This picture here is proof that camera equipment helps a lot in your pictures.

[Soulblade88]

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8570/16685226946_dfd5bbc2f3_b.jpg

You look at the photo the main subject should be the golden tooth temple but you see cars, pedestrians, cyclists all in the picture and on top of that there are trees and other buildings all vying for the person's attention. There are really so many elements in the picture frame and if this was posted in the critique section i think all of these would be mentioned. Yet all because of his camera and also because of the photo editing software used the picture does look good. The people, buildings all have a luminated like quality on them that you won't see were you to say use a cmaera phone to take and just post here without editing with software. Try using say a lower quality camera and take the same exact picture by standing at that spot and people will say it doesn't look nice but they won't comment on the camera used at all but on the skill of the picture taker.

 

[Bart Tan]

this is what i always trying to say, but there r still members here who disagree while having the latest camera body n $xxxx lens

 

[ahblack]

I'm kinda lost in between your words... but I'm guessing you were trying to say "people criticize photo based on the image quality", am I right?

If that's the case, I think you will have to outline what's being "good" and "pretty" for yourself.

You see, as everyone would have noticed this, is that camera with better specifications will surely take a "pretty" shots, "pretty" is being sharp, good contrast, less noise and great color reproduction, compare to a tiny weeny camera on a mobile phone.

However...

A "pretty" shot doesn't equal to a "good" shot!

Take the image you posted here as an example. Yes like you said, there are in fact too many subjects vying (your word) for people's attention. Everything is sharp and clear, as if all the subjects are the focus of the image. But what if that's the photographer's intention? From the way I see this, this image is trying to showcase the surrounding of the Golden Tooth Temple which includes the temple itself.

What's "good" about this image is that all the subjects in the image were nicely captured, none of the subjects was cropped, blocked, under/over-exposed, the scene is nicely leveled (things that supposed to be straight are straight, the horizon is perfect). These are what people "criticize" the most for a photo, and it's called "composition". Too bad there's a slight flaw with the distortion of the blue cab on the left, but still...

If you can reproduce this kind of composition with a 10 years old mobile phone's camera, people will not comment it not being nice, instead they will praise the person who took the photo on how he/she managed to take such "good" photo even with that mobile phone alone.

In the end, what I'm trying to say is... If one can't compose a shot, best camera in the world is gonna worth nothing on his/her hands. If one can compose a shot, all he/she need is a simple device that can capture images.

This image that you posted, is both "pretty" and "good".

 

[catchlights]

Ok, you got your point, so you can go and upgrade your camera to OLYMPUS, download a copy of GIMP software, than you should able to shoot anything and everything, post processing it, than it will look exactly like his.

 

[Ralf Winston]

This argument only applies to specific situation. if you want to shoot sports definitely need long lens and also those 10 FPS bodies.
even if you have the equpemnt, still need some skills lah.

 

[daredevil123]

Better equipment gives you better resolution, cleaner high iso pictures and sharper picture.

So if the phototaker who usually shoots garbage upgrades his equipment. He will shoot cleaner and sharper high resolution garbage.

Any picture can prove anything... i can show you wonderful pictures shot with lousy equipment too.

 

[M_16]

Yes, the photo looks very nice. Your comment is also true.

But then you consider what would you prefer people to comment:

"Wow! What a beautiful picture! You must have used a very good camera!"

OR

"Wow! What a beautiful picture! You must have a great eye and fantastic skill to take this shot!"

A good photo doesn't have to be very sharp or noiseless. This is a famous example:

 

[Soulblade88]

Yes, the photo looks very nice. Your comment is also true.

But then you consider what would you prefer people to comment:

"Wow! What a beautiful picture! You must have used a very good camera!"

OR

"Wow! What a beautiful picture! You must have a great eye and fantastic skill to take this shot!"

A good photo doesn't have to be very sharp or noiseless. This is a famous example:

View attachment 6985

I prefer for them to comment on my skill of course but my point is that some of us don't own that kind of cameras or software to produce some of those types of high quality pictures so we need to work much harder to get a nice pic.

The pic you showed looks artistic but in my opinion i don't think it looks anything special.

