Have you seen people scoff at the idea that they should learn photography before going pro? Only to have them asking next week how to fix the wedding photos they ruined?

If you don’t have the experience, don’t fake it.

I was called a gatekeeper. Here’s what I actually said.

I think Photography is one of the few jobs on earth where experts are called outdated gatekeepers if they try and promote professional standards.

I’ve spent decades challenging myself. I make master classes in photography. I also share my knowledge freely. In almost any skill industry. If you have LESS than 2-4 years of experience, you’re not pro-ready. In most fields, experts have to approve of you first.

Yes, in photography, you also NEED years of dedicated study or apprenticeship. You should NOT try to be a professional, worrying about what to charge for your work. You may have talent and some good photos. But you’re probably not ready, and that’s OK.

A nice camera will take a good photo. If you happen upon the perfect scenes, you will get it. But the perfect scene is not real life. Being a photographer is an understanding of space, position, line, and tone. And even more of interacting with people. Posing, sales, marketing.

I have 25 years of trial and error. We need time to practice. We are the joy of learning before insisting on going PRO. That’s why so many are ruining weddings or begging for help after sessions because clients are unhappy. They are doing a job they never learned.

Buying a stove does not make you a chef.

Then why does buying a cool camera make you a photographer? because we can fake it in Photoshop by using AI generation to add in the part we missed. That’s not a photo; it’s using someone else’s, while you send Adobe money for the privilege of faking it.

Being a professional or expert in a craft does not mean you simply bought the tools. It means you learned that trade. That this is divisive when in any other trade it’s normal, shows the profession has become TOXIC.

This was a respected profession – Now it’s barely taught!

The attitude that experience is something to be mocked because you got some great photos or someone paid you is dangerous. These photographers often burn out quickly because they never learn the trade as a whole and respond to any criticisms with scathing accusations of gatekeeping.

When I started, I practiced for over 5 years before I even started charging. This was normal in the early 2000s. I understand there’s no absolute rule here. But in a fix-it-later world, we get offended by the idea that we are not great artists NOW!

Half of the photos in this post have won awards at PPA international competitions. About as tough as it gets. But when I shared this on social media, they were called low quality by the photographers.

So can we no longer have any professional standards? Do we have to accept constant AI fakers from new photographers as master works because the internet likes them?

“You’re a gatekeeper Gavin! It’s subjective!

What is going on? I went deep into toxic Facebook groups to find out. In fact, this is a topic I started in the groups. It got hundreds of likes, but nearly every comment was defensive or trying to belittle my own work.

This Seattle photo from 2011 won a lot of prestige and awards for me. It also helped me understand. Talent can be natural, but skill still always takes time. Study and practice. Even when I officially became a master, I realized I was not nearly good enough.

Photography now is driven by selling new cameras that convince new photographers they will be amazing because of good gear. It’s helped drive an incredible amount of argument among new photographers, which in the end prevents them from learning the craft.

It’s easier to make decent photos than ever and harder than ever to stand out. It could be said that gear is being used as the real gatekeeper. When in reality, the camera matters very little.

Dare I say, good photos are not always subjective – I’m not saying the government should fix our profession. But we should stop pretending there are no standards. There are objective guidelines who what a good photo is and how to create it. Just like learning to make music or furniture.

Sure, it’s subjective. But there are guidelines. High-level competitions and judges force you to face how great your photos are. Like PPA’s international juried competitions. I was young and arrogant, also. I pitted myself against people with decades of experience and got my ass handed to me. I got upset, but when I got over that ego, I learned a lot and pushed harder and eventually became a master photographer myself.

Most viral photos today are AI fakery.

I don’t use Ai generation to create scenes. But these day you can get more likes in a photo of your camera than the photos it takes!

Because the viral photos are fake. They are created by Ai or partially created by Ai fill tools like in Photoshop. Yes. Doing any major portion of a photo this way makes it a fraud. You didn’t create that amazing background of a bowing dress. It was plagiarized from a photographer who did.

Real photos matter. Fake AI photos are not photos. But Adobe does not care because they get paid. So we have to demand proof of whether the photo is real. Because

It’s not bad to be a hobbyist.

I think this is the biggest point people miss. The idea that they are not ready to be a pro is an insult. If you fly a hobby plane, would you be offended if a commercial pilot said you were not ready to fly a jet?

Going pro can quickly take the joy out of a thing, and we’re always being pressured to turn our hobbies into a job. But slow down. As you improve, do things with friends. After a few years, maybe help someone who can’t afford a wedding photographer. Try things that are safe and learn like ANY other skill. Is it gatekeeping that you started playing violin last month, but are not invited to play in the Christmas concert?

