I am but I do not feel like wasting the bandwidth on this pseudo-topic.
Amusing as it is to read, it is not worth the effort. :munch: :munch:
Y'all are getting a bit over the top analytical. But none of you are technical people right?
I think you're dead on here. This has been my own personal observational experience over decades, and the same anecdotal experience of so many others I have known.
One example, the very best software engineers I have ever known have been almost exclusively members of this club. Focused like a laser to the exclusion of all else in life, but able to see the connections and abstractions that the rest of us routinely miss. And to do it with ease, at times almost as an afterthought, and often honestly and truly surprised when others don't see the same things.
I've always been fascinated by high intelligence in others. These are very, very interesting people with which to interact. They are not like the rest of us, for sure.
Ken
LOL HAHAHA sure do, but only if they have a LF camera,
cause the world of photography KNOWS you can only be technical and creative or both
if you have an ENORMOUS LF CAMERA !!
otherwise they are nomadic ... and wander the depths of the interweb
There's a difference between high intelligence and highly creative. They can exist in the same person but often don't and seem to me to be distinct.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.
Nonsense. It's a specialty forum for people with that interest. I've never detected any snobbery about smaller formats and most people there do shoot smaller formats. My favorite threads there are the ones of smaller format linages. I've commented before that I think working in LF gives a different vision development that people often carry to other formats. I know my 4x5 experience has drastically improved my medium format photography.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.
Eventually those people always seem to move on to LFF.
If you visit LFPF be sure not to mention anything about Caitlyn unless it's kissy-kissy... and never react in any way to a personal jab from a protected member.
BTW, this thread gives me a headache. I know nothing and I like it that way.
Better to spend three minutes practicing recognized excellence when doing something, rather than a lifetime trying to spin mediocrity into some new type of unrecognized excellence.
i shall call you so-crates !
You got banned from a photography forum? Man I get banned from motorcycle (Harley) forums. I'm a saint 'round these parts.
Yeah, I think "Caitlyn" did it.
Better to spend three minutes practicing recognized excellence when doing something, rather than a lifetime trying to spin mediocrity into some new type of unrecognized excellence.
Ken
Nonsense.../QUOTE]
Thanks, Roger. I dislike the running down other forums...even on the LFF when folks run down APUG for its anti-digital discussions. I like both forums.
Thanks, Roger. I dislike the running down other forums...even on the LFF when folks run down APUG for its anti-digital discussions. I like both forums.
Better to spend three minutes practicing recognized excellence when doing something, rather than a lifetime trying to spin mediocrity into some new type of unrecognized excellence.
Ken
Isn't that Lomography? I've watched the term - and the business - grow over the years and I still can't get my head around it. As far as I can see, it's using cameras and film that were at the bottom end of technology half a century ago. Not saying that some artistic photographs didn't come out of those old Brownie's, but probably more by accident than planning. Maybe this is another "anti-perfection," retro movement like vinyl records and tube amps.
I'm very open to someone telling me what I'm getting wrong.
Because there is natural variability within a species, we are in fact all different. Eye color, shoe size, vertical leap, mental IQ. We and our individual characteristics all exist as points on a random distribution bell curve. Our positions on that curve for any given characteristic are fixed at conception with our genetics. Since we can't control who our parents were, we have no control or input over where we fall on that curve.
Because we can't go back in time, we must all just make the best of wherever fate chose to place us. The measure of a person's success in life is the degree to which they can fulfill their fixed potential for any given characteristic. The definition of success is therefore different for each of us.
Not a novel concept, but an obvious one. And hard for some to accept since many were raised to believe that "all men are created equal." Perhaps they are, or should be, in something abstract like human rights. But definitely not biologically.
I have every bit as much right to be a world-class gymnast as the next guy. Except I was born 6-feet 6-inches and 220 pounds. Try as I might, it ain't gonna' happen. I also once knew a gymnast in high school. She loved basketball. She was 4-foot 11-inches...
Ken
I'm very open to someone telling me what I'm getting wrong.
I think there are two issues at play here.
Mediocrity is to me unacceptable. No matter your present place on the learning curve and evolution as a photographer you should be trying for excellence. As good as you can be. You may still suck or you may be great but in both cases you should be "trying" to get better.
As for using tools that give certain looks, this is no different than putting the neg on the floor and grinding it. It's a conscious attempt at a certain look.
To me this is like distressed wood. Woodworkers work hard at taking something that was recently made and distressing and "damaging" it for a certain look. That's the same as a scratched neg print or a holga print or whatever tool you used to get something. Just like exotic printing methods are an attempt at a certain look and style.
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?