[casil403]

Is it the chef or the ingredients that makes a good meal?

Being a Professional Chef by trade, I can say it is both. However, that being said .....
A Good Chef can make a great meal with fabulous ingredients...a Great chef can make an great meal with adequate ingredients.
I think like any profession/hobby, the same rules apply.

[Blue]

Being a Professional Chef by trade, I can say it is both. However, that being said .....
A Good Chef can make a great meal with fabulous ingredients...a Great chef can make an great meal with adequate ingredients.
I think like any profession/hobby, the same rules apply.

Likewise a brain surgeon is going to have a challenge with a box knife and flash light working in a stair well.

[casil403]

Likewise a brain surgeon is going to have a challenge with a box knife and flash light working in a stair well.

Unless his name is Dr. McGuyver!

[EyeSpy]

I have left my camera setup and ready to fire for weeks on end in our studio.
And it has yet to take even a single shot on its own.

The next step will be taking photo's with my bear hands.
I'll let you know how that goes as soon as I get results

Superbily Succint !!

[tuco]

I never saw a Deuce Coup mechanic working with off brand pipe wrench is what I'd tell them. Those guys argue the virtues of Snap-on, Mac, Mat-co, and Cornwell and snicker how Crapsman is for serious amateur shade tree guys.

Having been employed once as a mechanic and therefore a "professional" at one time, I can tell you I'd repair a customer's car at the same quality level be it Snap-On or Craftsman tools in my hand. The only difference would be how much -I- enjoyed using them which doesn't mean squat to the customer. I still have a Snap-On tool boxes and lots of their tools, btw.

Yeah, but having rebuilt more than one engine in my youth, I can say that if all you need is a half-inch socket, and you don't pull an engine every day, the Sears version works just fine. The problem comes when you start showing off the shop, rather than the work.

I'm no working pro, either, but I do get that to shoot a hockey game or an executive portrait on site, you need proper and specialized equipment. As a working pro, you need a level of reliability that is far and above the use by an amateur. However, most tyros like me do need to fight the urge to get hung up on getting equipment to do those special jobs when we mostly take the kind of photos for which cameras have been made for a century, and instead concentrate on trying to bring something that remotely approximates skill or creativity to the subject. When I hear the level at which some folks turn up their nose at a lens, I do hope that the work that their results really justify the scrutiny.

I've cranked a wrench once or twice myself. That Craftsman might be ok most of the time but when you're in a tight spot between a pulley and the engine the thinner, stronger Snapon makes the difference.

It IS the photographer. Why? Because a good photographer knows his equipment. He KNOWS what can be done with it. More important he knows what he can't do with it and works within those parameters. But he also knows how far he can push the equipment every so often.

For many years I ran a press. They said my equipment couldn't run 4 color. But I did it. How? I knew my equipment. I knew which 4 color jobs would work. Better still I knew which ones couldn't because of the press

[Rupert]

I have some nice glass, and find it does make a difference in the ability to capture your subject under varying conditions. I also see some with glass far inferior to mine that do better work than I do....which is frustrating. Still, since I shoot Squirrels, I manage to stay pretty well satisfied.
Short answer, it is both the shooter and the gear most of the time.
Regards!

[Ratmagiclady]

I have some nice glass, and find it does make a difference in the ability to capture your subject under varying conditions. I also see some with glass far inferior to mine that do better work than I do....which is frustrating. Still, since I shoot Squirrels, I manage to stay pretty well satisfied.
Short answer, it is both the shooter and the gear most of the time.
Regards!

Well, a great deal of this certainly depends on what you're trying to do.

I don't think that anyone would dispute that if you had access to my kit rather than your own, you'd find yourself at a relative disadvantage when it comes to squirrels. (Here, try my cheapie Takumar-A zoom! ) For me, the long lens stuff just isn't a big deal, but I'd probably choose pretty similar stuff as you if it was, or if the money was less to me.

Likewise, while people can do great stuff with slow lenses, they'd be hard-pressed to do a lot of what I do with a 3.5 or something, at least and enjoy much of a success ratio. Sometimes it's about which aspects you take seriously, too. To me, a nice longer lens would tend to be a luxury, but I know I wouldn't be carrying this big Sigma 28/1.8 around without darn good reasons.

[TaoMaas]

Like I said earlier...this is SUCH a bogus discussion because the answer will change with each situation. Sometimes it's the gear that makes the difference...sometimes it's the photographer...sometimes it's access...and sometimes it's just the emotional attachment that's the determining factor. There is no one answer.

[Reportage]

Like I said earlier...this is SUCH a bogus discussion because the answer will change with each situation. Sometimes it's the gear that makes the difference...sometimes it's the photographer...sometimes it's access...and sometimes it's just the emotional attachment that's the determining factor. There is no one answer.

which is why i always give the answer, go shoot hockey when i myself am posed with the same question.

