John,
You know, this thread and the Schnozz'z comments about simplicity
reinforce a theme you bring up eloquently sometimes between the pieces
of erudition.Good photography is simply 'da eye' and how we see the
light from a scene in our eyes and capture it on film. Tools and
technical information are just the tools to do that.
I'm reminded of a great car mechanic who used to work on my Porsche. He
only worked on cars he know and only had those tools needed to work on
those specific cars. I think he had fewer tools than I had. Maybe that's
one indication of a pro?
Johnny, I don't know if you are being disengenuious, or if it really
took 100 rolls of film to create those lovely images of Yellowstone
you've posted, but I'll bet not. I used to have a live-in 'girlfriend'
(with her 2 teenaged daughters, and my preteen son it was lively times)
who had an old match needle Pentax with a single 50mm lens. She never
believed me, but she regularly took Natiional Geographic quality slides
with that camera. When you got 'da eye' you got it. Other folks here got
it too, there's a lot of good photos on the TOPEs and members sites.
Moose
John A. Lind wrote:
At 02:27 3/5/02, Johnny Johnson wrote:
> Thanks (and John Lind too) for the kind words but I've got a theory.
> Put a monkey and enough rolls of film in Yellowstone Park and he'll
> end up with a few decent pictures. :-)
Not necessarily an immediate "eye catcher" because it has subdued
colors and a subtle composition, photographs such as "Aspen Grove" do
not happen by accident. You had to realize the possibility for it and
visualize it in your mind before shooting it.
You're "in denial" :-)
< 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 >
|