Built-in flash in P&S digital and DSLR cameras

Lame sockpuppet troll, currently under the guise of:

franklin-d-worth wrote:

I never alluded to, nor directly said that, Jane Brown was the couch-potato
photographer without any real-life experience.

Let's see:

"Couch-potato photographers always slip up in their facts when all
they have for reference in life is what they read online, in lieu of
any real-life experience with anything..."

Yes, it is obvious that the online couch potato with no life is the
individual who hasn't shared any of his own photos to substantiate his
life experiences - - is namely, our cowardly anonymous sockpuppet
troll.




-hh

"franklin-d-worth" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 02:39:22 +0100, "Bill Again" wrote:


"franklin-d-worth" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 23:13:40 +0000, Chris Savage
wrote:

On 2007-11-13, Bill Again wrote:

You remind me with that comment of an article I read recently by Jane
Bown,
[...]

quote
I'm not very particular about equipment: I use Olympus OM1s and have
about a
dozen, all purchased second-hand more than 40 years ago, and while I
have
[...]
unquote


How reliable a source can we consider this to be? She was buying a
camera, second-hand, more than five years before anyone outside Olympus
ever
saw one.

Whatever. I don't understand the 'available light' dogma. I'm with
Eugene
Smith on the matter.


Just as reliable as all the other propagandistic "advice" that dSLR
advocates
hand out. I was waiting to see if anyone would notice the blatant error
of
their
"proof". :-) Couch-potato photographers always slip up in their facts
when
all
they have for reference in life is what they read online, in lieu of any
real-life experience with anything related to the topic.


You are an ignorant and unmannered person. Blatant error of "their proof".
What arrogant nonsense. The quote was not proof of anything, it was a
quote
from an article by Jane Bown. This photographer is now 82 years old and
far
from being a "couch potato photographer" she has photographed more
personalities than you could shake a stick at. She doesn't need to prove
anything, certainly not to idiots like you.


I never alluded to, nor directly said that, Jane Brown was the
couch-potato
photographer without any real-life experience. (Read what I said again.)
Any
real photographer would have immediately noticed the error (or
misquoting?) of
her statement and would have never used it as a reference for anything. My
comments refer to you and -hh alone. And rightly so, since neither of you
noticed it. :-)

Your over-reactive defensiveness speaks tomes about you. (i.e. Methinks
thou
dost protest too much.)

*poof*, there just went any credibility of anything you or -hh have ever
said
online

That was fun.

Yawn.

On 2007-11-14, Bill Again wrote:

"Chris Savage" wrote in message
...
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.]
On 2007-11-13, Bill Again wrote:

You remind me with that comment of an article I read recently by Jane
Bown,
[...]

quote
I'm not very particular about equipment: I use Olympus OM1s and have
about a
dozen, all purchased second-hand more than 40 years ago, and while I have
[...]
unquote


How reliable a source can we consider this to be? She was buying a
camera, second-hand, more than five years before anyone outside Olympus
ever
saw one.


What do you mean by "reliable source"? It's a comment by someone who was
very busy in the industry and who was and is admired. It is a quote that
reflects on the sort of photography that is more about art than technology.
It is not meant to prove anything.


Ms.Bown is being less than lucid about her photography. I
read that article when it was published and, while not denigrating her
photography, she obviously wants to promote this image of herself as
some bumbling old dear who knows nothing of those horrible complicated
science bits of photography. I believ she is being more than a little
disingenuous.

The idea that someone can make a successful career out of photography
without any knowledge of basic technique is plainly preposterous. She
makes this vague allusion to light on the back of her hand, but she
obviously has developed a good technical understanding of the
capabilities of the medium she shoots on.

Unfortunately this kind of prattle is all that gets passed on to
students on most photography courses these days, so we end up with all
this postmodern, technically inept but textually impeccable bull****
(I had the misfortune of seeing Elton's rapidly withdrawn Goldin show
at Baltic in September.)

Bown not only knows and understands her craft and works within the
limitations thereof, she probably had a 'nice little man' somewhere in
a darkroom who could produce a print from the dodgiest of negs.

And, as a long-time OM system shooter, I object to the assertion that
only someone who is 'not very particular about equipment' would shoot
with an OM1.

I now return you to your regular trolls and apologise for this unwonted
diversion into discussion of photography.