[Rupert]

Like I said earlier...this is SUCH a bogus discussion because the answer will change with each situation. Sometimes it's the gear that makes the difference...sometimes it's the photographer...sometimes it's access...and sometimes it's just the emotional attachment that's the determining factor. There is no one answer.

You are of course, exactly right.....but not everyone understands this. How many have heard.....
"That's a great photo! You must have a very good camera!"

To many non photographers, it is only a matter of the camera, with not much thought of any skills being involved. I once told a lady that made that statement, "Yep, I sent my camera out for a stroll, and it just came back with this shot you like so much.....fantastic camera!"
Best Regards!

[Jodokast96]

I just want to touch on the cooking analogy being used, as I feel it's a bit off the mark. A good cook with the best ingredients will make a good meal with both good and bad cookware. A good cook with average ingredients will still probably make a good meal with either set of cookware. In both cases, the meal may not be the best it can be with the bad cookware, but will still be better than what a bad cook will conjure up with the best of everything. Applying that to photogs, you've got the cook (photog), ingredients (subject), and cookware (gear).

[Ratmagiclady]

You are of course, exactly right.....but not everyone understands this. How many have heard.....
"That's a great photo! You must have a very good camera!"

Well, understanding the sentiment, you know, that's usually kind of my cue to say, "Ah, I like him. (handing over,) Here. Have a look."

If you're positive about it, I guess it kind of works both ways: you can be like, basically, 'See, it's not a *magic* camera, just kind of like it's a camera with a standard transmission,' here's the clutch, and here's this, and here's that....

I find that when people talk about 'things,' it's not like they mean to downplay the human element, it's just how people kind of talk about stuff. They don't talk about *driving,* mostly, they talk about *cars,* .....kind of funny, really, but they don't say in as many words, 'How do you do that?' but sometimes that's what they're curious about. (Ever been curious about something and not felt like you knew enough to ask an intelligent question? Maybe said something lame instead? Like that. )

Or whatever. People are funny. I still think it's a great thing about carrying an odder brand: it *clearly* breaks the ice for some people. And if you think that's cool, try shooting an obvious antique.

[tuco]

I have a story that taught me a lesson about photography many years ago way back in the film only days. You remember them, right Anyway, I was going to hangout at a friends cabin for the weekend. He invited some old friends of his to come join him too.

One guy that arrived earned a living from photography. He had with him one of those cheap, disposable cameras you could buy at the time that had film already loaded and you sent the whole camera in to get the film removed and developed. He had taken it apart and put in some BW film and duct taped it back together. I was there with my Pentax 6x7 that I had only recently purchased. I remember thinking, wtf, you can't take a good picture with that. It has a terrible lens and I felt what a waste of effort since I was all so impressed with the sharp images I was getting from this new MF camera.

Next time I went to the cabin there was a framed picture hanging on the wall this guy took with that camera. The picture was of the guy who owned the cabin and it captured so many elements in it that defined this person and it literally told a story in a still image. I was so amazed that the quality of the image was the last thing I saw in that picture. He took advantage of what little features the camera had well too; namely, its panoramic format and DOF.

Yeah, you wouldn't submit it to an advertisement agency for a full-spread ad in a magazine or make a large blow up of it but it still was an awesome picture. I guess awesome because at the time I didn't think you could take a good picture without a quality camera.

Would it have been twice the picture with a quality camera? Maybe it would hanging in a art gallery but on his wall in the cabin it didn't matter. That day I stopped judging pictures by the sharpness of the image and started to focus on the content in them more.

[johnmflores]

Well, understanding the sentiment, you know, that's usually kind of my cue to say, "Ah, I like him. (handing over,) Here. Have a look."

If you're positive about it, I guess it kind of works both ways: you can be like, basically, 'See, it's not a *magic* camera, just kind of like it's a camera with a standard transmission,' here's the clutch, and here's this, and here's that....

I find that when people talk about 'things,' it's not like they mean to downplay the human element, it's just how people kind of talk about stuff. They don't talk about *driving,* mostly, they talk about *cars,* .....kind of funny, really, but they don't say in as many words, 'How do you do that?' but sometimes that's what they're curious about. (Ever been curious about something and not felt like you knew enough to ask an intelligent question? Maybe said something lame instead? Like that. )

Or whatever. People are funny. I still think it's a great thing about carrying an odder brand: it *clearly* breaks the ice for some people. And if you think that's cool, try shooting an obvious antique.

If the gear wasn't that important, why are we spending so much time on this forum looking at 100% crops, debating the drawing quality of lenses, peeking in the shadows for noise? The shear volume of gear-related discussions on this forums shows how important we think it is. The Critique section of this forum is a ghost town by comparison.