and my perception that the K-5 was much better was created by focusing on the weaknesses of one part of the frame when if I'd looked at another part of the frame I would have come to a different decision, the differences were in the exposures, not in the type of camera used.

It is really easy to jump on these kinds of comparisons if you really want a new camera.

We see it here all the time. People post a picture that illustrates why they needed a new camera, and their analysis is flawed. But they already have the new camera so why say anything?
Evaluating why a particular image is the way it is , is a skill like any other. Not everyone does it well. Some rare people are improving their photography, but a much larger number are fooling themselves.

Or as us early programmers used to say... garbage in, garbage out. Excellent decisions are made only by those with excellent skills of analysis. Most often people just look for the advice that recommends doing what they want to do anyway, and go with that.

I've done that way more often than I'm going to admit.


---------- Post added 06-12-20 at 05:43 PM ----------

my gear isn't limiting me - but I am curious about that next lens....

New lenses are fun, a different way of seeing the world.
It's a whole different world out there, every time you change lenses.

---

Last edited by normhead; 06-12-2020 at 02:49 PM.

[robbiec]

Op is right, composition is a big part of getting an Explore or at least it is with me. If I'm cropping for a Flickr upload, rule of thirds all the way. Lens plays a part too I think, my must successful is a Leitz Weitzlar (Leica) 65/2.8, followed by FA50 Macro, then 43, and A100/2.8 Macro. I only post to Flickr when I'm joining the Ladies & Gentlemen in the Singles-In challenges and I've oftened wondered if that group has a dispositionally high Explore rate
The other observation I would make is that when I was picking up Explores more regularly, I was more in tune with my photography, a new lens here and there always helped as you were trying different stuff to figure it out. Know your camera and its strength and weaknesses so it's operation is intuitive, Flickr seems to like the older style rendering on one hand, but getting close in with a macro seems to help too.

[rogerstg]

Composition or camera gear?

Neither. IMO, it's subject matter. For example, a poorly composed image taken with a 4mp P&S of a chupacabra would get tons of hits.

[pepperberry farm]

OK - I did it - I sat here and made the list of explores and the lenses that captured each image....

totals were easy - 143 explores, made with 55 different lenses...

breaking down those numbers produced some interesting results, however:

Top Explored Lenses - five or more explores, with a couple of ties:

1. Voigtlander Ultron 40mm f2 SL II
1. Auto Chinon MCM 55mm f1.7 Macro
3. Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 II APO HSM
4. Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 72B
4. Pentax SMC A 20mm f2.8
4. DA 21mm f3.2 Limited
4. DA 40mm f2.8 Limited
4. Tamron Adaptall-2 012BB
4. Sigma 24mm f1.8 EX DG
4. Cosina 55mm f1.2


Lenses Used on the Top-Five-Explored Photos

1. Vivitar (Cosina) 100mm f3.5 Macro
2. Auto Chinon MCM 55mm f1.7 Macro
3. Pentax SMC 35mm f2
4. Pentax FA* 300mm f4.5 ED IF
5. Cosina 55mm f1.2


Lenses Used on the Top-Five-Viewed Photos - not just explored or even faved, but just viewed

1. Cosina 55mm f1.2
2. Pentax SMC 35mm f2
3. Auto Chinon MCM 55mm f1.7 Macro
4. Sigma 24mm f1.8 EX DG
5. Vivitar (Cosina) 100mm f3.5 Macro

hmm...

a couple of thoughts on these shots - a large majority are from my participation in the Single In and the Daily Challenges, which mean I shoot every day, day in and day out, so I am uploading at least a couple of shots per day to flickr

additionally, it would appear that shots (of mine) that hit explore are just about anything with sky in it, dogs, or glass with light reflections...

as far as composition vs gear - the newest body I use is a K-3 and you can see not too many 'expensive' or 'exotic' lenses in my collection of explores, but more along the lines of what I would consider 'standard' lenses for Pentax shooters....

[normhead]

Flickr explore just doesn't like me. My explored image is not typical of my favourite work. And there's only one.

