Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!seismo!hao!csu-cs!stewartd
From: stewartd@csu-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Expensive Equipment
Message-ID: <2377@csu-cs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Aug-83 17:12:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: csu-cs.2377
Posted: Wed Aug 24 17:12:32 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Aug-83 03:38:31 EDT
Lines: 22


 
 cornell/wally missed the point.  The fact that equipment is
 expensive or not is not at issue.  If a person is going
 to spend money on a Canon automatic camera, they ought to get
 what will do the job.  IE:  there are too many hacks in
 these electronic marvels anyway - so why put up with something
 less than convenient?  Poor cornell/wally got sidetracked on the
 price issue.  It is not correct that the cost of equipment
 is not what makes the photographer (some of my best work was
 done with a box camera I got for two dollars).  BUT - the
 issue is not "good" photography, but dealing with a specific
 technical situation, namely, double exposure (or any of the
 problems inherent with automatic cameras).
	Thus, it may be a consolation to those who own $500
cameras that they are not necessarily doomed to photographic
mediocrity.

David C. Stewart
Colorado State University - Computer Science
Fort Collins, Co 
(ucbvax!hplabs!csu-cs!stewartd)