Mozart was a genius, but he would have been forgotten by history if he had not been a consummate craftsperson at performance and composition, obtained only by much hard work.
Monito wrote:
Mozart was a genius, but he would have been forgotten by history if he had not been a consummate craftsperson at performance and composition, obtained only by much hard work.
An interesting example. Mozart certainly worked hard in his life, but he was a child prodigy -- I rather doubt his abilities as a kid (he's said to have started composing at the age of five) were "obtained ... by much hard work".
By the way, I'm pretty sure he was a craftsman (unless you're privy to a new historical discovery) :-D
mobcoa247 wrote:
Talent trumps equipment every time.
Great equipment enhances talent.
Great equipment is complimentary to talent.
Talent stands alone.
You can have great gear and flat out suck.. bottom line
Yes, but even besides talent, just about every type of photography has things that equally, or more.
This theme must be 'in the air'.....I came across another post on a UK site earlier questioning why people are constantly chasing the latest 'must have' upgrade......when there is no obvious upgrade in the quality of the work being produced!
The 'upgrade' message is pretty powerful however....on Saturday I was speaking to a neighbour in the local pub and I asked him if he was still using his 30D (he had a very decent crop only lens as well...can't remember which...I do remember it cost more than the 30D)...but no...he now has a 1Ds3.
It seems one of his pics with the 30D had been accepted by a magazine and this has prompted him to 'upgrade' so he can sell more images.
He works in finance in the City of London so the cost of the upgrade was probably petty cash to him........but will he produce better more commercial images...or was he just seduced by the glossy Canon literature?
Nothing on this extended thread has caused me to rethink my original proposition..that for the vast majority of members on sites like this, the road to better photographs is not spending money on 'better' kit.....it is about improving ones knowledge of ones current kit....and investing any spare cash more wisely.
Obviously people in the financial position of my neighbour have no dilemmas here as he can just splash out on what he wants, when he wants...but this might be a detriment..he clearly thinks money is the answer to better images...so what happens if he is disappointed? Another upgrade?.....he was already thinking MF digital backs in the pub.....
Do the camera companies increase their profits by continually pushing the upgrade myth? And do we let them...if so, why?
Monito wrote:
Mozart was a genius, but he would have been forgotten by history if he had not been a consummate craftsperson at performance and composition, obtained only by much hard work.
I happen to know a little about this. There were lots of excellent craftsman in the classical era who have largely been forgotten. Mozart was a "craftsman" on some level, but it is what he did that was not craft that set him apart, and that is why he was not "forgotten by history."
You did not understand what I wrote about virtuosity. Might want to look at it again a bit more carefully. A virtuoso possesses remarkable technical skill, but that is not all such a person possesses nor is it the entirely of what makes one a virtuoso.
Dan
KaaX wrote:
I don't think so -- and let me clarify what I meant.
A craftsman is one who's capable of producing a high-quality product. What he wants to make is usually well-defined, so the end goal is fixed -- his skills lie in knowing the characteristics of his materials, knowing how causal relationships work, and the ability to actually make the thing (as opposed to just knowing how to do it). There is usually little artistic creativity involved, though typically there's a lot of problem-solving. In other words, a craftsman knows well how the rules work and is able to use these rules to make excellent things.
A genius is a very different creature. His abilities lie not in following the rules well, but in breaking them. A genius may or may not have high technical skills -- that's not what defines him. "Just" a craftsman feels comfortable within his system of rules but would be lost without them. But a genius is precisely the one who can function when the old rules are gone, broken, or do not apply any more -- he opens new areas, draws new maps, and establishes new rules.
By the way, I don't consider virtuosos (people who have amazing, almost superhuman technical skill, typically in performance arts like music) to be geniuses. I consider them to be very very skilled craftsmen, but unless they break radically new ground, they are not geniuses. Same thing with "true artist" -- to be one requires passing a considerably lower threshold than to be a genius.
It's possible to be both a craftsman and a genius. But very few craftsmen are geniuses and not all geniuses are good craftsmen. Same thing with artists -- few artists are geniuses and not all geniuses are artists.
anthonygh wrote:
Obviously people in the financial position of my neighbour have no dilemmas here as he can just splash out on what he wants, when he wants...but this might be a detriment..he clearly thinks money is the answer to better images...so what happens if he is disappointed? Another upgrade?.....he was already thinking MF digital backs in the pub.....
