>>4426973>but the pancake isnt SUPER SHARP so it doesnt count!!!111!!and? so fucking what, more large sensor cameras would fit in pockets
what the fuck happened to using a camera just as a normal, day to day record maker? on digital cameras if your lens is too sharp you just get moire around your crisp tree branches and a flawed lens is like a fingerprint anyways, AI doesnt imitate shitty lenses well. and having a larger sensor is better for capturing more reality without having to let a computer reconstruct it.
do you really settle for running your precious day to day memories through "apple intelligence" which sends them to apples servers whenever possible and ONLY use a "real camera" for pretentious "art"?
>yes i make art with a camera, REALITY SCANNER![x] doubt. photography will never be art - music is art, painting is art, they are expressions of the human soul. photography is as artistic as taking a funny screenshot of someone elses movie or video game, only you steal from god. it is not an expression of the human soul and can not be by definition and its nature. only people without souls themselves can mistake it for art. not even the photography in cinema is art, it is just the preservation of theatre and a potential scaffold for an act of art. the act of photography can never be art and a mere photographer can not be an artist. i have a soul and prefer music so i can see this clear as day. photography is a hobby closely related to journaling. music is an art. dare not compare winogrand to bob dylan.
you may hope to be a director for one frame, a screenwriter, that is art, but the mere camera is nothing more than a passive audience, never a creative force, just a witness. no framing can save you, nor any color grade, for what lower art is there than changing the colors of the scene you stole from god? but as an inspiration, for the creation of a whole new world, then the photograph can be respectable, and yet, not the act of art itself.
