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