Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 55 of 55

Thread: Dispelling the Negative

  1. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jed
    I could also in theory suggest option #3:

    #3 Photographer was really complimented by the comments. Photographer was also genuinely impressed by the food and genuinely complimented the cooking utensils.

    Entirely possible but clearly not the intended reading.
    ah..jed u r power thinker i didnt think of #3...or maybe theres' a even a #4, and etc =)

    Aton..maybe u r rite..hehe..this is gettign 2b a psychological exercise..time to go back to re-read those psychology texts =)

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aton
    How a person intepret a thing, shows how he/she would react in similar situation??
    Well said.

  3. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minoxman
    If the photographer chooses to talk about gears, that's his/her perogative.
    So tell me, should I get the D70 or 300D?
    neither... get the lomo.
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Very interesting.

    When I first read that story a long time ago, my intepretation is #2 - that the photographer wants to use the cooking utensils comment to 'educate' the friend that it's not the equipment but the person behind it that counts more. Only today then I learnt of intepretation #1 (and 3 for that matter ).

    Regards
    CK

  5. #45

    Default

    the photographer in the story missed a great opportunity.

    he should have said to his friend's wife, "not at all, i took all those stunning photographs with this $5 beat-up no-name camera that i picked up from a garage sale."
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  6. #46

    Default

    ..then the wife replied "How'd you guess" and showed the photographer her $10,000 fully automatic and digital cooking utensils.

  7. #47

    Default

    then the photographer went home, sold his $5 beat-up no-name camera, and embarked on a lifetime pursuit of the fully automated intelligent camera. and he never took a good photograph ever since.
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  8. #48

    Default

    In actual fact, neither the host gave a damn about the photos or the photographer a damn about the food.
    It's about the gear, remember?

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    2,548

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minoxman
    He clearly got pissed when people talked about his gear being the determining factor in his so called wonderful pictures, hence my deduction is that he is sensitive about gear talk and that was my point.
    Guess you never understood it either eh?
    Normally I wouldn't even bother with a thread like this one, but for once I'm going to wade in and let a few rounds off.

    First off Jed and the others are correct in their interpretation and it is you Minoxman who have the analogy by the wrong end of the stick.

    In the first half of the analogy the woman is impressed with the quality of the photographers work in his book and like all amateurs presumes that the better the photo the more expensive the camera yet doesn't pay much attention to the ingredients involved in a good photograph.

    In the second half of the analogy the photographer enjoys a great meal, which by it's definition means it tastes good, thus by definition meaning that the ingredients are of good quality. (see the gap closing now?). So to show the woman that the ingredients and how they are prepared is of prime importance he points out rather tongue in cheek that she must have very expensive utensils, thus closing the cycle in the analogy.

    This level of analogy or logical construct if you will is typical of those covered in any elementary psychology or philosphy course.
    The Ang Moh from Hell
    Professional Photography - many are called, few are chosen!

  10. #50

    Default

    au contraire.... the woman enjoyed the photos and the photographer enjoyed the food.

    interpretation #4: the photographer was a genuinely modest man who let his gear take the credit. and subsequently gave his host the chance to do the same. after all, a good carpenter praises his tools just as a bad one blames his.
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  11. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian
    Normally I wouldn't even bother with a thread like this one, but for once I'm going to wade in and let a few rounds off.

    First off Jed and the others are correct in their interpretation and it is you Minoxman who have the analogy by the wrong end of the stick.

    In the first half of the analogy the woman is impressed with the quality of the photographers work in his book and like all amateurs presumes that the better the photo the more expensive the camera yet doesn't pay much attention to the ingredients involved in a good photograph.

    In the second half of the analogy the photographer enjoys a great meal, which by it's definition means it tastes good, thus by definition meaning that the ingredients are of good quality. (see the gap closing now?). So to show the woman that the ingredients and how they are prepared is of prime importance he points out rather tongue in cheek that she must have very expensive utensils, thus closing the cycle in the analogy.

    This level of analogy or logical construct if you will is typical of those covered in any elementary psychology or philosphy course.
    Yeaaaaa right I agree with you 100%. It was clearly a retaliation by the photographer but it's ok you can have your own take on this. I was just stating my take on that paragraph. No right or wrong.
    But I'll let you have it.

  12. #52

    Default

    That story wasn't even about analogies..lol. The woman was naive and the photographer was sensitive. Period.

    And the food sucks.

  13. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian
    ... like all amateurs presumes that the better the photo the more expensive the camera yet doesn't pay much attention to the ingredients involved in a good photograph.
    sounds like a sweeping statement.

    a definite in a logical argument!
    you can buy better gear but you can't buy a better eye

  14. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zaren
    sounds like a sweeping statement.

    a definite in a logical argument!
    Hey I am an amatuer and the last thing I care is what gears one used even if the pictures are "bad" But then I was deemed illogical so...

  15. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Perth Australia
    Posts
    2,548

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zaren
    sounds like a sweeping statement.

    a definite in a logical argument!
    Fair comment, what I should have said was "clueless non photographer" however i used the term amateur instead.
    The Ang Moh from Hell
    Professional Photography - many are called, few are chosen!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •