Keeping a Photography Notebook

2024 Photo Journals

If there was ever one lament that I have, it’s about not always keeping a journal.  When we are young, we sometimes keep journals to record our thoughts, thinking that they are important - and they may certainly be so.  If if were not for diaries, much of what happened to ordinary people on a daily basis long ago would not have been recorded.  But I’m not discussing diaries or daily journals, but those notes that are kept to record what I do photographically.  I wish that I’d kept travel/photo journals 50 years ago, and even 20 years ago.  All I do have are all the photographic results from those outings, and in some cases, I did keep notes, but I was never fastidious about it.  I have some small notebooks where I have started with a few entries, and the rest is blank.  Some notebooks are the pocket style, and may contain only a single photo trip, with notes that were jotted down along the way.  I changed that in 2017, when I started to keep a journal of all my photographic activities, not just those taken on trips.  I’ve never kept notes on every roll of film that I have shot, as that’s just not as important as what I saw, where I was,  and what else was happening.  On a long trip, I will number my rolls, so that I can just enter the information later as to the camera and film stock that I used, and the date.  That works out well for me.  You can purchase photographic record notebooks that are essentially just a list of rolls with exposure information, if you are the sort of person that likes to keep that information, and I’m not.

From my 2022 Takumar Trek notebook - a list of films shot, 
all added after the trip was over.

Small photos, printed by the Kodak mini-printer

My preferred journals. 

I also decided rather recently, to stick to a certain style of notebook that is generally about 5.5  x 8 inches, and found that I can buy them in bulk from Amazon. These have brown covers, lined pages, and have 60 pages. (Image).  They cost about a buck each.  While for some people, 60 pages may be too little, I find that they are perfect for a long trip, or 2 to 3 months of activities.  I don’t want a whole year in one journal, because losing one would be bad enough, but to lose a many months or a year at once would be awful.  In addition, the smaller size takes up much less space in a bag.  So far, I have been happy with them.  Another journal that I like is the one issued under the Magnum Photos imprint (Thames and Hudson), which are just a bit wider, and with thicker paper, and 48 pages. They are also more expensive. Moleskine notebooks are nice, too, but a far cry from being $1 each!

These cheap notebooks are utilitarian, for sure.  But they do the job, and that’s what I want.  One thing that I often do is to include shots from my iPhone, when it’s appropriate, and for printing those I use a Kodak C300R camera/printer that does a great job with small dye-sublimation prints.  A good thing to carry on any trip.  The photos really help augment the journal entries.

June 2024, when I was working on the Kudzol developer

Now that I have been diligent/consistent about keeping notes, these journals have been very useful when I need to write about photographs that I have taken.  I find myself referring to them whenever I am working on a project.  I counted 160 rolls of film shot in 2024, and I used 6 journals.  There is no way that I can keep all that in my brain.  I may not know where the hell I’m going, but I do know where I have been!

Older pocket notebooks, some contain just a few pertinent notes, others are entire trips.

from a 2018 trip to Ontario

An entry for 2009. Marc Akemann and I did some night shooting.

How photographers keep notes and  organize their work is a very personal thing.  What works for me may not be what works for you.  But if you have a system, and you like it, stick with it, because you’ll be better off than just throwing your negatives in a shoebox.  I do know that having all of my negatives in polypropylene negative sheets and stored in 3-ring binders has served me well.  I can go into any year and find what I need.  It’s the notebooks about that particular roll of film that I lack, and I wish I’d been doing that since I started. I now have 25 years worth of binders, and I find myself going through them when I am working on a project. I used to make negative contact sheets, and lately I have started going through the years 2000 to 2010 to scan in the negatives.  I can do so much more now with the scans than I did with the darkroom then.  I have a lot of old work that I can use in upcoming zines, and it’s been fun to pore over those older negatives and find that I did get some pretty good results.

