BTW, if you want some WOWs...try this guy out: Deep Sky Colors I think he may just be the best astrophotographer on the planet...he does huge mosaics with the deepest exposures, with the richest colors, taken under the darkest skies on earth, the guy will drive over 7000 miles just to produce one mosaic...and every single one of his images just blows my mind so much I'm not even able to utter the word "wow". It's just. Mind. Blown. No words.
^^ This is my goal. If I can become skilled enough to make just one image that compares to this guys work before I die....then I'll die a happy photographer.
Thanks jrista, for the DSC link. Spectacular images, no question. Being less of a space-image fan than yourself, I'll take a nice framed copy of the night shot "Untouchable Beauty". Assuming it to be as advertised, I am impressed by such capture of natural beauty (of the down-to-Earth sort)
["...as advertised" meaning not a product of liberal "enhancement", instead, a reasonable facsimile of the real thing. The painted "visions" of the American West so often including waterfalls, rainbow, butterflies (unicorns?), etc., etc., are cloying examples of the opposite (What, no Disney castles?).
You make terrific well-reasoned pleas for emphasis other than technomania for the photo-artist. But, …my question (art-as-subject appropriate here?)still lingers:
Everyone in a guitar building/evaluating discussion forum is well aware of the difference the skill of the player makes in the music produced. Talk of styles and technique abound elsewhere, with heavy subjectivity evident in those posts.
But, it seems to me, the forum where bracing styles, top thicknesses, types and characteristics of woods, effects of string gauges, string spacing for finger style vs. plectrum use, body size, etc. are the expected subjects, ..is not the place for disappointment when the "artistry" of playing the guitar is not emphasized.
"Canon Rumors" to me clearly enough suggests that the forum discussion will (or should) focus on the equipment available or expected to be available from Canon, …simple as that. Are there not sufficient other sites which offer conflicting opinion ad nauseam on what constitutes "art"? ("opinion", because one man's art is another's "WTF?")
I of course, have my own reaction to any given image, but someone else's interpretation may, and probably will, be different. I do not care at all if this is so, and am really not seriously interested.
If he/she and I similarly appreciate the image, then that is something we may enjoy, i.e., a pleasurable shared experience. If not, neither of our opinions should be devalued for its holder.
The beauty that is in the eye of any beholder is to some degree a personal treasure. In that sense, arguing against his opinion is to deprive him his uniquely individual experience, …a form, I tend to think it could be said, of theft.
It has taken me many years to arrive at what seems to be a fair balance between being fairly strongly opinionated, and yet mindful of the wisdom of the old saying "If you can't say anything nice, …".
I can truthfully say that I benefit much more than I contribute here at CR, I come here to learn more often than my participation might indicate. And your posts are usually the informative kind I come for, helping me understand Canon (and other) equipment.
The other side of the coin, and I make this observation with absolutely no offense intended, is that I would not come here at all, if the posts were predominately peoples' thoughts on art, including your own.
I am here for the things that seem implicit in the forum title, and anyone's "best BIF"," best landscapes", "best macro", although popular with many, and worthy in their own right, with websites galore featuring them, are not what draws me here.
I don't expect any other members to be concerned with, or impressed by my preferences. I am simply commenting on the fact that I think tech-talk is perfectly appropriate here, and I don't at-all miss what I think can accurately be described as "off-topic" in this plainly labeled forum.
The fact that this forum claims to offer one thing I am interested in, and the fact that I am here often, does not make me expect or demand that other interests of mine will be covered here to my satisfaction.
If this forum discusses (broadly)"Canon Rumors", then the hosts have met their claim, and can not be accused of less. They have not "falsely advertised".
PS - The writings you have done here, in your efforts to contribute, are similar in kind to what may be offered in any book by its author. And the response will be similar, although in the case of inter-net exchanges, more obvious/emotionally affective.
Some will comprehend and may or may not express gratitude. Many will comprehend less, but still be glad to have been offered the chance. Some will (mistakenly)think they have understood, and comment further based upon that incomprehension, leaving you frustrated (if you focus on these persons). If you take upon yourself the continuing effort to assist the poorer students, and are not sufficiently encouraged by the quicker ones, the task can seem unrewarding.
I suggest that the readers you are able to reach and help, to whatever degree, are the ones to keep in mind. It is almost a certainty that you are appreciated more than you will ever be made aware of. The author writes, the book goes out, readers read, and the effects of the readings can never be completely known.
When seeds are cast, the hope (and the faith) is that some will grow. The unseen reward is best assumed.