9 ms·

I have heard of travel photographers doing this with high-end DSLRs. You can use miniature painting techniques to make cameras look incredibly worn to the poin

I have heard of travel photographers doing this with high-end DSLRs. You can use miniature painting techniques to make cameras look incredibly worn to the point of broken.

scottyah 3y ago
Same with bicycles in New York City, even mimicking beat up duct tape and rust (although the entire frame and water bottle holder are carbon fiber).
exitb 3y ago
There are more reasons to do this, other than theft. Often photographer does NOT want to appear professional, as it affects their subjects.
- jeffbee 3y ago
  Wouldn't the amateur have a shiny, new-looking camera? If I see someone with the knurling worn off their focus rings I am going to assume they are professionals.
  - jandrese 3y ago
    Either that or someone who bought second hand equipment because they can't afford new gear.
sottol 3y ago
Or you could just buy a Leica M-P "Correspondent" [1] - by LENNY KRAVITZ DESIGN - that came roughed up and brassed from the factory. I think they only charged $15,000-20,000 extra over the $5,000 base price of a regular M-P. Ahhh, the beautiful and strange world of the uber-wealthy and collectors. Burt more seriously, I've often seen photographers use black gaffer tape to hide the prominent camera manufacturer logos. [1] https://leica-camera.com/en-US/Company/Press-Centre/Press-Releases/2015/Press-Release-Special-limited-edition-LEICA-M-P-%E2%80%98CORRESPONDENT%E2%80%99-SET-CREATED-BY-LENNY-KRAVITZ-FOR-KRAVITZ-DESIGN https://leica-camera.com/en-US/Company/Press-Centre/Press-Re...
- Ancapistani 3y ago
  > I've often seen photographers use black gaffer tape to hide the prominent camera manufacturer logos. Most of us do that for reasons other than theft protection. It's especially common for street photographers, as an obvious Leica or something will draw attention that we don't want - we want people not to notice us, because our whole goal is to capture things in their "natural setting". I do it - in fact, I bought my camera partially because it doesn't look like a modern pro-level dSLR. It's a Fujifilm X-Pro3, and I've covered the logo with black tape and often use vintage (or vintage-looking) lenses. My intent is for people to assume I'm part of a college art class or something. It gives them an easy way to "put me in a box" in their hears, classify me as understood and unremarkable, then forget about me. Prior to this, I had a silver X-E2. I'll never forget the time I was out shooting with a friend who had a brand new, black, Leica M. Twice people came up to us and spoke only to me, wanting to talk about photography or ask about my camera. I'd picked it up on Craigslist for ~$200 - my friend was standing next to me the whole time with a ~$7k Leica with an amused look on his face. That was the moment I decided I'd never buy a silver camera again.

I have heard of travel photographers doing this with high-end DSLRs. You can use miniature painting techniques to make cameras look incredibly worn to the point of broken.

scottyah 3y ago

Same with bicycles in New York City, even mimicking beat up duct tape and rust (although the entire frame and water bottle holder are carbon fiber).

exitb 3y ago

There are more reasons to do this, other than theft. Often photographer does NOT want to appear professional, as it affects their subjects.

jeffbee 3y ago
Wouldn't the amateur have a shiny, new-looking camera? If I see someone with the knurling worn off their focus rings I am going to assume they are professionals.
- jandrese 3y ago
  Either that or someone who bought second hand equipment because they can't afford new gear.

sottol 3y ago

Or you could just buy a Leica M-P "Correspondent" [1] - by LENNY KRAVITZ DESIGN - that came roughed up and brassed from the factory. I think they only charged $15,000-20,000 extra over the $5,000 base price of a regular M-P. Ahhh, the beautiful and strange world of the uber-wealthy and collectors. Burt more seriously, I've often seen photographers use black gaffer tape to hide the prominent camera manufacturer logos. [1] https://leica-camera.com/en-US/Company/Press-Centre/Press-Releases/2015/Press-Release-Special-limited-edition-LEICA-M-P-%E2%80%98CORRESPONDENT%E2%80%99-SET-CREATED-BY-LENNY-KRAVITZ-FOR-KRAVITZ-DESIGN https://leica-camera.com/en-US/Company/Press-Centre/Press-Re...

Ancapistani 3y ago
> I've often seen photographers use black gaffer tape to hide the prominent camera manufacturer logos. Most of us do that for reasons other than theft protection. It's especially common for street photographers, as an obvious Leica or something will draw attention that we don't want - we want people not to notice us, because our whole goal is to capture things in their "natural setting". I do it - in fact, I bought my camera partially because it doesn't look like a modern pro-level dSLR. It's a Fujifilm X-Pro3, and I've covered the logo with black tape and often use vintage (or vintage-looking) lenses. My intent is for people to assume I'm part of a college art class or something. It gives them an easy way to "put me in a box" in their hears, classify me as understood and unremarkable, then forget about me. Prior to this, I had a silver X-E2. I'll never forget the time I was out shooting with a friend who had a brand new, black, Leica M. Twice people came up to us and spoke only to me, wanting to talk about photography or ask about my camera. I'd picked it up on Craigslist for ~$200 - my friend was standing next to me the whole time with a ~$7k Leica with an amused look on his face. That was the moment I decided I'd never buy a silver camera again.