But what about if you just want to keep a log of exposures?  There used to be some very specialized notebooks for photographers, especially into the 1980s.  Perfect for large-format photogrpaphers, where every exposure can be unique, unlike the person shooting 4 frames per second.   For a while, those notebooks seemed out of print, but with the resurgence of film photography, various types of photo memo-style notebooks are now available.  Possibly the more useful one is from Mike Padua's Shoot Film Co.. as shown below.

In addition, a quick search also shows another one, but I've not examined it personally:

Of course, you can just use any blank ruled notebook to do the same, but having an organized layout fopr doing those records may be the better way to go, if you go that way.  These notebooks make a great deal of sense for large-format practitioners, since you can develop each sheet of film according to how you exposed it.  

As far as photography-related notebooks, there are many sizes and styles available online.  Etsy sellers are one source, as I have seen some nice-looking notebooks there.  I'm not a fan of spiral or wire-bound notebooks, as they can have pages rip out or the bindings get messed up over time.  Lay-flat notebooks are preferable to hard-bound notebooks, because they are easier to write in (at least to me).  In any case, make time to record your photo adventures, so that in the future, you won't be wishing that you'd done it (like me).

Simple Joys

 I have been in a bit of a creative slump lately, whether it's writing or making photos. Today, I have felt the best in about a week, after getting over some lower-back issues that had me in a lot of pain and limiting my mobility.  Thanks to some stretches, ibuprofen, and heat pad, I now feel pretty good.  It's a rainy day, and the daffodils are looking quite good.  Spring is here, a bit later in the mountains than along the coast.

But what I want to write is about how some simple pleasures can bring joy to a day.  I was eating breakfast, and my second slice of toast was in need of some jam.  I went to the fridge and pulled out the small jar of raspberry jam that my mother-in-law had made the previous year.  She's 97 years old, and is still able to make jam.  There was just enough left in the jar for one slice of bread, and as I emptied it and smoothed it over the toast, I anticipated how good it would taste.  When the raspberry jam reached my taste buds, I had this singular moment of joy.  Accompanying this were thoughts of how wonderful a gift this was, and the knowledge of how the berries were picked and eventually ended up hundreds of miles from the source.  THIS was the spark I needed to get my mojo back!  

In our ever-challenging world, we need moments like this to remind ourselves that a simple pleasure such as home-made raspberry jam should not be taken for granted.  Whatever small pleasures you enjoy, take time to experience them.  Appreciate the sublime.  Photography does not have to be about the fantastic, outrageous, or unique. A sublime image can connect us to shared experiences, and if photography is a visual language, no text is needed to tell the audience what's happened.  

While that was it for that jar, I am comforted in knowing that we have a few more in the pantry. 

For me, photography is also a simple joy.  I photograph for myself, and if others like my images, that's great. If I did not enjoy doing it, I'd be doing something else. My artistic skills in other mediums are not great.  While I also enjoy using film, I won't deny the advantage of immediacy with a digital image.  It does not matter what you use, only that you are doing something that brings you joy.  

DSLRs will never go away for me

 

My D300 with the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 zoom

With most of the manufacturers going all-in on the mirrorless craze, you'd think the DSLRs are dinosaurs.  With film cameras, SLRs have always been my preferred platform, no matter the manufacturer. My first real camera was an SLR, and that's the way that I have been photographing for a long, long, time. My first DSLR was a Nikon D70s, and I used that camera for almost 10 years before I sold it.  I've shot with a lot of different digital cameras, including the m4/3 Olympus, Nikon 1 system, Fuji X100s, and my latest mirrorless, a Canon EOS M5.  However, were I to consistently use a DSLR, it comes down to a Nikon D3100 - mostly for ebay shots, as it sits on a tripod in my "studio."  My APS-C DSLR for anything else is my D300.  It's a rock solid DSLR that I can trust in any conditions, and works with a lot of lenses.  The only significant downside is that it uses Compact Flash (CF) cards, and not SD cards.  It has sat in the drawer for a while, unused, because I was getting a CHA error message on the 32GB card, and sometimes with a 4 GB card.  I tried a bunch of 1 GB CF cards and no problems. Hmm... I ordered a new 4GB CF card that arrived yesterday and it's fine, so yay!  For me, the D300's 12MP are enough for anything I do, and for macrophotography, it's absolutely great.  

