世界輪流轉

大家交流一下攝影資訊、技術心得,報報料等等

版主: kiev, mickey_mouse

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章進仔 » 2010-05-08, 01:01

bytfung 寫:
進仔 寫:
Oldcake: 過期菲林點會值錢左 :banghead: 我識得既年青朋友(其實都幾多架...玩咩都有...),絕少會去追求所謂「過期菲林好特別」而去買,會買最多都係因為平....而就我觀察所得....話「過期菲林色彩好獨特,正」既人...都係在網上賣過期菲林既推銷語句....過期菲林...邊有人會願意俾貴價錢買丫 :banghead:


世界輪流轉

http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?ti ... a=page%3D1

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:


o下 :shock:

嘩,好生意...... :shock: :shock: :shock: :evil:
人不奢華,山景本無價。
頭像
進仔
秀才
 
文章: 1159
註冊時間: 2005-03-11, 16:40
來自: 風之谷

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章GreenLover » 2010-05-08, 01:39

的確, 大夫給我所有過期菲林, 都賣鬼晒. :oops:

還有一點, lomo對事物的態度. 不輕於相片上的成像
就如不同人從對事物有自己的preception, 用不同觀點去拍呢個世界
有人喜歡清清楚楚交代細節, 有人喜歡看到自己的夢再去想象.

另外, 先拍張相後再後製lomo, 係可行. 但對lomo的traget group來說太深, 太需時, 需要的器材也多.
頭像
GreenLover
員外
員外
 
文章: 2558
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: Dewdney Ave.

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章OldCake » 2010-05-08, 08:36

GreenLover 寫:的確, 大夫給我所有過期菲林, 都賣鬼晒. :oops:

還有一點, lomo對事物的態度. 不輕於相片上的成像
就如不同人從對事物有自己的preception, 用不同觀點去拍呢個世界
有人喜歡清清楚楚交代細節, 有人喜歡看到自己的夢再去想象.

另外, 先拍張相後再後製lomo, 係可行. 但對lomo的traget group來說太深, 太需時, 需要的器材也多.


Edmond........想請教 :oops:

>>對事物有自己的preception, 用不同觀點去拍呢個世界

怎樣用不同觀點? 用乜方法表達自己的preception?

這些需要有想法......再用適當工具......適當技巧嗎??
D80 真係機動性强
百尺竿頭仍需進、錦上何妨再添花
拍靚的照片取悅眼晴,拍好的照片觸動心靈........^o^
老餅和餅嫂相簿
頭像
OldCake
掌櫃
掌櫃
 
文章: 23827
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: 香港老餅家

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章OldCake » 2010-05-08, 08:39

我覺得這帖非常有意思.......絕非吹水 :oops:

我搬去攝影討論啦 :flower:
D80 真係機動性强
百尺竿頭仍需進、錦上何妨再添花
拍靚的照片取悅眼晴,拍好的照片觸動心靈........^o^
老餅和餅嫂相簿
頭像
OldCake
掌櫃
掌櫃
 
文章: 23827
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: 香港老餅家

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章進仔 » 2010-05-08, 13:55

OldCake 寫:
GreenLover 寫:的確, 大夫給我所有過期菲林, 都賣鬼晒. :oops:

還有一點, lomo對事物的態度. 不輕於相片上的成像
就如不同人從對事物有自己的preception, 用不同觀點去拍呢個世界
有人喜歡清清楚楚交代細節, 有人喜歡看到自己的夢再去想象.

另外, 先拍張相後再後製lomo, 係可行. 但對lomo的traget group來說太深, 太需時, 需要的器材也多.


Edmond........想請教 :oops:

>>對事物有自己的preception, 用不同觀點去拍呢個世界

怎樣用不同觀點? 用乜方法表達自己的preception?

這些需要有想法......再用適當工具......適當技巧嗎??


