Yay...! Second that...!

Good and valid points.
Up to a point, that is: the last one about "reasoning".
There are splendid benefits for consumers to be had from F1 and World Cup Car Rallying motor sport and from high-end sailing competition.
These include offsets for secondary industry, and small business R&D. The spinoff benefits are legion.
In sailing, Tasmania is home to more than a few.As is NZ.
On more visible scale, call by any serious yacht club and check out the moorings.
Same same the very many port moorings around coastal Australia, NZ, USA, Latin America, The Caribbean, Italy, France, etc.
Touring sailboats are aplenty. New technology and design experience is part of a very large industry.
It's a hoary idea that what might have come in via the military or aerospace is arguable. But it's not dominant.
,

Damn. Again. I'm doing this by phone oad. Will resist the urge.

Are you speaking literally? Financial, moral or political? When did NZ declare bankruptcy?

Sponsor.
Like 'Nikon', 'Canon', 'Sony', 'Red Bull'.
Sponsorship.

Really...?

Damn...! Battery ran out before I could revise. Like Team New Zealand I was beaten by an offcial time limit. This one impsed by 'Ugly Hedghog'. Sigh.
Please ignore previous. Am reposting to the thread:
As I was saying in response to John and others....

We have a happy relationship with our cousins across the Tasman, but not such that we let them claim Australia's victory 30 years ago. That winged keel on the Australian designed and built yacht 'Australia II' was indeed Aussie.
Sure, there was a challenge by the US under the Deed Of Gift Rules that govern the race. It was alleged the design had been 'Dutch inspired'. This was ultimately proved false and 'Australia II' was permitted to compete.
The rest is history. The victory by the yacht from The Land Downnder broke the 132-year hold on the Cup by the US.
I'd contest the cynical claim on this thread that the event attracted little interest in the USA. Sports media analyst evidence suggests the opposite.
In fact, it was a contest that attracted large media attention here and in the US.
As did the New Zealand wins in 1995 and 2000, and the recent Kiwi challenge. All were hard fought and exciting sports events.
We were barracking this year more for 'New Zealand' and 'Aotearoa' than Team Oracle, despite the Aussie component. (Well, one Sydney yacht club was perhaps a little jaundiced toward Spittle's kipperng..!)
I accept the sentiment of high financial cost argued here for large syndcate yachts competing in events like The Americas Cup and The Sydney-Hobart and so on. But that does not mean crew-members deserve dismissive criticism of implied shallow elitism. On the contrary, many are regular amateur sportspeople who have come through the small Fireball, FF11, Ff15, 18-Footers et cetera - after nipper experience in dinghys, VJs and the like.
Sailing is certainly not an elitist sport. It's highly athletic.
Equating it with F1 car racing is unfair and illogcal.
However, to a prejudiced, mean-spirited, or an ill or uninformed eye I concede it could seem to some to be an unattractive spectator sport. At least from a shore viewpoint. Televisual coverage gives more meaningful cine photographic perspective.
Whether or not a possible extended review of Team New Zealand's hydraulics failure, or re-opening a protest against the cheating charges might be worthwhile, or a renewed appeal against the final race time case would work is really just conjecture. The cheats were punished. Team Oracle was penalised. The final race was replayed. Surely it's something best adjudicated there by the officials...? That could take time.
We 'armchair critics' can but wait. If the Kiwis want to dispute the American victory, that is.
For most of us - including members of Sydney's Northern Beaches Newport Yacht Club where Jimm Spittle has elbow space at the bar - we respect, admire, the spirit of Team New Zealand. Our Kiwi cousins remain the first team outside the USA to win the Americas Cup (1995) and then successfully defend it (2000).
I am confident of Kiwi sportsmanship, and I know Dean Barker woudn't be using the 'money' excuse or 'blaming his tools'.
That would not be 'Wahia te iti kahurangi'...!
Ka kite ano,
- Theo.