My full-frame (FX) DSLR is a Nikon Df, with 16 MP, and again, it's a wonderful camera that uses all of my manual and AF lenses just fine.  It's what I pick up when I want to make great images.  It's paired right now with an old 28mm f/3.5 that was factory AI'd. so it works great as a manual lens on the Df.

My point with all this is that I refrained from switching to a Nikon mirrorless Z system because, dammit, I am not made of money, and second, my suite of lenses does everything I need.  The new lenses for those mirrorless Nikons are even bigger than the ones I already have.  There's an insane amount of money being spent by people that think they need a newer system.  Maybe some do, but at what point is there a diminishing return?  I see people saying they need the latest and greatest because they are gear jockeys and to them, that's their thing. Fine. It's your money.  

However, the thing is - I don't trust Electronic Viewfinders.  Sure, I use one on my EOS M5, but that's a special purpose camera, not my main one.  With a DSLR, I have a viewfinder that's a direct and immediate connection to what I am seeing.  That's how I do photography. I shoot a DSLR like I shoot film.  

So, my now more dependable D300 will get more use, and believe me, it's a great DSLR.  The controls are perfectly placed.  Also, neither my D300 or Df do video.  I'm not a video person, and the fact is, the latest cameras concentrate so much on video, that they lack some functions that appeal to still photographers. Making video-less DSLRs or even mirrorless models, would drop their prices considerably.  I think that's the real crime with these new cameras, and maybe also a reason for some to shoot film cameras - there's no video feature.  My iPhone can certainly handle any short video I may need to do.  Maybe I'm just a curmudgeon, but I bet there are a lot of photographers that would agree with me.  Manufacturers - don't turn every camera into a video camera. make some good, robust, still cameras that appeal to still photographers!  Maybe the Df is the last of the still-only, and that's why I love it.

Becoming a Confident Photographer

Over the years that I have been writing this blog (since late 2004), it’s become sort of a series of articles about cameras, film, lenses, and some how-to posts.  Occasionally, I dip into travelogues and news about the field.   A few times, I discuss more intangible things.  Back in early November, I visited Manteo, NC and the Outer Banks.  Although we have lived in NC since mid-2019, it was my first trip to coastal NC since our move here, which is a 7-8 hour drive, or 444 miles to Manteo.  It’s been nearly 30 years since I’d been to the Outer Banks, and while I have some memories from that trip, I was never in one place long enough to really appreciate the area, and it was before I was a serious photographer.  

This trip was a good getaway for 4 nights in Manteo, the largest town on Roanoke Island  - and the gateway to the Outer Banks.  I had brought my Nikon F3HP and my Nikon FE, my Fujica GL690, as well as some toy cameras, including the Ansco Pix Panorama and the Lomo Sprocket Rocket.  The only digital was my iPhone.  Early November may seem like an odd time to visit the Outer Banks, but most of the tourists are gone, the weather is usually good, and lodging is a bit cheaper.  We rented a cottage right in Manteo, and everything was walkable to the waterfront. I used the F3 only with b&w film, and the FE had only Kodak Pro Image 100.  Most of the film I shoot is b&w, no matter the format, but having one camera with color for colorful subjects is always a good idea.

Bodie Island Lighthouse, Ansco Pix Panorama, Kentmere 100

On a trip such as this one, I tend to stick to a couple of films, and I chose HP-5+ and Kentmere 100 for the F3.  My main lens was the 35mm f/2 Nikkor, but I occasionally used other lenses when I thought it was necessary - the 24mm f/2.8 Nikkor, 56mm f/1.6 Lensbaby Velvet, 85mm f/2 Nikkor, and the 75-150mm f/4 Series E telephoto.   For the FE, I only used the 50mm f/2 Nikkor.  The only other b&w film I shot was a roll of Rollei RPX 25, on a dramatic windy day along the coast of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore. 

