A modern high res camera does allow for more mistakes though. A good photographer doesn't under- or overexpose 2 stops. I do. A good photographer doesn't so often realize that the good bit of the image is actually 1/5th of it, in the corner. I do.

So I crop 1/5 of the image and boost the exposure 2stops. If I do that with a camera just a few years old, the result is terrible.

Now obviously, if the image is bad or completely uninteresting to begin with then no technological thing is going to help. But it's nice crutches for beginners. After I cropped my image to 1/5, I learned what I should have done. In the past, that was a really expensive lesson (the photo was ruined). Now I get the lesson AND the photo.

I underexpose two stops on occasion if the highlights are too blown out and I want that detail - it's really easy to bring the shadows back up in lightroom.

>"Wow, that's a really good photo! You must have a great camera!"

"That's so kind. You have a great mouth!"

(Saw this in a comic somewhere - sadly, I can't find it any more).

Here's one of my favourite photos: https://www.instagram.com/p/BXmN7DgF0L-/?taken-by=anta40

When I showed it to family members, most of them liked it. Then one of them asked "What camera did you use to take this picture?"

I said "Just an old 6x6 Japanese box, loaded with Portra 400" Maybe someday I'll visit that place again, shoot a 4x5 and make really huge print of it :D

> The main dimension "really good camera!" helps in these days is resolution, which has approximately zero to do with photo quality

I've mainly found exposure to be much easier to manage with a good camera.

To the extent that "exposure" means "don't screw it up, probably", modern cameras are really helpful. To the extent that exposure means "Conscious control of motion blur, depth of field, etc", I find myself reverting back to manual, aperture priority, and shutter priority modes that have been around since the 1970s.

Thinking about it, this also shows up in the divide between my two main cameras - a Nikon DSLR, which offers me total control and an experience very similar to the film environment I learned in, and an iPhone, which offers me almost no control at all. I use and love both.

I wish I could have a nice DSLR (but those things costs a pile of money!), unfortunately I wonder if I could be arsed to lug it around that often... Therefore I have an iPhone that is always on me and use the default app for quick snaps[0], but lately if I want to take a nice shot I'll use a more advanced app offering more manual control (as well as increased feedback (namely ProCamera). Just being able to have some fine, locked control on focus and tweak exposure compensation with a live mini histogram makes a world of difference†, even before you prioritise shutter vs ISO.

† Tip: (thank you non-discoverable UI) The default iPhone app can lock AE/AF by loooooong-touching until it locks, and you can adjust exposure compensation by sliding up and down, but the former is a AF lock (not a manual set) and the second one is both highly imprecise and takes ages to go through large ranges when AE screws up. ProCamera's UI is both much more intuitive, responsive, and full-featured.

[0]: https://twitter.com/lloeki/status/897158101706702853

When people say that, I point them to my Instagram[0] and ask them to see if they can spot the few photos I took with my mobile phone. Invariably, they can't, because I don't think it's even possible for Instagram photos (unless you know to disregard narrow shots, which is something phones can't do well).

[0]: https://www.instagram.com/stavroskorok/

A decent camera makes it more easy though.

My 300 EUR camera can focus on the eye, and my 1.8f lens will make the background blurry. All I add is rule of the third. The camera will also measure the exposure according to the face.

And suddenly I made a photo that other people find aesthetically pleasing.

It's going to be interesting ones artificial blur / bokeh and AI compositions are mainstream.

Now I want to see the picture!