The majority of professional photography instructors today know their equipment inside out - from camera and lights to computer and software. They have the awards and degrees to prove it.

But a disturbing trend has evolved in the past few years. Some contemporary speakers at conventions and other seminars claim not to be "technical". They apologize that they're not even sure what kind of lens they are using - they use "this one" for portraits and "that one for weddings". They show you how they do their work with a portrait subject or a wedding model, but they don't really teach you how to control your camera and lighting properly. To them, it just works, in theory.

Well, that's great. So, you spend a couple of hours being taught their methods, including a shooting demonstration and then their Photoshop techniques to fix what didn't go right in the camera. They show you how it all works out because the software creates the artistic version and their clients love it. The camera is no longer so important. What's wrong with this picture? Well, for one, they have dedicated more time to becoming software experts rather than good photographers.

I would agree that digital photography has to be a process consisting of the camera (part one) and the software (part two). Unlike a particular film emulsion, which (theoretically) only has one interpretation of the scene, digital sensor information can be interpreted in many ways on its way to becoming a jpeg or a print. But knowing how to use the many software products is only the second half of the equation, and a professional photographer must also know the camera. It's use or abuse directly affects what happens later on the computer, and how much time is spent on "fixes". At best, software should be today's darkroom for preparing a good photograph.

The second disturbing trend of the past few years