In your message dated: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 07:18:04 PST you write:
>
>Like many people on this list, I'm past the half-century mark. In high
>school I used a slide rule, not a pocket calculator. (They didn't
>exist.) The great thing about slide rules is that they force you to
>determine the magnitude of the answer before you begin the calculation.
>You might make a mistake in the actual calculations, but you'll never
>make a mistake on the exponent.
Yeah, yeah, I know. But we are loosing sight of the point. The point
wasn't my stupidity in Chile, it was that if you are going to use a spot
meter, you better damn well have a circular polarizer. And my comment
to someone else who thrashed me for making the mistake applies here: If
you have never made a photographic mistake in your life, you have a
right to criticize me, otherwise I'm not sure you do. And lest everyone
think I was clueless when I got my OM-4, remember that I had been
shooting with an OM-1N for about 14 years before I got the OM-4 (in
1994) and in that whole time rarely had a bad exposure. And before
that, I used an Argus C-3 with a little crappy Sekonic meter, and always
got good results. But in Chile I was all excited about my new camera,
and didn't pay as close attention as I should have. Also, I'm sure the
high altitudes contributed some to the number of shots that were *way*
off. In fact, those taken at 14,000 ft seem much worse than those taken
at 12,000ft. I'm not sure if this is because I wasn't thinking as
clearly at 14,000ft, or if I tended to use the polarizer/spotmeter more
up high. I think probably the latter. Anyway, as everyone has guessed
by now, this is still a sore spot 4 years after the fact. I learned my
lesson then, and take much more careful precautions now. With all that
said, I'm not sure it's really productive to continue this thread...
Cheers,
--Lee
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|