The guy with lots of money he as a great camera and he has the possibility to travel to the weirdest places in the world, he comes back with the most rare exotic photos you've ever seen, his camera had a great zoom and quality...
OR
The guy that has a 3.1 pixels camera, no money to travel, but he can walk in his neighborhood and take a great picture that expresses exactly what he wanted to express...
What do you think is better a good camera and money makes a good photographer? or is the good ideas that actually can be found anywhere...?
what do you like more?
thanks guys!
2007-06-25 08:55:25 · 10 answers · asked by N.T. 3 in Home & Garden ➔ Garden & Landscape
It's definitely the second example you gave, not the first. Cameras don't take pictures; people do.
2007-06-25 08:59:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that The guy that has a 3.1 pixels camera, no money to travel, but he can walk in his neighborhood and take a great picture that expresses exactly what he wanted to express is better than The guy with lots of money he as a great camera and he has the possibility to travel to the weirdest places in the world, he comes back with the most rare exotic photos you've ever seen, his camera had a great zoom and quality
2007-06-25 09:03:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The one with the 3.1MP camera provided it is good enough for creative control. Many consumer level cameras also tend to have little to no manual control compared to a prosumer level camera. There is a limit to how much you can do even if you have the best eye with a low-end consumer camera. So my personal opinion is that either could be taking great photographs in this case. The one with the expensive camera could have an easier time making great photos, yet less creative, while it is the other way around for the person with the 3.1MP.
2007-06-25 09:05:37 · answer #3 · answered by alittlelost 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's a weird question.. It's generally not the camera it's the eye behind the camera... You can have all the expensive equipment in the world and still take crappy picture's and with digital you can take crappy picture's and make them great with software.... A good photographer is in the eye of the beholder... Some photos speak to people for different reasons... Doesn't matter what type of equipment used.. It's the good ideas and subject that make a photographer great.. Good luck
2007-06-25 09:00:49 · answer #4 · answered by pebblespro 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The guy that has a 3.1 pixels camera, no money to travel, but he can walk in his neighborhood and take a great picture that expresses exactly what he wanted to express...
2007-06-25 08:58:09 · answer #5 · answered by Cecilia 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
An old saying: "Photographers take pictures, not cameras."
I'd say the second guy. Anybody can point a camera at a great landscape, push the button 10 times, move to another spot, repeat and after 100 tries come up with a nice picture.
The best pictures are not the ones making you say: "Oh, how pretty."
The best pictures make you say: "How did he see it there?..."
2007-06-25 09:05:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The first guy is having more fun but to answer your question, the camera doesn't make the photographer. If I gave a novice a pro-camera, he couldn't take pro pictures.
2007-06-25 08:59:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Photography Master Class gives you all the knowledge you’ll ever need to take photos that dazzle. It takes you step-by-step through every aspect of photography – from the absolute basics right through to the cutting-edge techniques used by the world’s most celebrated photographers. Whether you want to launch a new career as a professional photographer or simply learn to take better pictures, photographymasterclass. puts you on a fast-track to success.
https://tr.im/20b0d
2015-01-27 07:33:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the richest person with the best camera in the world does not guarantee a great photographer. you also need an eye for composition, lighting, depth of field, etc. so both have the potential to be equally great or terrible.
2007-06-25 09:02:38 · answer #9 · answered by colormehappy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's obviously the man with the 3.1. it's about expression. because he expresses himself, he is content.
money gets you places, but not always with a smile on your face.
2007-06-25 09:01:14 · answer #10 · answered by day-nuh 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