Do the camera companies increase their profits by continually pushing the upgrade myth? And do we let them...if so, why?
My feeling is a rapid upgrade path is pretty typical for many in the early stages of photography, if they can afford it. It's basically low hanging fruit, which quickly improves technical results. Once those are no longer factors in a person's output, the much harder work of improving the creativity of their images results in a much lower rate of continual improvement.
As for the upgrade myth.... it's like the chicken/egg question. Which came first? I've been involved in photography in one way or another for about the last 30 years. I can't think of a time when I wasn't interested in what was new on the market. The difference seems to be that the upgrade cycle now is a lot faster. And because we all know the cycle is quite short, it doesn't take much time after a product release before the speculation begins about its replacement. Have we been trained by the manufactures, or are we pushing them? My feeling is manufacturers would be happy if they could stretch out product lifespans to multiple years.
gdanmitchell wrote:
You did not understand what I wrote about virtuosity. Might want to look at it again a bit more carefully. A virtuoso possesses remarkable technical skill, but that is not all such a person possesses nor is it the entirely of what makes one a virtuoso.
Yes, you did mention that virtuosos possess a semi-mystical expressive power beyond and above mere technical skill.
That still doesn't make them geniuses in my mind. My definition of genius (which might be different from yours) necessarily involves breaking new ground and going where no man has gone before :-) For me "just" performers -- say, like Paganini -- do not qualify. As always, YMMV...
you could be a sucky guitar player with a 50.00 walmart,but with a 1000.00 Fender strat at least you will sound better...not play better but sound better.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I happen to know a little about this. There were lots of excellent craftsman in the classical era who have largely been forgotten. Mozart was a "craftsman" on some level, but it is what he did that was not craft that set him apart, and that is why he was not "forgotten by history."
Precisely.
However, equally and conversely, genius without craft is just psychotic rambling. It takes craft to turn genius concepts into real items. Mozart's early compositions are not the ones that made his reputation or his mark on history.
A little like the (dis)ingenuous person who went to the novellist and proposed "Let's make a deal. I'll come up with dynamite ideas for novels and you write them up and we share the profits 50/50."
I think the equipment certainly helps, but I think some people are a little too concerned with gear. It's astounding to me how many people are buying 5DIII's as a FIRST DSLR. Then they end up with some bad images, get on the web and talk about how much the camera sucks and insist that they ended up with a defective camera. Then they sit on Canon Rumors refreshing and obsessing over whether or not they should buy a lens because there may be a new version coming out sometime in the next few years. Because not having the V2 version of a lens totally destroys your ability to take pictures.
Axilrod wrote:
I think the equipment certainly helps, but I think some people are a little too concerned with gear. It's astounding to me how many people are buying 5DIII's as a FIRST DSLR. Then they end up with some bad images, get on the web and talk about how much the camera sucks and insist that they ended up with a defective camera. Then they sit on Canon Rumors refreshing and obsessing over whether or not they should buy a lens because there may be a new version coming out sometime in the next few years. Because not having the V2 version of a lens totally destroys your ability to take pictures....Show more →
I don't think too many people are buying the 5d3 as their first camera. The vast majority of DSLR sold are of the rebel variety and most of these are bought as first DSLR's. Sure there might be the occasional 5d3 sold to a newbie, but what is wrong with that if they can afford it. Who says people need to earn their stripes using a rebel forna few years before moving onto higher end DSLR's? If they can afford the 5d3 with nice glass, why waste their money on a rebel they might grow out of in a year or two?
I wish to hell people could just enjoy shooting without getting caught up in this sort of BS. Why bother caring what someone else's crappy attitude about having or not having gear is.
ftemoto wrote:
I wish to hell people could just enjoy shooting without getting caught up in this sort of BS. Why bother caring what someone else's crappy attitude about having or not having gear is.
My thoughts exactly. This topic arises every so often and gets debated endlessly. What is the point? Just go out and take photos with whatever gear makes you happy. Don't worry so much what the other guy is shooting and the gear he is shooting with. Does it really matter if he has better gear than you?
