Genuinely, is it an excuse to “be cognizant of the world” or something? It’s got the shell of an “art hobby” but it’s not so different from saying promoting is an art.

>>4427854 (OP)
i just like to push buttan to make pitcher, it doesn't need to be any deeper than that anon.

>>4427854 (OP)
weak bait

>>4427854 (OP)
It's not a hobby it's a coping mechanism

>>4427854 (OP)
Welp, there are plenty of people here with more ambitions than that, but for me it's pretty much what you said. The years just fly by and it's nice to document and appreciate those moments there and then and afterwards. Also you learn some basics about art and familiarize with the subjects. Handling different cameras and lenses bring me joy no phone could. Also, my friends get decent pictures for their tinder.

>>4427854 (OP)
>but where is le deeper meaning?
poetry has ruined your brain
photography as a hobby can only be appreciated by shape rotators. you must 1: have an internal narrative (dialogue with the soul) 2: be able to think effectively without consulting it (control of the mind).

>>4427854 (OP)
I enjoy using cameras to make negatives to make prints with. I really enjoy the whole process. Start with an idea and finish with a framed print.
Sometimes they're bad, sometimes there's meaning or symbolism in them, sometimes they are just pretty pictures.
It feels great to finally have that picture you've been working on for hours framed and on the wall.

Originally it was all about taking photos of the family, now it's all about the gear. Photography has replaced pokemon for me.

>>4427854 (OP)
You can isolate and capture the feelings you get in certain places or from certain situations and convey them to others.
Sometimes symmetry just appeals to you subconsciously.

>>4427874
how can you enjoy gear when every new release is a downgrade from dslrs for everything but one man cinematography shit no one actually asked for
>bro we got 8k 422 now!
>youtube: *720p 0:0:0*

>>4427854 (OP)
12 years ago I was given a D800 and a full set of Nikkors as a gift.
I have never ever received anything worth that much before or since, so I pretty much had to learn how to use it.
Then I fell in love with photography.
I never fell into the gear trap, because I basically started out with all the gear I could wish for. In 12 years, I have bought two lenses and two speedlights, and a couple of 35mm film cameras for fun.
But to answer your question:
>Yes, it's about "being present/aware" to some extent
>As I'm getting older, it's also about recording memories. I realized too late that I had forgotten a lot of things that was important to me. Now, I'm taking steps to record things that I find important or enjoyable.
>I also earn some money, shooting weddings, but it's mostly just a hobby, and mostly for myself

>>4427882
why would you fall down the gear trap when you started with better shit than 100% of some mirrorless brands lineups
all that improved is the zooms are sharp wide open now and cameras go 2-4fps faster thats it. the autofocus actually regressed for a bit.

>>4427881
>life revolves around le youtube

>>4427897
>bro we got 8k 422 now!
>cinema: *1080p 4:0:0*

>>4427854 (OP)


ÆSTHETICAL PLEASURE, AND POETICAL SATISFACTION.

>>4427928
wtf go back to lit

The point is to capture some good light.

>>4427888
cope of the poor

>>4428011
who would win
$250 nikon dslr
$3699 lumix s1r

>>4428060
Gross. Both are nasty.

>>4427854 (OP)
Photography isn't art, no matter what anybody says, you arent creating anything.
I do it because I sometimes get pretty looking pictures and capture a "vibe". Ive taken a bit over 1k film photos and havent shared them with anybody but mom. Also I wouldnt leave my house without an excuse

>>4428065
It's an aging woman larping as a teenager with makeup, nasty no matter what, but the "mirrorless lens design revolution" has been a fucking disaster for portraiture when you consider that portaiture is rarely printed larger than A4 and resizing high res, super sharp photos still preserves all the extra detail that low res cameras and soft lenses miss/smooth out.

>>4428066
>posts on /p/
>doesn't post photos even tho he has more than 1k of them
Opinion checks out

>>4427854 (OP)
If you don't understand the concept of a "hobby" I recommend you go see a doctor.

