|Re: How have digital cameras affected the art of photography?
Group: alt.photography · Group Profile
Author: John Sisker Date: Jun 8, 2010 00:40
"Charles E Hardwidge" wrote in message
> "John Sisker" sprynet.com> wrote in message
>> You're apparently not paying attention, that title is now reserved for
>> I apparently gained this distinction because I did not follow all of
>> Charles's advice in reference to my digital camera comparisons.
> You're the guy who made up his mind before asking peoples opinion without
> questioning your own priorities or doing any research. Just like you're
> guy who's always banging on about "creativity" and "professionalism", or
> presenting "snapshots" while pre-empting comment. There's an irony in here
> you're not getting.
> Have you noticed how I haven't mentioned the Nikon? I've talked about
> everything BUT the Nikon. What makes me think you're going to buy the
> or will you cave in to your Freudian need for a bigger penis and get the
> my daddy is bigger than your daddy Olympus? Maybe, you'll have a moment of
> enlightment and discover the GODLIKE capabilities of the Canon, and call
> bluff and buy it. Oh, noes. What have I unleashed.
> Let go, grasshopper.
> Charles E Hardwidge
I think there is some basic logic missing here... if I made up my mind
before asking peoples opinion, than why would I have even asked? Likewise,
in regards to some related dialogue, my wife is also trying to learn more
about photography. Constructive critique is beneficial, insults and sarcasm
is of no use. All creditably is then lost.
As for the Nikon, yes I am seriously looking in that direction. However,
what you said, or did not say, has no bearing on that one way or another.
Yet, the advice and suggestions from others, has got me to researching a bit
more before my final decision.
John Sisker - Huntington Beach, California