搭句嘴,我覺得呢個世界咩人都有,有人玩相機係純係中意按快門果下爽,影咩都唔緊要,或者根本影完就即delete,純綷玩器材。

有人係中意亂Q咁影,見「靚靚地」就upload 上 facebook 開心下當興趣,冇話研究攝影藝術唔藝術;

又有人好認真探究攝影,由想法出發,從選擇工具,拍攝過程都一絲不苟;

有人XX當撞棍當藝術,激到你死唔怕醜;

又有人從器材出發,識玩反射鏡、移軸效果、HDR就做大師。


自己做緊咩,最緊要自己清楚。而世上咁多人玩/投入攝影,潮流又不斷轉變,都真係唔 X 得咁多。好似三四年前機械菲林機,120 相機價賤到冇人有,呢兩年好似直升機咁又上返去;十年前左右買得菲林SLR 的人點都會認真研究下攝影,今日人人手上都一部專業DSLR...

都係果句,我覺得最緊要係清楚自己做緊咩。影得張相出來俾人人睇,就要對自己製造出來既影像負責。 :flower:
拎張 XX撞棍當藝術既相出來,就算過得到自己,俾人批評,都係拍攝者自己既責任。

另,近來睇左篇arcticle 幾有意思,轉載分享下
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm
最後由 進仔 於 2010-05-08, 14:13 編輯,總共編輯了 1 次。
人不奢華,山景本無價。
頭像
進仔
秀才
 
文章: 1159
註冊時間: 2005-03-11, 16:40
來自: 風之谷

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章進仔 » 2010-05-08, 14:04

呢D "level" 係作者既個人觀點,我未必苟同「拎起相機影相」既人就要有高尚低劣「等級」之分,但呢篇野內容講左相當多現在會參與攝影既人既拍攝感度,都值得一看 :beer:


Online Expert: Level 0



This level never existed before the internet, because cameras were never as exciting as sports cars or missiles for men to research.

This became terrifyingly apparent one day when I got an email from someone who didn't think an example I posted of a sharp lens was sharp. I was confused, since it was exceptionally sharp, which is why I posted it. When I asked this reader "not sharp compared to what?," he replied that it wasn't as sharp as a different example of a different lens he saw posted on some other website.

Holy Crap! This was a guy who doesn't even own a camera! He spends his time researching them and spreading his irrelevant opinions all over the Internet!

The Internet is ablaze with these guys. Forums and chat rooms are loaded with them. Photographers don't have the time for forums. We have more photography to do than time to do it. See The Two Kinds of Photographers.

Photography was never cool enough before digital to attract men's attention for no particular reason. Personally, the muzzle velocity of a Barrett 50-calibre sniper rifle is far more interesting to me than the MTF of a digital camera I'll never use. If I worked in an office and could waste my employer's time researching personal hobbies on the Internet, I'd rather look at pornography than research other people's cameras.

This level has existed in the automotive marketspace forever, with young boys learning every possible performance specification of Corvettes and Ferraris. We boys start this more than 10 years before we can get a driver's license, much less be able to buy our own Ferraris.

Boys love to learn about cars, guns, motorcycles and anything technical. I know I sure do. We men never grow out of wanting to know everything about everything, and telling you so.

Just because any car nut can tell you every possible performance specification of a Ferrari doesn't mean he can drive. Most of these people live in places where they've never even seen a Ferrari, much less ever owned one themselves.

Today with digital photography, we now have the same lookie-loos researching digital camera specs just for the bizarre fun of it. Ignore them. They love to talk and research, but aren't photographers.




Equipment Measurbator: Bottom Level 1

These men (and they are all men) have no interest in art or photography because they have no souls. Lacking souls they cannot express imagination or feeling, which is why their images, if they ever bother to make any, suck.

These folks have analysis paralysis and never accomplish anything.

Does poring over a microscope analyzing test images have anything to do with photographing a Joshua tree at dawn? Of course not. Even worse, time wasted concentrating on tests is time not spent learning useful aspects of photography and certainly time that could have been better spent actually photographing. Test just enough to know what your gear can do, and then get on with real photography.

They are interested solely in equipment for its own sake. They will talk your ear off for hours if you let them, but as soon as you ask to see their portfolio their bravado scurries away, or they think you want to see their cameras or stocks. You can read why cameras simply don't matter here.

Most seem to come from technical avocations, like engineering, computers and sciences. These people worry so much about trying to put numerical ratings on things that they are completely oblivious to the fact that cameras or test charts have nothing to do with the spirit of an image. Because they worry so much about measuring camera performance we have dubbed them "Measurbators." Unfortunately, many of them wander into KenRockwell.com looking for information on camera performance.