>>4428066
You have printed some at least, right???

>>4428067
Fujifilm s5pro may still be the best portrait camera. It's only 6 megapickles and costs like 300 bucks.

I hate that modern style of portrait lighting/editing also yuck.

>>4428066
Photography/camera is the brush, the artwork is the print. Doesnt make sense to say that paint brushes and paint can't be art. They are tools used to produce art.

My recent still life printed on albumen is a good example of this. Go look in the fgt thread for it.

>>4428066
No, photography in itself is not art. Indeed. Anywhere you find fine art "just photography" you're going to find it doesn't stand on its own. There is ALWAYS some "critical theory" or slacktivism (ie: behold, muh climate change) esque commentary that needs to go along with it, always some statement, otherwise, it's just snapshits.
You know, the kind of vapid stuff that a journo calls "powerful" and then walks past

And then you start paying attention to the apparently interrelatedness of all the participants. People get into magnum by knowing or being related to other magnum photographers, who are the friends and proteges of the past magnum photographers, who are ultimately, the ethnocentric co-conspirators of the tastemakers who tell all the impressionable midwit art students what art is about at this moment.

protip: now you know how to "make it". its truly who you know, you dont even need a vision just hit on a hot political topic that jives with the majority of the financial elite.

But, photography certainly can be art
>this is photography
but the art is a very small minority before the snapshits of poor people and garbage being pushed out by people who overuse the word "human" (and have a tendency to do time as leica brand ambassadors). And even in the more genuine side of things there are a LOT of photographers who just reenact paintings with modern clothing and buildings and fancy themselves clever.

Cinema on the other hand is inherently art.

>>4428075
1 frame -> :|
30 frames per second -> :D

Why?

>>4428078
If a picture is worth a thousand words, a movie is Dostoevsky.

There's no getting around that any act of cinema is necessarily an act of art, while acts of photography are very rarely art and only sometimes ascend when they are made into the print (or the finished work). Even the most impartial and objective documentary presents with a strong bias and creative intent and is, without a doubt, a work of art.

>>4428066
you can create something in front of the camera and you can distort something with the camera

but 99% of photography is not art with street photography as an obvious example. it is such that even a common dog photo is more artistic, because directed modeling is simply a step above what may or may not be 1/24th of a second of a documentary. could you call the street snapshit "schrodingers art"?

>>4428087
Well, yeah, but why?

What's the difference between me filming my dog playing fetch and a picture of him running back with the ball in his mouth?

>>4428089
Each successive decision is your consciousness collapsing infinite probabilities and therefore each is a more and more significant moment of your existence, ossifying your vision, your thought, your emotion, as an absolute certainty, a human creation that can be shown to others. When you make cinema, you are engaging in a mystic ritual that transforms the infinite nature reality into exactly the finite thing you wanted it to be. Art. Even if you suck at it.

A movie just contains more creative intent than a mere photograph. Hence, photography that is art, is also heavy in pre-capture direction and post-capture production. Modeling, planning, and the print are essential steps to transform "a capture" into "a creation".

>>4428078
Because movies create stories and music and props/graphics retard

>>4428090
That makes sense. Film is just lots of photographs. I still don't really believe all video is art, but I'm thinking more of outliers to your theory. Like a video of a single frame repeated at 30fps infinitely.
I'm glad we both agree that print is the artwork of photography and creative intent is an essential facet of actual art.


One thing that I think photography has over film is that you can hang a picture on the wall and enjoy it like that. I know you can put a projector or screen on your wall, but it's not the same aesthetic.

Thanks for your intelligent replies. They were interesting.

>>4428094
I could do all that with a photograph as well, low IQ Andy. You know the music is just attached to the video, right? I could hang a picture and play music on a speaker to accomplish something similar.