Elizabeth II, Nikon F3HP, Series E 75-150 zoom, HP-5

Now, what does the title of this post have to do with the above information?  Well, as I was shooting the scenes that I encountered, I was quite sure that I would get some really good photographs.  I was confident in my equipment and lens choices, I was using films that I had a long experience with, and I was confident in my decisions of aperture and points of view.  This is not always the case for many photographers, and certainly, not true of me years ago.  Confidence really only comes with experience.  Had I used a camera that I was less familiar with, or a different film stock that I was unsure about, a good photo might not have resulted.  

big winds, big waves.  Nikon F3HP, HP-5.

To people getting started in photography, and especially in using film, you should try keeping things simple until you understand the capabilities and limitations of the equipment and films that you are using.  It doesn't just end with the film stock, but how it's developed.  There are a lot of folks that would have had some great images, but screwed up in the film developing.  It's less likely to happen if you are consistent in your film, techniques, and developers.  

Nikon F3HP, Lensbaby Velvet 56, HP-5

Let me explain via my way of working.  I have owned my Nikon F3HP since 2008, and it's still in mint condition because I have certainly taken care with it.  While I have many other Nikon bodies, I'm very fond of the F3 because of the way it handles, and it's very dependable.  Because I wear glasses, I really appreciate the high-eyepoint prism and viewfinder.  So, I see pretty much all of what is going to be in the negative.  Second, the 35mm f/2 Nikkor has become my walk-around lens with this camera, and I know that the lens is going to render things perfectly.  I used Kentmere 100 and the HP-5+ because I like the results with those films, and I have always had good experiences with them in the developing tanks, plus they scan really well.  There have been times when I might try any number of odd films, but on a trip such as this one, I stayed with the tried and true to get the images I wanted.  Was I confident in my ability? Of course, I was.  When I ended up looking at the negatives,  and then the scans, I was really happy to see that everything came out the way I had envisioned.  

Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Nikon F3HP, RPX25

Now, to throw some uncertainty in -- I was also shooting with an Ansco Pix Panorama camera - a toy camera with a 2 element 28mm lens and a 13x36mm cropped frame. I had loaded it with Kentmere 100 - which on a sunny day is perfect, but in the days at the Outer Banks, I had only used it on cloudy days.  I didn't know if anything that I shot with it would be satisfactory.  But, that's one of the joys of using such cameras - any time things work out great with it, it's as if I have been given a gift.  I was confident in my choice of image framing, but to have satisfactory results was indeed, a great thing.  I also shot a roll of Lomochrome Purple in my Sprocket Rocket, which gives me a 24x72mm panoramic negative.  In this case, I really had no idea of how the images might appear, since it’s a strange film, and a pretty simple camera.  But then again, it’s always a bonus when those things work out.  One also has to be able to not over-think things and just let it play out. After I developed the film and scanned it in, it was apparent that while there were a handful of shots I really liked, that film isn’t the best for overcast days.

Bodie Is. Lighthouse, Sprocket Rocket, Lomochrome Purple

Becoming a confident photographer is not always going to result in great images, because well, that’s the thing about photography.  Just when you think you are doing great, it’s always possible for the photo gods to thwart you with any number of things to mess you up - such as setting the camera at the highest shutter speed instead of A (for aperture priority) and not realizing it because you are so enamored with the scenes in front of you.  Forgetting what film was in the camera and using a red filter with a color film,  forgetting to change the ISO setting for the new roll of film, or realizing that after the 36th frame, that the film never got properly seated in the take-up spool, and you have been shooting blanks for the past hour.  Then of course, are the darkroom foibles.  The thing is, each of these missteps are bits of experience, and make one a more confident and more competent photographer.  If any photographer tells you that none of these things have ever happened to them, it’s quite possible that he or she is lying, or that they haven’t been doing it long enough.  

