Quote:
I really like your pictures. I'm kinda partial to B & W and I really like how it brings out the wonderful textures and compositions of yours.
It just goes to show that while elaborate equipment may make it easier for you to realize your vision, it is no substitute for talent. I remember in college a lot of the students who had very good technical ability, but their artistic and creative sense was lacking. ("Joe knows how all the equipment works but he makes a lousy film") Then the flip side was those whose work was so topical or politicised, so heavy on the message but their skill in realizing it was horrible. My Photo III professor barely knew how the 4 x 5 camera worked.
I remember spending a huge amount of time exploring some alternative processes of printmaking for an assignment (the 19 year old pictures are hanging on my wall to the left of me as I type). Because the technical side of the work was so involved, I did not try to get heavy on message-and this was the early 90's when art was super political. My teacher downgraded me for not making a "STATEMENT" while giving better grades to people whose work was visual garbage, but who claimed some neo-feminist or other trendy meaning behind their work. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but don't sacrifice the art for the message. I griped to my teacher and said there is nothing wrong with art just to portray beauty itself, with no deeper meaning. It wasn't as if I was shallow and couldn't make emotionally or intellectually challenging art. I just didn't think it had to be done all the time. He raised my grade.
I love photography, but I only have a cheap $80 camera, but it works like a charm. Here is some of mine:
