On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 09:10:10 -0600 "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is moving away from the original subject, which was trying to find ways
to avoid tripod use by dialing up digital sensor sensitivity.
Let me ask you this, why would an amateur, who is supposedly doing the work
for love (this is the definition of the term) take shortcuts that can only
dissapoint?
It's not like we have to take pictures like those poor saps who hung a
shingle outside their door.
William Robb
Oh yes, probably it is somewhat off the original topic. I could see several reasons why an amateur who is serous about their __learning process__ might not use a tripod:
1. Laziness. No, I am serious.
2. Curcumstances - my wife put up quite a fight when I once wanted to take a tripod with me in order to shoot some macro shots in the near forest.
3. Level of an amateur. You see, I for example, haven't yet enlarged past 10x15 cm any of my shots. I do intend to do so some time soon. But again, I haven't done that. All the scans that I've been getting from the lab do not count as a measure of how sharp are the pictures. No offence to the lab, but this is how it is. So I will have to taste this thing myself and conclude my own outcome of it.
It took me about a year here on PDML to realize that even with this very low level quality processing that I get from the local labs, I'd better use primes instead of zooms. No, I am not trying to cause this talk another turn of direction.
I think I could say (with proper modesty mentioned) that I keep growing as a photographer. I suppose one day I will be experienced enough to use a tripod as often as ever possible. By the way, I need to buy one, that is good enough. The plasticky video tripod that I have sucks. But again, as I said - level of an amateur.
Peace!
Boris
