>>4332387When autistic people choose an art, they usually choose photography basically because it lets them sperg out on tech specs and scientific measurements of corner sharpness.
Then because you can sell a camera for $3k+ and lenses for $1k+ each, the corporations shill gear on Youtube, feeding back into this cycle of autistic spec sheet sperging.
And then when they actually take photos, they don't need to actually do anything decent composition-wise or artistically creative, just take a picture of a fucking bird with their SNOY super fast super precise AF and crop 20mp out of 60mp, with blown out bokeh, and normies will think it's a good picture because of the bokeh, and other autists on reddit will think it's a good picture because it's razor sharp in the top right 1x1cm corner.
Meanwhile actual artists are using fucking Leica which gives you a choice between shitty primitive contrast detect (not even depth from defocus) or manual focus only, and sensors and other tech that are 5-10+ years old at this point unless they're a trust fund kid (tbf a sizable portion of Leica users), or they're using an older Canon with kit zoom their uncle gave them four years ago after their uncle found it in their attic. You'll ask them about the tech specs and they'll say they have no fucking clue and look at you like the fucking nerd you are, but they actually have a decent, even if often amateurish, portfolio. Of attempting art. Not just birds or some weird autistic obsession like wind turbines.
Tbh this kind of stuff is actually why I really appreciate Lomography. Lomography scares away the autistic fucks that ruin photography. Lomography ruins photography in its own way, but at least it's instagram-tier early-20s chicks actually trying to do art. I can tolerate that.