Many of them also play with audio equipment, computers or automobiles. They enjoy these toys just like their cameras for their own sake, but rarely if ever actually use them for the intended purposes.

Younger ones play video games or engage in chat rooms and web surfing. Older ones join "camera" clubs. (You should join photography clubs, but never camera clubs or any clubs that try to score art, since art is entirely subjective and cannot be scored numerically.) Likewise, these people never create anything notable with any of this other gear either, but they sure get excited by just having, getting or talking to you about it.

The one type of gear these people ignore is the only type of gear that actually helps: lighting.

Someone with a decent portfolio is not an equipment measurbator. Someone with more cameras than decent photos just may be. People with websites teeming with technical articles but few interesting photographs probably are.

Do not under any circumstances deal with these people, talk to them, read their websites or especially ask them for photography advice. To the innocent they seem like founts of knowledge, however their sick, lifeless souls would love to drag you into their own personal Hells and have your spirit forever mired in worrying about how sharp your lens is. If you start worrying about this and you'll never photograph anything again except brick walls and test charts.

These people are easy to identify. If you've read this far you've probably seen their websites. They always have lots of info about equipment, but very few real photographs. Beware of any information from any website not loaded with photography you admire.

Other people have other words for these people. This article here adds some more perspective.

I had to pull most of the photos of equipment off my site because these people were spending more time looking at my equipment than my art! The bandwidth for which I pay was being eaten up by these idiots looking at my lenses, instead of looking at the photos in my gallery which is the whole point of this site. That's why all the stupid pages like this one are in yellow, so that their eyes hurt too much to waste too much time on the nuts and bolts.

Most people who waste my time e-mailing me with technical and equipment questions through this site unfortunately belong to this unenlightened bottom group. Almost anyone who actually worries about the level they occupy belong to the bottom. Many of these folks stalk the Internet, and spend hours getting off "contributing" to technical websites and photography chat rooms like Photo.net, http://www.dpreview.com and photocritique.net instead of making photos. The guys here aren't too bad, and most of the Leica people here are just equipment collectors.




Rich Amateur: Level 2

These are amateurs who, by having too much money, buy lots of equipment which can fetter their freedom of expression. They are mostly men, and many are old or retired.

Rich amateurs shoot Leicas, Contaxes, Alpas, Hasselblads and Linhof 4x5s. These are great cameras, but the results are the same as the Zenits, Pentaxes, Bronicas and Tachiharas.

Today they mostly shoot Canon 1Ds-Mk IIIs, 5D Mark IIs or the Nikon D3X.

These are the same idiots who bought the first 2.7 Megapixel digital SLRs designed for newspapers like the Nikon D1 back in 2000 just because they cost $5,000. They gave technically poorer results than the film cameras used by snapshooters. All because it's expensive doesn't make it good.

Bad rich amateurs think fuzzy B/W images of poor people are art.

Some rich amateurs fall into the bottom spiritual level easily because they worry too much about equipment, others go straight on to create great art since they don't have any worries about equipment since they think they own the best. Oddly, few rich amateurs produce ordinary work. It either rules or sucks.




Professional: Level 3

A professional photographer is a person who earns his entire living (100%) from the sale of photographs.

Professionals do not create art for a living; they create images for commerce. They usually have some familiarity with the tools and can get out decent images, however they may or may not be able to capture imagination.

Of course professionals may create great images, but that's on their own time.

Professionals spend very little time worrying about cameras, except when they need to get them repaired. They spend most of their time looking for work and pissing about how all the other photographers in town are dropping their prices.

Professionals spend more on film and lab fees each month than they spend on camera gear in a year.

There are no professional nature photographers. They all either have day jobs or make their wives support them.

Professionals shoot Nikon SLRs, Mamiya medium format and Calumet 4x5" cameras. They cannot afford gear as good as most serious amateurs.

Unless you are a commercial photography buyer, or know one as a friend, you have not heard of professional photographers. The ones you may have seen in camera ads proclaiming that they use this or that camera are just spokesmodels.

Professionals don't have websites and don't put out technical newsletters. Those people are usually amateurs.




Snapshooter: Level 4

This is my mom and most people. These people want memories, as opposed to photographs or cameras.

