This is a very interesting post from Álvaro Serrano and I mostly agree with it. Either way it is worth your time.

In a section leading up to the below quote Serrano talks about The David and how it likely would not be any better if it had been made with more advanced tools. In theory I agree, and take the point, even if that is a hard statement to prove.

Then Serrano starts a new section of the article, in which he says:

That’s great if you only ever plan to shoot with Olympus cameras and it’ll definitely allow you to capture some gorgeous images but at the end of the day, you haven’t learned anything, and it hasn’t made you a better photographer because it didn’t take any effort or knowledge on your part.

Worst of all, technology can cheapen the end result. If all it takes to capture a scintillating long exposure is pressing a button, where’s the artistic merit? How is that image compelling in any way?

What the hell? I can’t agree with this at all. Knowledge of the tools is not, in any way, a prerequisite for art. Art, photography, or any other creative pursuit is in no way lessened or enhanced because of the tools used to make it.

If someone takes a gorgeous photo, it remains gorgeous no matter if the camera was set to manual or set on auto. Art is art. It’s the vision to create the art that matters, not the knowledge of it.

Posted by Ben Brooks