John, we have a happy relationship with our cousins acrossbtye Tasman, but not such that we let them claim Australia's victory 30 years ago. That winged keel on the Australian designedband built yacht 'Australia II' was indeed Aussie.
Sure, there was a challenge by thevUS under the Deed Of Gift Rules that govern the race, alleging the design had been 'Dutch inspired'. This was ultimately proved false and 'Australia II' was permitted to compete.
The res is history. The victory by the yacht from The Land Downnder broke the 132-year hold on the Cup by the US.
It was a contest that attracted large meia attention here and in the US.
As did the recent contest. A hard fought and exciting sports event.
I accept the sentiment of high financial cost argued here for large syndcate yachts competing in events like The Americas Cup and The Sydney-Hobart and so on. But that oes not mean vrewmembers are

__________________________

Well yes. That's true Ole Sarg. You would have heard it back when there were Bushes in the White House garden and thornier issues inCongress.
The telling actually began, according to Gibbon, with one of the dud Caesars back in Rome when their Senate was stuck. But, hey, a good joke lives on. The circumstance and retelling give it curency.
Heyrob's splendid image gives it dimension.
All we need now is for someone to introduce a photograph of a hutchfull of hares.
And someone else to post a pic of a feller's axe.
THEN we can debate the merit of joke recycling by splitting yet more hares.
.

A memorable metaphor. The race to the White House can be a madding Saint Saens 'Carnival of the Animals'.

Wonderful. What a team...! :-)

Why even promote a false mystique...? So-called " full frame" is merely the closest sensor size to the 35mm fim standard for "miniature" cameras.

It's basic. Sensors replace film in digital cameras.

Claimed higher manufacturing cost is the chief reason manufacturers use smaller than "full frame" sensors. They make more profit from cheaper thumbnail size plus sensors.

If you don't intend cropping or using your image for anything other than monitor viewing or brightly lit standard prints uo to poster size (20x24)" then the cheaper CMOS sensor or 4/3rds cameras will probably suit.

Don't be swayed by the pixel marketing hype alone. Pixels aren't everything.
"Full frame" Nikons, for example, have always been better in low light even with relatively small pixel numbers.

There's no mystery. The larger the sensor the better, providing you have good glass up front and the camera platform is well made. Current leaders among the least expensive of quality cameras with " full frame" are Nikon and Canon.

PS
You might also make time to carefully sub all letters and captions to correct literal spelling gremlins before mailing anything.
So too should I. (smile)
Cheers,
- Theo.

Like any aspirant to any professional trade, craft or profession, it is up to you.
There are a few "ifs": If you have a passion for the craft; if you are determined; if it is more than a gadgeteering, self- satisfying, hobby interest; if you are young enough, or sufficiently committed to undertake an appropriate graduate or diploma or certificate course; and if you are then willing to seek a prized, highly competitive, indentured apprenticeship with a newspaper, magazine or commercial studio.... you will stand a good chance.
Otherwise resign yourself to the way of wedding and "santa" photographers.
Truth is, there is no easy path.
However, you have taken the first step identifying your desire. It's likely you also have a reasonable camera. Don't worry if it isn't state of the art. Don't even worry if you are using film. It's the final image that matters to a publisher or employer. Not the brand or style of camera - although some file agemcies like Alamy prefer submissions made by good glass on closest to at least 35mm film or sensor size.
Just look at the photographs published by professional photographers, bearing in mind that higher standards are expected for hard copy magaInes and newspapers, and keep making images that you feel might emulate those you see published.
Do this. Practice all you can. Get a portfolio together. Write letters to,prospective places where you hope to get training, experience and employment while you study.
Seek advice from professional journalists and photojournalists associations, the contacts for which will be in the association and, or, union pages of your local phone direcory. Go talk with the pictorial editor of your nearest newspaper.
Demand for print may have become less because of the Interweb, but it remains relatively strong, especially now with evolved specialist and general magazines, and is above all the best training ground for aspiring photographers.
Beware of anything, or anyone other than university, college, or trade school that asks you to pay money. For anything. Including equipment.
Most of all know that it is possible to earn a living honourably, enjoyably, as a professional photographer.
Good luck,

Excellent. Publication in a professional hard copy glossy magazine remains the holy grail for PJs. Your achievement is commendable Ginny.
BTW, what camera did you use to make the image?
Cheers,
- Theo.