Don, I'm very enthused about the prospects for digital cameras for my interests. The point of "fewest parameters" being harder is great. Doing so many things easily with these cameras CAN be a hinderance rather than and advantage. That might be why there is an increased interest in older methods of photography. I have a love/hate relationship with my Canon D70 right now. It comes out of the bag after all the film is gone. My friends with the latest DSLRS are doing phenomenal work. I am very interested in discussions comparing digital with conventional photography because for me the material evidence (negatives) of the picture means a lot. I understand that that is boring and irrelevant to many. AZ Build a Lookaround! The Lookaround Book, 2nd ed. NOW SHIPPING http://www.panoramacamera.us > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: Digital Photography > From: "Don Roberts" <droberts@xxxxxxxx> > Date: Sat, August 07, 2004 3:53 pm > To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" > <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Alan, pardon the over reactive moment. There may have been one > suggestion that digital imagers were not photographers or I may have > inferred that. Anyway, it kept the thread moving and growing. I > have only recently moved into digital after a lifetime of > conventional, and some unconventional, methods and processes. I > have no particular ax to grind with either. But I am falling in > love with the digital world. One can do so much there. But, as > with all creative processes, sometimes too much freedom of choice > makes the job harder rather than easier. An architecture professor > of mine always said the toughest jobs would be those with the fewest > set parameters. Vacillators need not apply. > Don > > lookaround360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Don, > > > > I don't see that anyone has privileged one method over another so far. > > Digital imagers are sooo sensitive :-0 > > > > Seriously, I think there are important aesthetic distinctions to be made > > among various methods of doing photographs particularly between analog > > and digital. Again, it doesn't mean one is better than the other. > > > > AZ > > > > Build a Lookaround! > > The Lookaround Book, 2nd ed. > > NOW SHIPPING > > http://www.panoramacamera.us > > > > > > > > > > > >>-------- Original Message -------- > >>Subject: Re: Digital Photography > >>From: "Don Roberts" <droberts@xxxxxxxx> > >>Date: Fri, August 06, 2004 8:01 pm > >>To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students" > >><photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >>This may be simplistic but "photography" means "painting with light" > >>or something to that effect. Nowhere is the medium mentioned. Why > >>should digital photographers then not have the same status as those > >>who employ film and paper? > >> > >>Bob wrote: > >> > >>> > >>>lookaround360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Bob and Mark, > >>>> > >>>>I think digital photography is virtual photography. I would say that > >>>>rather than being artists skilled digital photographers are > >>>>illustrators. > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>I think results are what count and jibes about methods to achieve them > >>>>are only for fun. It is, of course, senseless to essentialize anything > >>>>or any one except in jest. > >>>>AZ > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>>I agree with this..... > >>> > >>>Bob > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >>-- > >>================================================== > >> Don Roberts * Bittersweet Productions * Iowa City, Iowa > >> * * > >> There are moments when everything goes well; don't be > >> frightened, it won't last. --- Jules Renard > >>=================================================== > > > > > > > > -- > ================================================== > Don Roberts * Bittersweet Productions * Iowa City, Iowa > * * > There are moments when everything goes well; don't be > frightened, it won't last. --- Jules Renard > ===================================================
