What is a brush without a painter? A camera without a photographer? A mic without the emcee?
I always get asked, "What kind of camera do you shoot with?" This bothers me for two reasons: One, I shoot with Sonys and I always get dirty looks from the millions of Canikon loyalist. Two, why does it matter? It's as if you're implying that the camera composed the framing, chose it's own settings, then edited itself. Well, maybe you weren't implying all of that; but I interpret it as such. The artist...these eyes...our hands...minds...do the creating. We are the dreamers. We are the creators.
I have always been the "artistic" type. The guy that was always asked to draw something for their textbook because the brown paper bag covering it was always too plain. Getting asked to design tattoos was another reoccurring question. I liked doing these things so I am not complaining. What I'm trying to say is, that social studies book wouldn't have had dope graffiti simply by throwing a sharpie at it. The tattoo wouldn't have magically appeared by letting a the gun lay on some skin. It always takes an artist to generate these masterpieces.
I know musicians who have produced brilliant music with minimal studio time. I've seen images crafted by photographers that evoke the deepest of emotions taken with cheap cameras. Some of the greatest literature was typed on typewriters that were barely serviceable. Have these tools become more reliable over the years? Yes. Have they made things more efficient? At times, Yes. But an artist is still needed to forge, sculpt, and mold the art. It should never be about "what was used" but rather "who used it".
So what is a brush without a painter? A camera without a photographer? A mic without the emcee?