dpullum wrote:
Oh yes, I agree that it is important that the artist be behind the camera. I agree that the photos are fantastic. But I observe that those comments are muddy thinking of the basic question "are SLR really necessary".
Are the photos great was not a question.
Is it necessary to be a great photographer is not the question. Stop the emotional crap about photographers and pretty pictures.
usmc1063, no mater how good the photographer if the sensor is dirty, the lens cracked, etc, the photo will probably be junk. So stand tall and be USMC in caps rather than thinking lower case.
while you have been tearful about the great photos, my mind asked... humm how about those multi mirrored telescopes that electronically combine their signals and come up with a huge mirror equivalent. So, could we have a FLY eye camera with many lenses and many sensors combined. And could those lenses have different focal lengths so that the DOF is fantastic,,, Wow.
Stop the emotional dribble and think outside of the box. Think future.
Oh yes, I agree that it is important that the arti... (
show quote)
Hmmmm a person who thinks out of the box and doesn't get caught up in the emotional dribble. What a novel idea. "Been there done that." But since I'm somewhat new to the world of photography I'm not adept at giving technical advice. Just advice from the seasoned professionals who I spoke with. Some of which say I have a gift. In fact one shared this with me. "I tried to keep both arts alive, but the camera won. I found that while the camera does not express the soul, perhaps a photograph can!" Do you know by chance who said that? Ansel Adams. A camera is only but a tool. Like any other tool it takes a craftsman to make it function.
As for my screen-name that is of my choosing I don't have to shout out who I am to make me feel important. So mr. dpullum be a critic of my photographs when I post or any comment that I make. Just leave my screen-name and your assumption of what it should be to yourself. Thank you