U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | Re: R.I.P. HDR Tangential (survey?)

Re: R.I.P. HDR Tangential (survey?)

nicely put Ar.

Everybody, I am interested to know, though a tragically unscientific approach (inspired by Facebook and People Magazine):

I as 100% Photo Nerd =
?% artist
?%gear head
?% tinkerer
?% haunted by visions
?% [add new or amend as i've exhausted my own list]

I'd likely fit 20% gear head + 10% artist (the wounded kind, with my heart on my sleeve) + 30% tinkerer + 40% haunted

anyone game?

Argon3@aol.com wrote:
c36.5a497d48.37e7ffdf@aol.com" type="cite">All right...give credit where credit is due...don't be so snotty about AA.

When I was back in film school, "Barry Lyndon" had just been released and all of the "cogniscenti" began the "Trash Kubrick" discussions.  Fat lotta good it did 'em.

The guy accomplished a lot and worked hard.  There was no Ansel Adams for Ansel Adams to imitate so he had to pretty much work a lot of shit out for himself, eh?

Compare all of the wannabe's more to students who have to study classical drawing techniques in order to learn how to paint...it's a means to an end and some people will be satisfied and stop there while others will develop into original thinkers.  I have a private laugh when I'm out and get the whole "zone system" thing from some guy with a 35mm SLR while I'm shooting 4X5 but I certainly can't get huffy with them...they're more to be encouraged (and as long as they're buying more film, chemistry and paper, the producers of said materials who are having financial difficulties will be able to stay afloat...shoot more, I say!).  Since when is perfection of technique someting to be looked down on?

Creative fufillment is a very subjective thing...I've learned not to rain on anybody's parade.