Snapshooters who are graphic artists or otherwise visually literate people often make fantastic images that impress everyone. These snapshooters are artists and don't even realize it. They usually dress better than the artists who think they really are artists.

Believe it: it's the photographer who makes an image, not a camera.

Snapshooters use point-and-shoot and disposable cameras, which give the same excellent results as the Leicas, Nikons, Canons and Contaxes used by everyone else.




Amateur: Level 5

People who earn less than half of their income from photography are amateurs. This has nothing to do with the quality of their photography.

This person loves to create photographs. Good amateurs of pure spirit can transcend the other levels directly to being an artist.

People who shoot weddings and etc. on weekends as a side line from their day jobs are still amateurs; they just charge for their photos. And as you read here they may also charge a lot for their snaps.

Amateurs who think that better cameras will improve their photos are at risk of descending to the lowest level of equipment measurbator. Too many amateurs have been misled by camera makers into thinking that they need good cameras for good images. This thought is poison to creating art.

Amateurs who lose themselves in creating great images are set for a path of enlightenment.

Being an amateur is a good thing; from this level one can rise to the level of artist rather easily.

Amateurs almost always shoot Canon SLRs.





Whore: Level 6

A whore is an artist who sells his soul by accepting money or drugs for his art.

By lowering himself to this level his vision is compromised.

Why? Because when one depends on selling one's soul to pay for one's food and pad one does not screw with the program, which means that one does not try new styles.

If a whore's work pays his bills after years of trying, it's unlikely any whore will be open to trying new styles while he still needs the dough.

Artists with representation (meaning they are represented by a gallery or an artists' representatives just as pimps do in the sex trade) may lose that representation if they change their style.

Therefore, art for sale from one person rarely gets better or different.

The style that sells is all a whore's johns and pimps (representatives) want to see. See Barnbaum's book on artistry. It is extraordinarily difficult for a successful whore to change styles once one has been accepted.

Read more about the whore class at The 10 Most Overpaid Jobs in the US.




Artist: Top Level 7

This is the highest level.

An artist fixes his imagination in a tangible form called a photograph. He captures the spirit of place or person, real or imagined, in this photograph and the viewer responds to this.

An artist is a complete master of his tools. When creating art an artist transcends common existence as his spirit flies up to meet that which he is capturing. He may practice and learn his tools while he is not creating, however when creating the camera becomes an extension of his mind. No conscious thought is expended on the technical issues with which he is a virtuoso while creating photographs.

To make a musical analogy, a musician may woodshed his scales, but when he's jamming he's not even thinking about fingerings. He's lost in the passion of the moment.

Just like professional surfers who have a dozen boards or pro guitarists who have 23 axes, an artist may have a slew of cameras, each for a different purpose.

Likewise, other artists may only have one camera, or none at all. It just doesn't matter.

Artists sometimes dress funny and tend to stay up late. They usually prefer to photograph attractive young women and are proud of it.

No one ever sees their work since they have crummy ability to promote themselves, and sadly, usually don't even appreciate their own excellent work. Those that do drop down to Whore, which sadly and paradoxically means you will never see the work of a true artist unless you know one personally. Good artists are usually too embarrassed to show their work to anyone unless you are intimate with them, since their work is their soul.

Artists use any sort of camera, including pinholes and disposables, or 8 x 10s. They use whatever instrument they need to create what they want.

轉載自 http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm :flower:
人不奢華,山景本無價。
頭像
進仔
秀才
 
文章: 1159
註冊時間: 2005-03-11, 16:40
來自: 風之谷

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章GreenLover » 2010-05-08, 14:32

OldCake 寫:
GreenLover 寫:的確, 大夫給我所有過期菲林, 都賣鬼晒. :oops:

還有一點, lomo對事物的態度. 不輕於相片上的成像
就如不同人從對事物有自己的preception, 用不同觀點去拍呢個世界
有人喜歡清清楚楚交代細節, 有人喜歡看到自己的夢再去想象.

另外, 先拍張相後再後製lomo, 係可行. 但對lomo的traget group來說太深, 太需時, 需要的器材也多.


Edmond........想請教 :oops:

>>對事物有自己的preception, 用不同觀點去拍呢個世界

怎樣用不同觀點? 用乜方法表達自己的preception?

