Is post production more important than Gear?

The pro-am debate is an old and somewhat misleading one, to be fair. A pro is simply someone whose primary income is from photography, IMO. I sell photos and do the occasional job for money (or karma) but it accounts each year for a fraction of my total income. I had a time, a few years ago, when I seriously considered photography as a career but I decided I would rather keep it as an enjoyable and occasionally lucrative pastime.

Equally, I know amateurs whose output is better than many a pro, and vice-versa.

Sent from another Galaxy
 
One of the points I was trying to make is the importance of an improvement loop which involves getting honest feedback. Unfortunately most of us have the tendency to surround ourselves with people who share our own opinions and look at the world with similar eyes. Therefore unfortunately the consideration of your peers about your level of skill may be quite deceptive. I remember how I took place in a photo competition in the 90s. Based on my own judgement and those of my peers I was convinced to end up among the winners. In fact at that time I produced meaningless postcards (still doing so ...) and I found myself embarrased when my "master pieces" got some quite mediocre ratings. After some further attempts I realized the root cause wasn´t the ignorance of the judges but my own ... We won´t improve by stewing in our own juice.

Wolfgang

Your peers are much nicer than my peers. For nearly my entire shooting life (from grade school to today, grade school was a long, long time ago) I have been surrounded by "peers" and mentors who will rip my stuff to shreds. Conversely, they would also provide some praise. Based upon that model, when my peers were not around, I learned to shred my stuff without them.

It is easier to provide constructive criticism in person than on the internet.

Gary
 
Back
Top