So recently this friend of mine had his unilateral thesis published on the Express Tribune on the statement that has it's viral roots equivalent to the rapidly expanding consumerism of DSLRs: "Owning a DSLR doesn't make you a photographer." [link]


Well of course, being an avid photographer myself, I'll have to agree with the ground reality of this clause that will be definitely prove to be acerbic to the many proud of owners of this digital entity. DSLRs have become more of a commodity that is sought by many blind eyes whose perspectives yield from the eye of the lens and of course, the product with it's digitally instigated factors (especially the depth of focus) is appreciated by the masses as a work of art and as a concoction of the talent and concept of the photographer. This trend has also enhanced the evils of capitalism and is analogous to the resentment of an ardent Apple iPhone consumer basking in the glory of his expensive 800$ iPhone 4 only to be soon iOutdated by the advent of a newer, better, classier, trendier and more efficient iPhone 5. Hence, people with minimal photographic background have started spending thousands of dollars on shit expensive DSLRs that is better than their competitors just to have the feel of a photographer. But that's just one side of the argument.


Now, ever since my friend's article got published. People have been tagging people who have DSLRs and personally attacking them without having any knowledge about their photographic background. In other words, typical stereotyping has stemmed from this one statement. And what's more queer is how many of the DSLR owners in my list, just to conceal their imminent guilt, have been defending their ownership by tagging other DSLR owners instead of contesting the the offense by presenting a logical argument. I've seen people gloating about practicing 'photography' with pocket film and 3 mp phone camera phones that were never different than the apparent SNAPSHOTS they take now with their 2000$ Nikon D300.


If you ask me, photography is an aesthetic compound of the digital tools and well as the human mind. Digital tools only execute the photographer's idea but for me, a photograph is a multifaceted story that is not depicted merely by words. It is a tale that circumvents beauty in the mundane of things, the genius in the human mind, the appeal to the human eye and a chance for the audience to find their own story in the subject unprecedented by anyone. Obviously a camera cannot find the perfect lighting, it cannot create the scenario, it cannot edit a photo to suit your mood of the picture you take. It's simply a gadget that helps manifest your idea with a little manipulation. Be it film, DSLR or a cellphone camera. It is an orgasmic vent for your soul.


DSLR's a surely unique in their own way, they make your images clearer, they help you perfect your focus and add pretty bokehs to add some vibrancy to your image. But before you're known as a photographer for the awesomeness your DSLR captures, be sure to clear your conscience of the fact that being an artist you can create beauty out of any medium of photography.


Here's one story.


A photographer went to a socialite party in New York. As he entered the front door, the host said
'I love your pictures - they're wonderful; you must have a fantastic camera.'
He said nothing until dinner was finished, then:
'That was a wonderful dinner; you must have a terrific stove.'