 

[thoongeng]

Ah I like guessing games

Would like to invite thread-starter and fellow members to guess if the following photos are taken by
a. Smartphone
b. Point and shoot camera
c. APS-C / Crop sensor DSLR
d. Full frame DSLR

Photo 1:

Photo 2:

Photo 3:

Photo 4:

You may also want to explain what is the reason you say so

 

[richiemccaw1]

Why does TS always stir up such great emotions amongst us all the time?

 

[Scintillation]

I prefer for them to comment on my skill of course but my point is that some of us don't own that kind of cameras or software to produce some of those types of high quality pictures so we need to work much harder to get a nice pic.

The pic you showed looks artistic but in my opinion i don't think it looks anything special.

Then maybe perhaps you should read up more on photography before commenting, especially on the history of the medium. Because that 'artistic' photo that you think isn't exactly special is shot by one of the greatest street photographers of all time - Henri Cartier-Bresson. And since it was shot in 1932, he didn't had the luxury of today's modern technology.

Also - some photos on your Flickr photostream seems to be private, particularly the ones you share on Clubsnap and other local forums, while the ones visible are watermarked with your name. Interesting indeed.

 

[catchlights]

I prefer for them to comment on my skill of course but my point is that some of us don't own that kind of cameras or software to produce some of those types of high quality pictures so we need to work much harder to get a nice pic.

The pic you showed looks artistic but in my opinion i don't think it looks anything special.

WOW, someone said Henri Cartier-Bresson's photo is nothing special!! :thumbsup::thumbsup:


btw, he is using a Leica you know? maybe his shot is not good, but his camera should be good enough huh?

 

[Errz]

Why does TS always stir up such great emotions amongst us all the time?

LOL..his photos says a thousand word already.

 

[richiemccaw1]

LOL..his photos says a thousand word already.

Indeed. There is nothing more I can say about such photos. Hence I would not attempt to.

And of course therefore I am keen to examine more about the mind of this immensely interesting CSer. No one seems to be more controversial in the history of CS than TS.

 

[Scintillation]

Also, one tip for Rexer here, who seems to have multiple accounts posting his works in different parts of the forum. Even though you make your photos private, they still can be traced. The photo ID gives it away.

You have two accounts - one to post your 'usual stuff' under Rexer Ong, the other to post shots from your Sony QX100. Here's a tip in case you would want to troll again in future - use different Flickr accounts. They can be traced easily.

All these done by simple Googling. Reported.

Edit: Sorry, I mixed up subatoyo and Soulblade88. I was Googling Soulblade88's photos and found that he claimed subatoyo's work under his name in another forum, so I mistook both of them to be the same person.

 

[swifty]

I'm not sure I follow what the TS is trying to say.
Are you saying the photo is proof because despite the many distracting elements "vying for the person's attention" the photo is still good because of the expanded DR afforded by modern sensors and software?
I mean, of course good quality equipment helps. It gives us more options, more flexibility so it helps from a technical point of view. But given a better composed photo with a poorer quality camera, I know what I would prefer.

In reference to the HCB photo posted by M_16, its ok if you don't like it but I'm curious how do you think the photo can be improved with better equipment? Would lessor grain, more resolution or more shadow detail make any difference? Or is the beauty in the composition and timing?

Thoongeng: pretty hard at web sizes but for fun I'll play. I'm more than prepared to get them all wrong
2 is from a phone with something like an instagram filter.
3 is from a large sensor camera. I'll guess FF
1 APS-C
4 compact

 

[chngpe01]

I agree also. My iPhone 6 is the best camera I used even better than the high end DSLR.

The pictures below is proof also ;p

 

[M_16]

Also, one tip for Rexer here, who seems to have multiple accounts posting his works in different parts of the forum. Even though you make your photos private, they still can be traced. The photo ID gives it away.

You have two accounts - one to post your 'usual stuff' under Rexer Ong, the other to post shots from your Sony QX100. Here's a tip in case you would want to troll again in future - use different Flickr accounts. They can be traced easily.

All these done by simple Googling. Reported.

Wah you managed to conclude that Subatoyo and Soulblade88 are the same person? I don't think so, judging by the drastic sytles of their posts.

Anyway back to the topic, photography books never ever start by mentioning you need a very good camera to be able to take good photographs.

There are so many fantastic photos taken using smartphones out there.

 

[tecnica]

High end garbage in, high end garbage out.

 

[MarkersNg]

...........................