Sun 06-Mar-11 01:31 PM | edited Sun 06-Mar-11 10:08 PM by musical
Where this thread may have a notable weakness is in glorifying the camera too much. I'm trying to see both sides. Trying. Further obfuscation is added when I joke. In this way I am all too guilty. My signature line, way the bottom of each of my posts, says something about me on a deeper level. Yet I am in love with the camera itself and I too have named my camera, Lucy. If anyone personified not glorifying equipment it was Sam Abell in his writings about photography. In that line of thinking it is so much more the person's reactions to a scene. I am bit more confessional when I confess that my wife was annoyed at my procurement of the d700 (it was a gift). She feels that "my pictures are my pictures," that they are not too much changed. Nothing external transformed me-- the camera didn't. I have a long way to go in photography and the d700 didn't give me a magic edge. Frankly, I'm just an ok photographer with or without the exceedingly lovely, most amazing d700. I'm in love with an expensive tool; it's well designed and I am not quite midway in learning it. So much is in the mind with photography. At least that is the mood of this reply of mine w/o my usual humor. I do kind of know what the OP is saying, though, about its magical sort of feeling in FX.
"...content, mood, light; there has to be a moment there." photographer Sam Abell.1>