Photography is kind of like Pokémon:

The ultimate telos (purpose) is to catch all of the Pokémon which exist.

So I wonder for us as photographers– is our purpose to capture as many photographic moments/photos as possible?

“Capturing” vs “Shooting” photos

Photographers are kind of like collectors; we like to collect moments via photography. We delight in capturing “decisive moments” (street photography), personal moments (family photos), and we like to document our life experiences (and it course photograph our food).

I like the notion of “capturing” photos over “shooting” photos because:

1. Capturing a photo implies you will observe and inspect it later. By capturing a photo of something, you almost possess it.
2. Shooting is like a gun: your aim is to kill it.

Food photography is good photography

The funny thing about photographing my food (before I eat it):

Shooting my food is almost equivalent to eating my food.

So once I shoot my food then eat it, I’m almost consuming the meal twice!

And by shooting the food, I’m more appreciative of the food, I notice more of the details, and thus I delight in eating it more, and have more gratitude to the food!

Thus, food photography is good photography.

Capturing is the same as owning, or better?

I like to photograph things which I admire the design.

And this is a big epiphany of mine:

I don’t like owning things.

Why?

1. When you own something, you get trapped. You cannot upgrade as easily. For example if I own an iPhone X but desire to get an iPhone Xs, the upgrade doesn’t seem substantial enough and thus I end up NOT getting the iPhone Xs.
2. Owning stuff adds unnecessary stress and complication to your life: Driving a Lamborghini is cool, but owning one must suck. Paying for insurance, maintence bills, etc.
3. No matter how great the thing you buy, you’re going to adapt (get bored of it). I call this “gear adaptation syndrome”. I don’t like being tied down by stuff; thus the optimal solution for me is to not own anything.