[stevebrot]

Neither. IMO, it's subject matter. For example, a poorly composed image taken with a 4mp P&S of a chupacabra would get tons of hits.

So true!

A quick survey of each day's 500 selections will show that subject matter may well ensure a flurry of favs and views.* There is a disproportionate number of "fan" subjects, a good example of which might be trains and train engines. A photo of either of those subjects included into any of the established train groups will have a decent chance of being explored.


Steve

* Strong indicators of "interestingness", at least in the eyes of the explore algorithm.

[normhead]

So true!

A quick survey of each day's 500 selections will show that subject matter may well ensure a flurry of favs and views.* There is a disproportionate number of "fan" subjects, a good example of which might be trains and train engines. A photo of either of those subjects included into any of the established train groups will have a decent chance of being explored.


Steve

* Strong indicators of "interestingness", at least in the eyes of the explore algorithm.

All the train tracks through here were torn up 50 years ago although this was the heaviest used train route during WW1 in all of Canada. I guess I got here 100 years to late.

[stevebrot]

A few years ago, when my first image was explored, I did some research on "The Magic Donkey" and the explore algorithm. There are tricks to explore and even a few "poisons".

First the poisons (not an exhaustive list):

• More than one explore per week seems to be unusual. Keep that in mind when posting images that you believe might be good candidates and which you really would like to have explored.
• Be aware that sharing to some groups with huge memberships will result in disqualification. The Magic Donkey does not like to be gamed.
• Spamming multiple groups also upsets the donkey.
• Memes will result in an administrative removal and may well black flag an account.
• NSFW images are also banned

Now a few tricks and hints gleaned from various sources:

• The explore algorithm does seem to know when a photo has good composition.
• It also likes bold display of color.
• Beyond basics, The Magic Donkey is obsessed with interestingness, which it measures by tallying favs and views and the rates at which these occur. an early surge in either will attract the donkey's attention. One of my posts was explored within an hour of posting, based entirely on dozen or so early favs and twice as many views.
• The above point may influence time of day for a post.
• Because of the importance of favs and views, it is a good thing to have followers who will see your stuff and to belong to groups where your work will be appreciated. Sharing to groups also is a good source of followers as might be promoting your Flickr posts on social media and places like Pentax Forums.*
• The Magic Donkey plays favorites, meaning that previous success on explore is a strong predictor of future success.
• The rules for explore should be expected to change over time.
• Accurate tagging is a good thing in that it drives traffic to both individual images and your photostream. This is particularly true for geographical features and locations of interest. Tags of factual reference are also helpful, i.e. tagging camera brand and model in a camera portrait.
• Pets, anything collectible, flowers, and macros do well as do overwhelmingly beautiful landscapes.
• Post often and post stuff that appeals to you and with any luck, what appeals to you will appeal to an audience.

If you truly want a deep dive into "explore theory", the stickies on the Flickr "in explore" group discussion are an incredible resource.

in explore on Flickr | group discussions

Steve

* Sharing the photo earlier on this thread of the White House Ruin appears to have resulted in two more favs for that image, not that I shared with that intent.

[pcrichmond]

Nice thread and great reading of the replies.
Interesting find on the response to your lenses vs composition.
From what I've experienced, the camera only captures, the lens adds our (the photographers) personal touch while the composition is what ultimately appeals to the viewers personal taste.
If someone doesn't like the composition, rarely will they give an image a second glance to discern if they like the bokeh, sharp detail or anything else.
If the image captures them, then they start to say they like the way an aspect created by the photography works or doesn't for they're own taste.

---------- Post added 06-13-20 at 11:40 AM ----------

Or as us early programmers used to say... garbage in, garbage out. Excellent decisions are made only by those with excellent skills of analysis. Most often people just look for the advice that recommends doing what they want to do anyway, and go with that.

I've done that way more often than I'm going to admit.

How true. As my photography teacher used to say - you can make a bad print from a great negative but you can't put detail into a print from a negative that doesn't have any.