My point is, becoming confident is achieved by using your tools every day, and keeping the process of photography simple.  I can say this, after 20+ years of serious photography-- that while trying different films and developers is perfectly okay, you’ll eventually decide on what films give you results consistent with your expectations.  Stick with them.  The same goes for cameras and lenses.  I’m a poor example of that aspect, but in my years of experience, it’s helped me to be able to know all about different cameras and films, because I do like to educate others about photography.  But in the end, I know exactly what gear that I’ll take to get the shots I want.  

hunting cabin, Alligator River NWR, Nikon FE, Pro Image 100

Having confidence in your equipment is important.  If you are starting out in photography, nothing is more discouraging than a camera that isn’t working properly.  There is a reason why a an SLR such as the Pentax K1000 has been recommended as a starter SLR - there are very few things that can go wrong, because the camera is so limited in its suite of controls - but it does have the basics.  A K1000 isn’t my favorite camera by any means, but one that works properly with a decent lens puts the basic elements of control - aperture, shutter speed, and focus at your fingertips.  You need only to compose and pick the best choice for exposure to make an image.  Use a bare-bones SLR and one or two film types for a year, and you’ll be amazed at how much better a photographer you are at the end of the year - and I mean use it every day, when possible  The same can be said for any camera, whether it is film or digital.  Use it with the same lens, and shoot almost every day, and see how you progress.  

Moon Jellyfish, NC Aquarium, Nikon FE, Pro Image 100

The world of photography is a huge umbrella, with all sorts of niche endeavors, types of equipment, digital and film, alt-process, hybrid workflows, and then types of subject matter.  You cannot possibly do it all, but whatever you do, become good at doing it.  Maybe it’s large format - which is something that I have never really had the patience for.  Maybe you are really into alternative processes, and all the best to you going down that rabbit hole, which is part alchemy and mastering the technical aspects.  I have respect for anyone that chooses to do things the hard way and can produce wonderful images.   That’s what I love about photography - there really is no "best way" - there are just ways that work for the person doing it.  For a long time it was considered that knowing and practicing the Zone System would lead you into producing better results.  I don’t think a lot of street photographers would agree with that, but if you want to use the Zone System, go for it.  There’s merit in knowing enough about it to at least understand it and applying the principles when it seems necessary.  However, millions of photographs have been made without ever thinking about the Zone System. 

  

salt marsh and islands, Manteo, Nikon F3HP, HP-5

Another interesting choice is not just the film size, but the aspect ratio of the images.  Square format (6x6) on 120 film is a favorite for many, but then there are those that prefer 6x7 or 6x9, or 6x17! Each of those negative sizes are different ways of seeing, and the same scene shot in each format has very different qualities.  You may find that you like square format the best, because you don’t have to worry about landscape vs portrait orientation.  

Manteo marina, Nikon F3HP, Kentmere 100

Every choice you make has an effect on the final image, from pre-visualization (if you do that), to camera, lens, film stock, filters, tripod or not, lighting, scene choice, and intangible factors such as mood (including yours, of course), intent of the photograph, and so on.  At some point, the factors that you can control become secondary to the point of the image.  It’s not that they don’t matter - but if you are a confident photographer, you hardly have to think about them, and instead think about the image.  

worn dock, Manteo, Nikon F3HP, Kentmere 100

Manteo, Nikon F3HP, Kentmere 100

If you become confident in yourself and your gear, I think you’ll find that it becomes a lot more fun to go out and make images, and your results will also be more rewarding.  At it’s most basic level, photography is pretty simple. Don’t worry so much about gear - though it is important, but the most important tool in photography is located between the ears and behind the eyes.

