With recently published photography books full of photos taken with cell phone cameras and plenty of discussions on the web about whether you need expensive/professional camera equipment to take either professional or “art worthy” photographs, I thought I’d chime in on the topic because, in some respects, I’ve been on both sides.

Does your camera equipment matter?

My response (which is probably influenced by my background in social science research) is: it depends.

I totally agree that photographic art can be made by almost any sort of photographic equipment, ranging (cost-wise) from cheap plastic, home-made (e.g., pinhole), and cell phone cameras to $40,000+ medium format digital cameras. The cost or sophistication of the equipment is not what makes it art; it’s the photographer’s vision and use of the equipment that makes it art. I have absolutely no reservations about the truth of this statement.

How about the issue of creating a “professional” image with any sort of equipment?

If you are creating an image for publication, most publishers require a fairly high resolution image–e.g., much higher than created by a 2 megapixel cell phone camera. Even if you were able to do some sophisticated resizing of your 2 megapixel cell phone image with special software to get it up to a higher resolution, the image quality will necessarily degrade to some degree. Then there’s the issue of whether the image needs to actually show high-quality detail. $40,000 medium format digital cameras resolve an amazing amount of detail (think high-resolution images of prepared food); the lenses on cell phones and toy cameras resolve very little fine detail. Another thing publishers are really picky about: images must have very little digital noise. Most cell phone cameras and compact digital cameras start showing significant digital noise at relatively low ISOs; expensive digital SLR cameras really excel at keeping digital noise low in images.

Ultimately, it comes down to whatever the publisher or client wants. I can tell you the stock photo houses definitely think publishers want high quality, low noise, high resolution images produced by “professional” camera equipment; they are usually *very* particular about these requirements.

How about portrait and wedding photography? Does camera equipment matter there?

When I am being paid hundreds or thousands of dollars by a client to photograph their family or wedding, you can bet they’re looking for high-end, “commercial” quality images from me. Also, I specialize in candid photography (both for my portrait sessions and weddings); I need equipment that can focus fast, on moving targets, and can take pictures whether there’s plenty of light or barely any light at all (e.g., in a dark reception hall at night). Without the proper equipment, some of the photography I do–photography that fits my artistic vision in the context of, say, a dark ballroom–would not be possible. When clients pay you to take photos at a wedding, you can’t tell them: “Sorry, my camera was unable to take a photo of the wedding couple during their first dance that actually made their faces, expressions, or body language clearly recognizable. I hope that having only grainy and blurry ‘artistic’ photos of the dance are ok”!!

When I am taking photos of my children when we’re out and about or on vacation, I use all sorts of cameras (film, digital, plastic, old, new, etc). When I’m doing street photography and personal fine art photography, I also play around with different makeshift/unprofessional camera equipment. It’s fun and it helps me break out of uncreative ruts!

But here’s the thing: even when I’m playing around and being creative, the equipment affects what I can do. If I’ve got in mind to take an artsy shot of people indoors in low light without using a flash, then I probably don’t want to use my Holga film camera with its f/13 lens and the 200 ISO medium format film I have in it; I would end up with a photo of nothing because it would be totally underexposed! If you’ve got a certain artistic vision in mind, knowing what equipment will achieve the effect you’re looking for can be the difference between realizing your artistic vision and not.

So, does your camera equipment matter?

In some ways, it *always* matters: the equipment determines to some degree what is possible. However, I agree that with these constraints come opportunities for creative expansion or innovation. Creative persons often need structure or limitations to “react against” to reach something new.

When you’re talkin’ pure creative expression, this sort of expansion beyond preconceived constraints and notions is an important and worthwhile endeavor. However, when you’re talking about commissioned work, this isn’t an easy climb and minds have to be changed!

It’s not beyond the realm of possibility that some creative person will make an art form out of cell phone photography of weddings such that people will actually pay that person thousands of dollars to bring a cell phone to their weddings and do their creative cell phone photographic magic! However, a preference for those types of images over the more professional/commercial-looking photos most wedding clients currently expect is gonna take quite some marketing and perception changing.

And–even though it shouldn’t matter–think of the cognitive dissonance wedding couples will have to overcome in order to be convinced to shell out big bucks to a photographer using camera equipment that is no better than the cameras posessed by 95% of the wedding guests!…:p

Michael Grace-Martin is a professional wedding, portrait, event, stock, and fine art photographer based in Upstate New York. He is also the author of this blog. All images and text are (c) Michael Grace-Martin Photography. His main website is: http://www.mgm-photography.com/.

Visit Michael's Art Photography Portfolio at SaatchiArt.com!