>>4428096
>I could hang a picture and play music on a speaker to accomplish something similar.
I could make a soup without any liquid, but then you've just got a bunch of random shit in a pot
Yeah, I agree with the sentiment that you can still "create" with a photograph, but video is the accessible, low-bar-quality, easily digestible horse shit of the creative world.
Just like random soup anyone can make, and will keep you from starving, it'll just be shitty on a relative scale.

>>4428152
it's funny because a lot of people in video/film do not really see the medium as art but as some sub category of it

>>4428152
>>4428154
That's my problem with video is intrinsically art. You could say the same about painting or whatever. Then you have some lesbian splashing her period blood on a canvas with dirty tampons and calling it high art. She filmed it too, so that's also part of her artwork. There has to be something more to it.

>it's funny because a lot of people in video/film do not really see the medium as art but as some sub category of it

Are you talking about photography? That just sounds they're being pretentious fart huffers.
I firmly and whole heartedly believe that my chicken still life printed on albumen is a work of art and I will not hear otherwise.

>>4428156
Nah I was talking about movies, didn't express it clearly enough
Gainsbourg claimed poetry, painting, classical music, architecture and lit were major arts because you needed an initiation to be able to create, whereas the rest were minor arts because anybody even without being initiated to it could do it

>>4428158
That sounds really gay.

post some examples without complaining about jet flying intellectual without economic limitations

>>4428158
>Gainsbourg claimed
muh appeal to some homosexual old authority, are you incapable of thinking and reasoning for yourself chuddie?

>>4427854 (OP)
it's fun

>>4428189
Not a single thought you have comes from yourself, they are all based on some old authority so why not accept it and go on from there chud

>>4428060
My suspicions are confirmed. Lumix really is just setting out to be budget Sony.

>>4428060
>it's NEVER a skill issue

>>4428281
>Camera A: Good colors SOOC
>Camera B: horrid color rendition
>"uhm, not up for 6 hours of editing with capture ones color picker tool and per channel curves? SKILL ISSUE"
Is this from the same genius that came up with "fuji doesnt have bad autofocus because you should just manually focus instead, skill issue"

There is a such thing as a bad camera.

And no you don't have a skill. Nothing involving camera operation or any of that shit is a valuable skill. It's like saying you're skilled for using linux. That's not a skill you're just wasting a lot of time and effort to get the same result as something put together by competent professionals does out of the box.

>>4428294
if you're pictures come out like that using any camera, it is a skill issue
if you think a picture like that means anything, it is a skill issue

>>4427854 (OP)
To freeze time. Simple as

>>4428324
Having used a SNOY and a sharp lens, pictures do just come out like that.

>>4428329
Awesome, you should share with us!

>>4428383
You'll have to jump into the shill's imagination to see the imaginary photos from their imaginary camera with a "sharp" lens kek

>>4428294
Imagine being so bad at editing making a preset for a session takes you 6 hours

>>4428420
putting any effort in at all just means the camera is bad

>>4428548
yes my sir! just because Sony needs some editing does not mean it is bad, it means it is good for creativity!

>>4427888
>autofocus actually regressed a bit
holy cope
>>4428060
please post results from a real camera like a Canon R5 not toys.

>>4427854 (OP)
#1 look at this cool thing I saw
#2 look at this cool thing you cannot comprehend with your limited mortal eyeballs

>>4428060
wantsomeday.jpg

>>4428060
Dear God, please stop spamming this pic. Also the "colorscience" pic with the brunette girl. Stop spamming nobody cares. Everybody here hates you.

>>4431696
This.

>>4427856
This

>>4427854 (OP)
A hobby is a hobby for fun, no further explanation needed.

>>4427881
I asked for it

>>4428060
Photography used to look better before landscape-driven megapixel wars

Just use 4x5 film faggots

>>4433233
Incredibly based.

>>4427854 (OP)
What's the point off kissing your girlfriend if all you need to do is ejaculate in her to get her pregnant?

>>4433272
Lubrication, duh.