I know, I know. I remember stating, just a few days ago, that I was fed up with shooting trees and landscapes.
Just to show there are no hard feelings… another shot of trees near the Grevelingen Lake, The Netherlands.
A camera is just a tool that has optical adjustments and a light-sensitive area. The latter can be analogue or digital. I do agree that the format of the light-sensitive area and the lens have a distinct impact on the result. That is even more true for analogue media.
I find it more and more difficult to specify the camera, film, lens etc… In the end it is not important. I do not think Mondrian added the type of brushes or paint to his work.
Just like we enjoy Mozart or Beethoven without being preoccupied if the notes were written on parchment made of linen of whatever.
I do agree that film matters. There is a distinct difference between them. And yes, lenses have also an effect.
I guess little of you know that Michelangelo Buonarroti also kept a diary in which he explains which chisel he used for each part of his sculpture of David.
Yeah, just kidding’
But David is a beautiful art.
So here it is… if an image is shot on film or digital, is, in my opinion, relevant information.
Lens and aperture, why not, they make a difference.
Maybe mention, if it is film, the film format.
Camera make is in my humble opinion not relevant.
What is the difference in driving to a job interview with a Skoda or a BMW? That the HR sucker thinks you are better because you drive a BMW?
Am I a better human being because I drive an expensive Peugeot. If I would drive a Dacia, would I be considered less?
A camera is just a tool and the medium is that too. It is what we create with those tools that really matters.
The result is what we need to focus on.
This is a digital image.