Nags Head Preserve, Nikon F3HP, Lensbaby Velvet 56, Kentmere 100

Don’t Over-think!

For the past few weeks, I have been scanning in 35mm slides from the 1970s.  These are not found images from the antique store, but from my camera, from 1975-1980.  One of my goals this year is to scan all my slides (or at least the best ones) from my early days of photography, and in the process, remove the slides from the clear plastic sleeves in binders, and transfer to metal storage boxes.   My scanner, my trusty Epson V700, does an excellent job with scanning in these colorful little windows to the past, and much more efficiently than using a digital camera to transfer the analog into  a digital image.  Trust me on this, as I have been scanning slides and negatives in various formats for as many years as we have had scanners available.  I also have all the equipment I need to copy via a DSLR. The workflow and the results via the Epson V700 are superior.    

The simple SLR that started me on my journey

Okay, let’s put the scanning aside, and have a conversation about the photographs, which is the real subject here.    My first 35mm camera was an Ihagee Exa 1a. Why?   As a gift for a teen interested in photography, it was possibly the cheapest new SLR available in 1974 from a NYC camera store, and I was thrilled with receiving it.    The downside with my Exa 1a is that it had a waist-level viewfinder, no meter, and a limited range of shutter speeds (1/30, 1/60, 1/125 and 1/175 sec. ).    In addition, the Meyer-Optic Domiplan 50mm f/2.8 lens is not what I would call a "great lens."  It was obviously good enough for a teenager learning about photography.    My only photography guide was the Kodak Pocket Exposure Guide, which I still have.    I did not have an external meter.  So, as I learned to photograph with this camera, I relied on that Kodak Pocket Exposure Guide for my settings.    I shot b&w film, color print film, and transparencies.    

fits in a back pocket

As I think back, I had to wonder why I shot slides so often after 1975, and my wife reminded me that it was probably the cost.    Believe me, the 70s were the last time a person with a low-income could live pretty well,  and I was a student with not much money.    As it turns out, it was cheaper to shoot slide film back then, as the film and processing was less expensive than color prints. I checked with a 1979 issue of Popular Photography, and the price to process and mount a 20 exposure roll of Ektachrome was less than $2.00, and the price of a roll of Ektachrome was probably around the same price. Some places offered a 20-exposure roll Ektachrome 64 for $3.65, including processing; about the same price as Kodachrome 64.  Since I was not in tune with the best offerings via mail (hey, no Internet then!!), I am pretty sure I purchased my film at the local drug store, Woolworth’s or K-Mart, and sent it out for processing.  In today’s dollars, that $3.65 translates to just less than $15.00, which would be pretty damn cheap now for a roll of film and processing!    

Feb. 1975. The view from the house I grew up in, Parishville, NY
Ektachrome.

In hindsight, I am happy that I chose to shoot the majority of my images on slides -- the colors have kept pretty well from those 1970s images, and because I didn’t have a lot of extra money, I didn’t shoot like I do now. However, it is also true that I was not a trained photographer with a plan.  In looking in these scanned images, I also realized one other thing - I did pretty damn well with the limited equipment that I owned, and my exposures were pretty much on target most of the time.  That means I used sunny-16 and intuition for all of my shots.    

That brings up the title for this entry - "Don’t Over-think." If I could use a really simple SLR nearly 50 years ago, with slide film, no meter, and 50mm f/2.8 lens, how is it that today, so many people are obsessed with the smallest details in exposures? I see newcomers to photography, especially film, needlessly obsessing over how much to adjust for a given exposure. While my Kodak Pocket Exposure Guide gave me the fundamentals, there is no absolute in photography.  Discerning the nuances in light and exposure, especially in landscapes, comes down to experience, but there is always the element of "luck."  Maybe I was just lucky many times, and certainly cannot attribute my results to experience.  The thing is, I didn’t over-think what I was doing. I believe that over-thinking is what kills creativity and the moment. As I look over these images from 1975-1979, I certainly find ones that could have used more exposure -- and the Exa 1a had a limited number of shutter speeds, including B, and I did not own a tripod.  Perhaps if I’d been given a camera like a Praktica SLR with a prism and a full range of shutter speeds, I would have been even more on target, but there’s no way to know that now.  

