Yup.
And, I'm in awe of how Bethe and Suzanne have been able to respond to "Chriscrawfordphoto" and "Helinophoto". I tried, but just managed to sputter.
d
retired scientist, and photographer for 30-plus years
Last edited by a moderator:
Both of our local photo stores are staffed by an equal number of men and women, and partially owned by women. I also meet a lot of photographers in the field, and I would give women the edge there. On other photo sites my contacts are about 50/50, with the women being far more productive. I don't think they're less into gear, I think they may be less into talking about it. Honestly, I think we tend to assume that we dominate photography and we act like it, and so the places we congregate, and the way we talk about it, can be off-putting to women. I think what I'm saying is that this question is more about us than them.
- I've NEVER once hinted that using natural light for photography is anything less than using flash-based light, where do you guys come up with these claims?
They give up, or they shoot "only using natural light", which is chickening out in my book.
Women are (and please read this) IMO just as capable as men in the technical areas, but they have rarely that interest, their interest (my experience) lies in the creative aspect and they are put off by the logical and theoretical aspects of photography.
Really?:
Sounds pretty straightforward to me.
You're just upset that you've been called out on your nonsense, which is usually the case when that happens to people.
and it is unfortunate that most of the men who i know who are either working photographers, or forum frequenters
are only for the most part interested in gear and the technical aspects of photography. instead of making interesting photographs
about anything at all.
My classes were not part of any degree program. Everyone in the class was there to learn more about using the darkroom and to get better as a photographer/printer.How many of those students stayed involved in photography after graduating or leaving school? As I mentioned, exactly ONE of the women in my college photo classes stuck with it after graduating. ONE. Out of 14 or 15. Out of the 10 men in the program, 6 are still doing photography. Four of us are fulltime pros. So is the one woman.
Point well made, my dear,
This thread is telling and potent and revealing. I have confirmed a lot here. Regard this:
Originally Posted by Alan W
"And yet all but 2 or 3 comments on this thread are from men.David's original question hasn't been fully answered."
First, my TITLE was geared to guarantee much 'looking' at what I had written. I did not want my post to be buried and insignificant. This thread is more important than the mere demographic aspect and this thread has so far proved that that assessment is all too correct. WHY?
There has been, with some, a mild inference that I just could be 'sexist' and even misogynist for having dared pose the question. The defense mechanisms are alive and well with us.
SuzanneR, the moderator, is correct when she says that there is a decided difference between photography shows and camera shows. Point well made, my dear, and I learned something from that, along with many other affirmations as to the predominance of the female sex at classes that teach photography. But, SuzanneR, I also sensed a bit of distress that I have not already SEEN (or perceived) that dichotomy and I did feel that, in your view, I fell handily into the category of being a "typical, insensitive male".
Is SuzanneR biased? Not particularly. She is evincing what most (male and female) are thinking about in today's politically correct environment by seeking, always, to uncloak a vestige of prejudice that must be 'outed' and dissected for benefit of public scrutiny. She is rather innocent but reflects a society whereby we have become afraid to offer our true thoughts for fear of ignominy.
Some have a hard time admitting the FACT that men are more prone to like gadgets more than women do. Yet, some see this affirmation as proof that women are being 'put down'. My opinion was, and remains, that since the age of chivalry has been assassinated by women's liberation we should welcome women as equals and support their rights on a level playing field; but a playing field that ALSO removes the previous advantages that 'made up' for their inequality in the past. Some can see that advice as proper. Some see it as sexist. But one thing is for certain: this thread is causing inner feelings to foment and emerge into a formidable topic that seems to have less and less to do with my original, rather innocent query. - David Lyga
Is SuzanneR biased? Not particularly. She is evincing what most (male and female) are thinking about in today's politically correct environment by seeking, always, to uncloak a vestige of prejudice that must be 'outed' and dissected for benefit of public scrutiny. She is rather innocent but reflects a society whereby we have become afraid to offer our true thoughts.
- David Lyga
I would be an ADVANTAGE to have women entering the 'gadget' field. We need MORE to be interested in analog. . - David Lyga
Women, I want you to become a part of us
since the age of chivalry has been assassinated by women's liberation
Since I was bored I opened this thread and read up to 8 pages and gave up. Must be because I am a woman.
I love gadgets, handling cameras , but standing around talking about them is not my cup of tea. I would rather be out shooting.
I have been doing darkroom work for over 65 years and in the old days, that world was very male; but time does change and more and more of my students are woman. With my serious photography students it is about 50/50.
You all need to go out and make images, use that equipment !
...You all need to go out and make images, use that equipment !
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?