NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/photo/22673

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-29 | 3.8 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!sgigate!odin!glass.esd.sgi.com!donl
From: [e-mail] (donl mathis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: A photographer's story
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Dec 92 04:07:46 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Net News)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (donl mathis)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA
Lines: 65
Nntp-Posting-Host: glass.esd.sgi.com


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Anthony
Tse) writes:
|>
|>    I am going to catch a lot of flame for this, but I think some
|> of you will like it, so here it goes.
|>
|>    Seems to me most people who are interested enough in photography to
|> scrap up what little money they have to buy a "real" camera when they
|> were in high school or college started out dreaming about being a
|> photojournalist.  [...]

I think you've underestimated most of us!

You have pointed out a couple of things that can be expressed in other
ways, though.  For example, you can choose any particular photographer,
and try to measure how much he or she likes equipment.  There are those
who just don't care about the camera or lenses, as long as they work,
and others who devote themselves to understanding all of the latest
technology.

You can also try and determine how serious someone is about making
photographs.  Some folks who really like cameras really don't care all
that much about photographs, when you get right down to it.  Others are
obsessed with seeking out those images, in whatever domain they've
chosen.  Hopefully, they've managed to obtain the equipment that is
appropriate for what they want to do.  In some cases, that will be a
point and shoot, because their interest is casual, and they just want
to, well, point, and shoot.  In other cases, it means giving up the new
car to get an appropriately large wiggler and a few Schneiders.  It is
true that those who aspire to certain kinds of photography have to come
up with more money than other folks; this is unfortunate, but just the
way it is.  Those who have enough money probably remember a time when
they didn't; it's hard to imagine having enough when you've always been
poor, though.  So perhaps it's hard for you to imagine having a good
enough job or whatever that you can spend an appropriate amount of
money on your equipment.  You made it sound as though nobody can afford
what they need -- this is not the case!

There are other characteristics that each photographer has -- the
general subject matter, for example.  I really don't care about making
photographs of football games, but other photographers are obsessed
with them.  That's a good thing.  I like to go outside; some folks like
to stay in their studios.

Regardless, I think the word "appropriate" comes to mind.  People
devote what seems to them to be an appropriate amount of time to
investigating all the gadgets and whizzies on the various cameras
before they buy; it might be appropriate to read Popular Photography or
some other magazine, or to invest in a larger library to learn how it
all really works.  People invest what seems to be an appropriate amount
of money, and sometimes that means "appropriate" in terms of the rest
of their life, too -- not just within their photographic interests.
And hopefully they can afford the appropriate equipment.  Then they go
out and make photographs that are appropriate for how they perceive the
value of photography -- people, animals, landscapes, still lifes,
abstracts, wierd artsy-fartsy stuff, combinations.  They're doing what
they thing is the right thing to do with their camera, whatever it may
be.

And it's great to have all of these different people doing different
things.

- donl mathis at Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
[e-mail]