Re:How a College Student Used Creative Commons to Dominate P...
by ghaff on Sunday February 07, 2016 @04:32PM
(#11054961)
I generally agree with you with respect to equipment cost although, to be fair, a lot of that difference is offset by consumables. A Nikon F4 may only have been modestly more expensive than a more consumer-oriented SLR but the pro probably shot thousands of dollars more film during a year.
So in addition to distribution, just using the camera has also gotten a lot cheaper.
Re:How a College Student Used Creative Commons to Dominate P...
by throwketchup on Tuesday February 09, 2016 @11:29PM
(#11070779)
You don't need brand new gear though: A used Nikon D2x or D300 on a good lens will produce results as good as most pros would get with film back in the day. Those bodies even drive all the old (cheap) Nikkor AF lenses. Total cost for a body and a couple of high quality AF zooms will run you less than $500 on eBay.
If you want to get really cheap, pick up a D1 for $35, a refurbished 55-200 VR for $100, and maybe a 2x teleconverter for $20.
What has gotten cheaper / more accessible is the ability to publicize, duplicate and distribute one's work. Twenty years ago, short of dropping off prints at the local newspaper, there would be no way for an amateur photographer to get her photos under the nose of photo editors at major news outlets. Today, that's as simple as uploading to Flickr.