Feb. 1976, Syracuse Univ. dorms. A typical winter scene in
Syracuse, but with less snow. Kodachrome 64.

Maine, summer of 1976. Kodachrome 25

Amenia, NY, Jan. 1977. Ektachrome

Ice storm, Syracuse, NY. It was so bad we could skate on the
sidewalks. Feb. 1976, Kodachrome 64

When I replaced that Exa 1a with a Pentax MG in the early 1980s, I finally had a camera with an exposure meter -- but guess what?  Relying on that aperture-priority only camera also gave me some bad exposures, because I relied on the camera to get it right, instead of my intuition. Overall, it was a trade-off. Today, I am a much better photographer, and know when to adjust for a given lighting situation.  But still, in those spartan days of photography, my youth and  inexperience also allowed me to take a chance without worrying about failure. Sometimes I got it perfectly right, and sometimes I didn’t. For example, the photo taken at the SUNY ESF Woodsmen’s event in the fall of 1975 shows me that I wasn’t afraid to get close to the action - the couple on the 2-person crosscut saw with the wood chips flying towards the camera is captured pretty well. I’ll show some other examples with commentary, as well, but those old slides are also peeks back into the 70s of my college years.

SUNY College of Environmental Science & Forestry fall Woodsmen's
BBQ in Tully, NY.  Oct. 1975, Ektachrome.

October 1975, Chittenango falls, NY. Kodachrome 64

Syracuse Univ. football game at the old Archbold Stadium,
October 1975, Kodachrome 64.

So, my advice for those folks getting into photography is to shoot what you know - and learn from it. You don’t have to travel to exotic places for great photographs - everyday activities and your immediate surroundings will mean much more the farther removed you are from them. As I look over these old shots, I realize that I was living in the moment, and photographing what was important to me at the time. I didn’t do it for posterity - though now those images have value in seeing people and places at another time, I did it for me.    

Speaking of in the moment... Fall 1976, Syracuse, NY, Ektachrome

Overthinking your photography is a cruel blow to serendipity.    Be in the moment, trust your instincts, and don’t fret if your camera is one-stop off, or you don’t have the best lens money can buy, None of that matters.  People obsess over details that don’t matter in the long run.   If you have a photography exhibit, nobody will care what lens and camera you used, what film (if it was film), filter, or other attribute used to make the photograph. It’s all about the image. 

Algonquin Mountain summit, Adirondacks, NY
Summer 1977, Ektachrome

In high school, I wanted to be an entomologist, and that’s what I ended up becoming, and doing for 40 years. Nobody told me that I could have been a photographer - and had I taken photography seriously as a profession (which I never thought of), the 1970s would have been the most perfect time to be an aspiring photographer.    So, it was never my dream to be a photographer - I just enjoyed it. I look back at those images from the 70s and I am amazed that I did as well as I did with so little knowledge.    

That's me, summer of 1977, in the Adirondacks.
My camera, taken by my buddy, Dave Rosher. Ektachrome.

January 1977, Twin Lakes, CT. Ektachrome.

So, perhaps the lesson here is that not only should you not over-think it, but shoot for yourself.    Don't worry about what others might think.  All too often I see posts by people on places like Reddit (r/photography) who are unsure if they are good enough, or are afraid to take up photography because they lack knowledge.    You can’t get better without actually using your camera. Today’s digital and analog wonders will outperform what I used in the 70s by a huge margin. You already have tools at your disposal that will make a perfect exposure 90% of the time.  The part that makes the difference is YOU. Get out there and shoot everything that interests you, and over time you will discover what really motivates your photography, and what you enjoy the most. That’s the direction you’ll go.