This is not gatekeeping. It’s where we are as a profession. The time you study is now a hard rule. real photography should be. I share what I know and learn from others. Take the time to learn for real so you become a true expert. Learn the power of a well-crafted photograph. Because the AI bubble will burst.

Gavin Seim

Assisted Culling is the new Lightroom feature for 2026. But no one needs to be a better photographer, and not for the reasons you think.

Lightroom Ai culling is Hot Garbage…

Photos in today’s session were edited with Filmist presets and the new Alchemist 3 actions.

The rejects are often the best photo.

Every photo I added in this post was rejected by Lightroom’s Assisted Culling. That’s because feeling and emotion that AI tools don’t get. Every

Most photographers are no longer taught that the way they cull defines their work. It’s one of the hardest skills for most image makers, and it can’t be left to a machine.

Use good tools, but always practice better culling.

I can teach Shadow and light and space, and line. But learning how to pick the best of 20 photos from the same pose is something only years of practice can teach you.

If we start handing this off to a machine, even when that machine is better than this admittedly per-release version. We will lose that skill, and photos will all look the same.

AI tools homogenize art.

Whether Ai generation of culling. It takes away the nuance that makes photos great. That is atmosphere and feeling and soul and the vision we had when we pressed the shutter.

Skip auto-culling and keep looking at every photo

Gavin Seim

Your everyday carry could be any camera. But your cup holder camera is the one that does not live in a bag or even with a lens cap. It’s your cup holder camera.

This is the camera that will actually transform your work.

Most of the images in today’s videos were edited with Filmist, Natural HDR, and Alchemist.

It can be a better photographer than any premium new body.

New overpriced cameras abound. But most of them are just copies of each other as camera makers ignore what photographers are saying and try to push every more premium toys on us.

But your Cup Holder Camera is rarely that expensive. Sure, you want a good camera, but as you know, if this video is a decade old, it will still be amazing. It’s about the agility of a camera that’s always ready and that makes you want to take a photo.

My CHC is usually a cheap to mid-priced camera that is really well-made and small. I know it’s going to get knocked around, and I know it will handle that, and that if something does happen, it’s not a huge deal.

Thinking like a journalist.

Whether you like landscapes, portraits, sports, or crazy events, the CHC is really about being a journalist. Being able to take any situation you find, grab your camera with a second thought, and get the photo.

Speed and agility are king. And if I jump out in the middle of a street fight to do something or say something, I also don’t want to be worried about how much I will lose if I get robbed or someone breaks my heart.

I’m not saying what you need to do is get a small camera so you can run into a police standoff. I’m just saying that a journalist’s mindset will make you take photos more, with more confidence, and improve every area of your work.

If you want to carry a Leica or get the high-priced Sony RX1R III, that’s fine. The main thing is that it’s a camera you will never have an excuse to toss in your cup holder and grab at a moment’s notice.

But a Pocket is even more accessible, right…

Maybe… In 25 years of doing this, the Cup Hold Camera I have found is the most convenient.

Even a pocket camera can get left behind. For example, my Sony RX100 was powerful if a little uninspiring to me. It was also very expensive and felt delicate. So in real life I neither wanted it kicking around the car or collecting dust in a pocket.

Perhaps the most “POCKET” camera in these times is the Ricoh GR, and while I don’t have one, I’ve been eyeing it as an even smaller solution for when I don’t even want a camera seen on my neck.

You want a camera you love. But it’s not about being trendy. The Fuji X half is more of a fun overpriced toy than a true pocket camera, and it’s not even well built, so as a CCH it’s not the best choice either.

Camera companies are trying to make expensive fashion accessories instead of really great cameras. They think if they can become Apple and trendy, they will get those numbers back. It won’t work in the long term.

So I think the lack of a truly pocketable camera in 2025 is a problem, and I hope we’ll see more quality compact cameras in the coming years. For now, I think buying used is the best way to send a message and get a great, always-ready camera that you will always take with you.

It’s honestly simple. But we are in an age of “experts” teaching us things about cameras that are often false. It’s today’s video, and we’ll debunk all of that today.

#2. Aperture and sensors with lenses at the same focal length

Video #1 – Sensor size does NOT affect aperture value

In today video I used presets from Filmist, Silver and a a little Natural HDR. There a free mini versions of each. Also don’t miss my next Shadow Hackers LIVE workshop.

Equivalent F-Stop is not a real thing in Photography.

I made this video on a whim. I didn’t know it would be such a hot topic, and I’m meeting a lot of resistance. I did not fully see how much non-photography education is being promoted as fact.

When I started in the 90’s it was said that real photographers used medium format. But NO ONE said, a 50mm 1.4 on your Nikon was a 50mm f4 because of the medium format.

