Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ames.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!ames!eugene From: eugene@ames.UUCP (Eugene Miya) Newsgroups: net.rec.photo Subject: Re: New technology worth it? Message-ID: <839@ames.UUCP> Date: Mon, 4-Mar-85 13:05:43 EST Article-I.D.: ames.839 Posted: Mon Mar 4 13:05:43 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Mar-85 11:32:59 EST References: <641@asgb.UUCP> <1472@emory.UUCP> <1025@watdcsu.UUCP> Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center, Mtn. View, CA Lines: 25 > In article <1472@emory.UUCP> tony@emory.UUCP (Tony Vincent) writes: > >>> Is the new technology in cameras (like the new Canon) really worth it? > >> > >>I suppose it really depends on what kind of photography you want to > >>do. In my opinion, REAL photography requires lots of patience, > >>thought, and attention to detail. > minor flame: who says photojournalists aren't REAL PHOTOGRAPHERS? > they pay attention to the same things that any other serious > photographer would. > > Herb Chong... for my two-cents: in the end, it's the eye behind the camera. don't forget that a large percentage of some of the best photos in the world are taken only because there's a massive number of instamatics and polaroids out there. i own three old heavy slrs. they are throw away cameras [friends have dropped numerous slrs off cliffs, into crevices]. i have three because i left on at a lake near canada only to buy a new one and have the old one returned. the new tech can certainly help. and i think photojournalists are photographers. --eugene miya NASA Ames Research Center {hplabs,ihnp4,dual,hao,vortex}!ames!aurora!eugene emiya@ames-vmsb.ARPA