--
Chris Savage Kiss me. Or would you rather live in a
Gateshead, UK land where the soap won't lather?
- Billy Bragg

"Marty Fremen" wrote in message
...
=?UTF-8?B?U01TIOaWr+iSguaWh+KAoiDlpI8=?=
wrote:

Hmm, the M-1, the precursor to the OM1, was introduced in 1972. So in
2012 the OM1 will have been 40 years old. Yet this alleged photographer
bought about 12 of them, second hand


Obviously she bought them second hand! She could hardly have bought them
new, could she?

Marty,

If you were 82, and had been working in photography for some 60 years and
someone asked you when you had bought a particular camera would you like to
be tied down to an exact date or stretch of years or would you quite likely
say something like, "Oh god, I bought those 40 years ago!"

I have had many cameras. I had, for instance, a third or fourth hand Rollei
in the 60's. I couldn't even guess at when I bought it. I cannot even
remember how much it cost.

I really believe that this obsession with dates and times and exactitude
does not fit with an artistic mind. The two are incompatible. Which is why
Bown can make confusing statements about exactly when she bought a camera,
for God's sake, but has a long and productive history of producing top
class, nay, world class, photography. Look at her photographs of Orson
Welles, Samuel Becket, Truman Capote, Evelyn Waugh, Margaret Thatcher or any
of the many others and then tell me you can criticise her for not
remembering when she bought a camera.

That's all

Bill

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.]
On 2007-11-15, Bill Again wrote:

[...] Look at her photographs of Orson
Welles, Samuel Becket, Truman Capote, Evelyn Waugh, Margaret Thatcher or any
of the many others and then tell me you can criticise her for not
remembering when she bought a camera.


Look at her photographs and tell me that she, as she disingenuously
claims, has no idea how to operate a camera or judge exposure. But she
wants us to believe that she is some natural artistic wonder who just
intuits these things. It smacks of desparation to me, putting up this
mythical barrier to entry of the profession by spreading this lie that
technique is neither learnable nor necessary.

--
Chris Savage Kiss me. Or would you rather live in a
Gateshead, UK land where the soap won't lather?
- Billy Bragg

In rec.photo.digital Chris Savage wrote:
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.]
On 2007-11-15, Bill Again wrote:

[...] Look at her photographs of Orson
Welles, Samuel Becket, Truman Capote, Evelyn Waugh, Margaret Thatcher or any
of the many others and then tell me you can criticise her for not
remembering when she bought a camera.

Look at her photographs and tell me that she, as she disingenuously
claims, has no idea how to operate a camera or judge exposure. But she
wants us to believe that she is some natural artistic wonder who just
intuits these things. It smacks of desparation to me, putting up this
mythical barrier to entry of the profession by spreading this lie that
technique is neither learnable nor necessary.

In the days when Jane Bown was learning her photography skills it was
not unusual for professionals to guess exposures rather than meter
them. Many articles were written about ways of guessing exposure. If
you were uncertain you'd bracket the exposure. Some got good enough at
guessing that they never bothered to buy a light meter, even when they
became cheap.

--
Chris Malcolm DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

On 16 Nov 2007 20:22:56 GMT, Chris Malcolm wrote:

In rec.photo.digital Chris Savage wrote:
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.]
On 2007-11-15, Bill Again wrote:

[...] Look at her photographs of Orson
Welles, Samuel Becket, Truman Capote, Evelyn Waugh, Margaret Thatcher or any
of the many others and then tell me you can criticise her for not
remembering when she bought a camera.

Look at her photographs and tell me that she, as she disingenuously
claims, has no idea how to operate a camera or judge exposure. But she
wants us to believe that she is some natural artistic wonder who just
intuits these things. It smacks of desparation to me, putting up this
mythical barrier to entry of the profession by spreading this lie that
technique is neither learnable nor necessary.

In the days when Jane Bown was learning her photography skills it was
not unusual for professionals to guess exposures rather than meter
them. Many articles were written about ways of guessing exposure. If
you were uncertain you'd bracket the exposure. Some got good enough at
guessing that they never bothered to buy a light meter, even when they
became cheap.

This is how I know when to disagree with my camera's chosen exposure settings.
I'm invariably right. Those who have to depend on what some electronics tells
them all the time will never know how to get it right, not just for exposure
settings either.

Bill Again wrote:

edited for brevity

Here's a quote about Jane Bown's career so far....

"The Observer published its first Jane Bown photograph in December 1949,
beginning a romance between Britain's oldest Sunday paper and the country's
most loved photographer that still flourishes.

edited

Hello, Bill:

Britain's "most loved photographer," eh?

Wow, what a ringing endorsement, that is! :-D


Cordially,
John Turco