Aperture is a measure of light transmission. The exposure of an f1.4 lens on medium format, full frame, M43, or a phone is exactly the same! Equivalence was created for the internet and by influencers who want to sell you bigger lenses or sound smarter than you.

By their reasoning, I should be calling their full-frame f1.4 lens an F8 because of my 4×5 large format lenses that literally cover 4×5 inches. On that a 90mm is a 24mm wide-angle after all.

But no. There’s a darker theme here. Over the last decade, the industry has gone from master Photographers sharing true experience, to visual spectacles from YouTubers who shill gear to the unsuspecting, more than to learn or teach real photography methods.

Sensor size changes, F stop does not

Some “experts” start copying and pasting math formulas that relate to how lenses are designed, not how they are used. The idea that a full frame gets more light because it’s a bigger lens covering more area.

No… The amount of light you get on the sensor and the corresponding exposure is exactly the same as we can see demonstrated in the video. On FF, M43, Large format or your cell phone.

Yes… You will get less bokeh on 25mm lens than you will on a 50m at the same aperture. That is a feature as much as it is a negative. The aperture is the same and there’s no Equivalent Aperture. That’s not a real photography term nor is bokeh is measured in fstops, They measure light transmission to the film or sensor based on the opening in relation to the focal distance.

Sensor sizes change things. But itg does not mean one is better…

We’ve been fed the idea that full frame is good and others are cropped. That’s not really true. Each sensor is a full frame of its intended size. You can choose what works best based on your needs. But they all get the same light.

We could spend one day talking about distance, opening size, circle of confusion, or how T stops are a bit more precise. But those are not what teach you photography or take good photos.

But there’s more light…

The idea of sensor crop is also new. We didnt call a hHasselblad a crop compared to a large fromat camera. They were designed at that natice size. I’ve been seeing this light gathering argument all over. It’s nonsense once you understand photography basics. Aperture numbers exist to provide a constant so we don’t need to think about complex math while taking a photo.

It’s like saying if you have a projector filling a 5-foot wall and another filling a 10-foot wall. Obviously, to cover the bigger wall with the SAME luma value light in each MM, you would need a brighter light, because its over a larger area. That’s why full frame lenses need to be bigger and to cover the same amount of light onto more area.

This makes zero difference in how aperture works since the light hitting each respective sensor space or film is the SAME.

I repeat: Exposure is EXACTLY the same on the sensor in relation to its size. This is the point of aperture numbers. They create a constant.

It’s not LESS bokeh. It’s MORE depth of field.

People often promote these smaller lenses or smaller sensors as worse. They are not. I’ve lost far more photos to out of focus from being wide open than from having enough bokeh.

Bigger sensors have less tightly packed pixels which in essence let them be more sensitive to light and often have less noise. Remember the exposure is exactly the same on both, but the larger sensor will often receive the light with less noise. No, this does not mean the aperture equivalence is real. It’s the sensor that’s different, not the aperture.

Smaller sensors, like on an M43 camera, can result in a smaller camera, but more importantly, smaller lenses. By a lot. This makes the camera much more portable, which means I take it more and use it more. The same quality lens also tends to cost less as it needs less glass.

But also because a crop sensor lens of the same field of view length is wide for example, my 25mm vs a 50mm on full. I get more depth of field. No still not aperture equivalence. It’s just that on the m43 I’m shooting at 25mm and get the DOF a 25mm lens affords. When I don’t want background blur, the M43 camera actually improves my hit rate and makes focusing easier.

Yes there may be a tad more noise in low light. Then again, maybe not because these small bodies often have better in-body stabilization. Yes they can have a tad more noise at high ISO. In reality, this rarely matters. Modern noise is more like grain and in most cases does not even need to me removed by any fancy tools. See my video on why you don’t need to de-noise.

The dark side of photography

Yes there’s a point where images get a lot more limited like cell phone-sized sensors. But on pro and prosumer cameras, it’s just a preference and all formats have advantages.

Everything has a cost in photography just as in life. Everything is a trade-off.

I have a Nikon full frame because, yes sometimes i want a bit more blur. But the truth is I usually grab full frame because my beautiful vintage lenses fit at their intended field and I can even use them with an auto focus-adapter of view and I can mount anything to the Nikon.

But more often, I will take a small crop sensor camera. My results and just as good, only slightly different and I take it more because it handles so much easier.

I’m glad to have both. But if bigger was better, I would have to say we all need medium format. But it’s not so don’t let people selling you stuff convince you it is.

Complex spin repeated by influencers and then by people trying to sound smart to others has a darker side. Real photography education is being lost by pretend experts and people selling you new gear. The basics of photography are becoming a lost art, and we need to change that.

Gavin Seim