Feininger had no patience with gear fetishism. This, from The Complete Photographer, may strike a nerve with some of us!:
'The Importance of Attitude
This is the most significant chapter in this book. Please, read it with care.
So you want to become a photographer—a good one. And like most students of photography, you probably believe that the key to good photography is mastery of photo-technique. Unfortunately, this assumption is at best a half-truth and at worst, a trap, a one-way road to failure. Surprised? Let me explain.
In my considerable experience there are two kinds of photographers: one, whose concern is with photography; the other whose interest is in pictures. The first (and, unfortunately, most amateurs belong to this group) is mesmerized by the technical aspects of the craft—precision cameras, sparkling lenses, fine-grain development, and so on. He owns the finest equipment, the latest cameras, the sharpest lenses, a full line of accessories. He is a walking encyclopedia of photo-technical information, and inordinately proud of the fact that he can produce virtually ''grainless" 16 X 20-inch blowups from 35 mm negatives. He knows everything there is to know about the merits and shortcomings of the various "system cameras," regularly trades up to the latest model (bravely absorbing the financial loss), but seldom knows what to photograph and rarely, if ever, makes a worthwhile picture.
At the other end of the spectrum we find the photographer whose sole interest is in the subjects he intends to photograph. In contrast to the first type, who is fascinated by gadgets and technology, he is concerned with people, natural objects, landscapes, street scenes, architecture, insects, birds or some other specific category. And because of this passion he tries to capture representatives in picture form to take home and enjoy again and again, perhaps sharing his enthusiasm with others. It is only because alternative means of visual recording like drawing or painting seem less suitable (or are beyond his ability) that he resorts to photography; and only the realization that technically perfect photographs are bound to be better interpretations of the subjects he loves than poor ones will involve him in the technical aspects of photography. Yet, despite this lack of deep interest in the medium itself, he is the better photographer of the two and his are the images which command attention. If you are this second kind of person, we should get along well.'
