Yesterday, in his “New York Times” article, “The Apple iPad: First Impressions,” tech writer David Pogue gave us some food for thought about how Apple’s iPad might indeed find a useful place between laptops and smart phones. However, more than anything, Pogue took the opportunity to warn us about snapping to judgement about new technology — whether we are celebrating it or castigating it.
Pogue softly rebukes iPad “bashing by the bloggers who’ve never even tried it,” writing:
“My main message to fanboys is this: it’s too early to draw any conclusions. Apple hasn’t given the thing to any reviewers yet, there are no iPad-only apps yet (there will be), the e-bookstore hasn’t gone online yet, and so on. So hyperventilating is not yet the appropriate reaction.”
Pogue wraps up his thoughts on the iPad with a message that seems important to those of us wrapped up in the world of constant advances in photographic technology:
“Like the iPhone, the iPad is really a vessel, a tool, a 1.5-pound sack of potential. It may become many things. It may change an industry or two, or it may not. It may introduce a new category — something between phone and laptop — or it may not. And anyone who claims to know what will happen will wind up looking like a fool.”
“A vessel.” A “sack of potential.” I love these phrases — especially the “sack of potential.” It relates to every new photographic imaging purchase I have made since I started doing so with gusto in high school. (The Nikon F3 was my drooling dream for years.)
Buying a Canon 5D might improve the photography one has been doing with a Canon 20D, universally accepted as much meeker than the 5D, just as the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II might allow one to create images not possible with the 5D. But then again, out of focus is out of focus.
The potential of photographic equipment is about more than getting images in focus using the best exposure settings or the number of megapixels on the sensor. It’s about end use of the image, and how our equipment helps us reach our goals, or not.
A couple years back, one photographer told me how he brought both a 5D and EOS-1Ds Mark II to on-location jobs, using the EOS-1Ds Mark II much as he would have used a medium format film camera — detail, detail, detail — while using the 5D for much of his portrait images. This helped him by cutting down on postproduction efforts needed to undo the too-real skin detail captured by the EOS-1Ds Mark II.
I myself have become quite addicted to the pop-up, built-in flash of my 20D, even if this nifty feature makes it a “non-pro” camera. A pop of critical fill light has made more than one image possible that I would have missed otherwise.
Of course, the importance of the right equipment for the job is not something to downplay. A couple years ago another photographer told me, “The number one piece of advice I would give to new photographers is to invest in the best equipment.”
Sure, but what is “best”?
The best equipment is great, but the best photographers, I would argue, are those that best exploit whatever imaging technology that happens to be in their hands.
It seems to me that all photographers are really nerds at heart, and so it makes sense that we should get excited about new, great, full-of-potential equipment. A new sack of potential is always exciting. But, for now, how about. . .
Share a Story of Exploiting “Lesser” Technology.
There are many examples I could give across the history of photography in which image makers have pushed their sacks of photo equipment potential to the limit — making much with little. However, I put the question to you:
Can you share a story behind an image (or body of work) that you were able to make with equipment that did not seem up to the challenge? Do you have examples of how using “lesser” equipment helped your ultimate success in ways you could not anticipate?
Share your thoughts on this topic via comments or email (ethan@ethansalwen.com), and if you get me interested (I’m easily interested), I’d love to share your image/s and more detailed story in a future post.
Let’s show each other how photographic technology is a sack of potential, nothing more, nothing less.
September 25th, 2011 11:54 am
I would like to change my blogger archive frequency from 1 month to longer, like 3 months. How do I do this?.
August 14th, 2011 3:32 am
Spot on with this write-up, I genuinely believe this internet site wants a lot much more consideration. I’ll most likely be once again to read significantly far more, thanks for that information.