Canon and Panasonic: updated models
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Dudley Hanks on 28 May 2010 17:42 "Jeff Jones" <jj197109671(a)mailinator.com> wrote in message news:src006derdi5n5nejs4sq0on33q7cpvp2h(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:14:36 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" > <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: > >> the difference between you and I is that you start with >>your own ideas / opinions / prejudices and devote your energy to bringing >>the world down to your level > > Quite the contrary. I short out the wheat from the chaff. I'm a > photographer. I find those rarest of gems in the most unlikely places. > It's > part of being a photographer. Looking for gold amongst the world's trash. > Your photography is trash. That simple. > You keep telling yourself that ... Some day, you'll convince yourself ... Also, something I find quite humourous about you is that you assume I've been posting what I consider good pics. I haven't produced anything in years I think is good. All I've been doing since I picked up a digital cam a few years back is test shots... Even the best photog develops his or her talent over time. Few, if any, get a masterpiece everytime they press the shutter release. My shots thus far have been an exploration of what I can do with my limited sight, certain sightless techniques and "the 12 inches behind the viewfinder." At first, I was simply trying to get a feel for aiming the camera. Then, I started working on controlling the (unseen-by-myself) effects of DOF andhow to anticipate how the AF system of the various cams I've been working with react in a variety of situations. Currently, I'm continuing all of these explorations, and I've started to think about exposure latitude, colour rendition and situational lighting. I have advertised nothing for sale, and have only sparadically posted an invitation for interested persons to PayPal a donation if they like what I'm doing. I doubt I will produce what I call a "good" pic for a number of years. But, that doesn't keep me from working towards that aim. Needless to say, with only the ability of gross light perception, it will be very difficult for me to achieve my goal without feedback from others. I am not a rich man, so I cannot afford to pay via cash for the critiques of photographers of the highest calibre. Fortunately, individuals who have reached that place in life feel inclined to give back to others, and some enjoy lending me a hand, with no expectation (other than the satisfaction of having helped me progress). These are the same individuals who donate money to build hospital wings, fund research into terminal conditions, erect cultural centres, etc. They are good people and they more than make up for persons like yourself, persons who choose to see only limitations, instead of potential... The more you post, the more you highlight the difference between yourself and the more positive members of society... Take Care, Dudley
From: Dudley Hanks on 28 May 2010 18:20 >> Quite the contrary. I short out the wheat from the chaff. This is the attitude I so despise... In life, there is no "wheat" and no "chaff," only a continuum of ability, ranging from what is valued by society to that which is yet unrecognized. Imposing arbitrary standards of "good" and "bad" does nothing to further any art, science or technology; it only delays progress and hurts society, because a large sector of a given community ends up being marginalized. If attitudes changed, more resources would be spent on developing tools / techniques to help the marginalized, and tax revenues from these advances would offset their cost, especially since multitudes of newly independent persons would no longer be a fiscal drag on the remainder of their communities. Cameras are a perfect illustration of this point. If camera developers would add speech (or even a well thought out pattern of beeps) to their menu systems and consult the blind community as to how best to suit their needs, VERY minor changes could result in the lowly P&S becoming one of the greatest mobility aids in history. It could be used to read signs, books, menus, etc. It could relay images of obstacles to dedicated help centres and provide real-time navigational help to blind persons as they commute. It could help the visually-impaired get a better view of people places and things they love / appreciate. Well thought out portable, pocketable cameras would more fully open up a number of jobs to the blind community, such as journalism, retail sales, teaching, consulting, etc... The "I'm better than you and I'll damn well prove it" attitude holds the whole progress of disabled persons back, much more dramatically than most people realize... Take Care, Dudley
From: Dudley Hanks on 28 May 2010 22:38 >> Enjoy turning yourself into a deranged freak-show amusement. A "freak" show is only possible in the mind... Your ideas and mental attitudes determine what or who you consider to be a "freak," not nature. Keep in mind, evolution determines that mutants can advance any given species as well or quicker than simply the gifted fairing better than the less able. Take Care, Dudley
From: David J Taylor on 29 May 2010 03:48 "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote in message news:IQULn.5311$z%6.2582(a)edtnps83... [] > In my case, my SX120 has a f/2.8 IS lens and an ISO 3200 setting which > help it outperform my XSi in certain low-light situations, since I don't > have a large-apertured, long focal-length lens for the XSi. Nor do you with the SX120 - at its longest focal length (60mm, 360mm equivalent), it's f/4.3, not f/2.8. The ISO 3200 image I found with a quick search was not full resolution, but 1600 x 1200. Cheers, David
From: Jeff Jones on 29 May 2010 04:03
On Sat, 29 May 2010 02:25:19 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >Once you get past arbitrary standards, a photo by a blind photographer might >just well indicate better mastery of the art than that exhibited by the Mona >Lisa And there you have it folks. Precisely the kind of delusional twit that you've all come to know and support. |