這些需要有想法......再用適當工具......適當技巧嗎??


能用最low tech的工具, 些少或唔需要技巧,
就可拍到自己喜歡相片, 物唔係件好事咩?

題外話: 我大公(公公個唐亞哥) 在生時都話, 食魚就一定要食遊水魚, 記得細個時食團年飯前一定去厕所個浴缸同條魚玩下先.
大公又點會食魚柳飽.
頭像
GreenLover
員外
員外
 
文章: 2558
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: Dewdney Ave.

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章bytfung » 2010-05-08, 18:13

我覺得玩 Lomography 的 "藝術家" 係刻意跟傳統攝影人背道而馳。
這是不順從權威吧

就不確定性來說,Don't think, just shoot 之後屎弗撞棍有好相 (唔一定係 technically 完美啦),又或係事後加插解釋。
我們唔識欣賞,但佢o地有知音人。
我們欣賞的 snap 大師,係轉數快之人 (見人/景 即構圖) ,也有些運氣的成份吧。

可能 lomography 玩家當左兩樣野一樣卦。
Buy it now.
頭像
bytfung
員外
員外
 
文章: 5352
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: 呢度

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章jae_fo » 2010-05-08, 21:03

身邊有同事鍾意玩呢家野:
http://www.kevinswan.com/blog/2009/07/17/the-camera-toss/

咁影法,唔係靠撞彩仲係乜?
睇過佢d相,完全唔知影乜,偏偏佢就覺得「好有feel」
完全理解唔到.
Get the T5 in hand, feel so good!
頭像
jae_fo
員外
員外
 
文章: 1163
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章進仔 » 2010-05-09, 01:50

snap 大師雖然係有運氣成份,但冇技巧同想法就冇可能影得到。
仲未計佢特登去找尋題材呢?

撞棍,撞1000張都唔知會唔會有一張 :banghead:
人不奢華,山景本無價。
頭像
進仔
秀才
 
文章: 1159
註冊時間: 2005-03-11, 16:40
來自: 風之谷

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章進仔 » 2010-05-09, 01:54

jae_fo 寫:身邊有同事鍾意玩呢家野:
http://www.kevinswan.com/blog/2009/07/17/the-camera-toss/

咁影法,唔係靠撞彩仲係乜?
睇過佢d相,完全唔知影乜,偏偏佢就覺得「好有feel」
完全理解唔到.


我睇個網站,有d幾好喎!
我估技術成份一定有啊,起碼入面草地果張相當好。

我覺得玩唔係問題,而在呢d動態攝影上成功率亦唔係問題,street snap master 亦唔會100%有好作品,
只係影相果個人,有冇用心去影,用心去增加成功率,亦識得選好的影像出來。

而唔係 係又話有feel, 唔係又話有feel 當藝術。
人不奢華,山景本無價。
頭像
進仔
秀才
 
文章: 1159
註冊時間: 2005-03-11, 16:40
來自: 風之谷

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章GreenLover » 2010-05-09, 14:13

bytfung 寫:我覺得玩 Lomography 的 "藝術家" 係刻意跟傳統攝影人背道而馳。
這是不順從權威吧

就不確定性來說,Don't think, just shoot 之後屎弗撞棍有好相 (唔一定係 technically 完美啦),又或係事後加插解釋。
我們唔識欣賞,但佢o地有知音人。
我們欣賞的 snap 大師,係轉數快之人 (見人/景 即構圖) ,也有些運氣的成份吧。

可能 lomography 玩家當左兩樣野一樣卦。



當我地日常生活已被四正完美的相片包圍住, 不如就回到其本層面上, 來d有缺陷的, 免去管理器材的精力, 等個雙眼, 個腦同身體都有空間去伸展一下.
我看lomo是一場運動, 而lomo相機係推廣呢個運動的消費品, 係感性的消費. 有別於傳統相機理性的產物.
頭像
GreenLover
員外
員外
 
文章: 2558
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: Dewdney Ave.

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章GreenLover » 2010-05-09, 14:20

jae_fo 寫:身邊有同事鍾意玩呢家野:
http://www.kevinswan.com/blog/2009/07/17/the-camera-toss/

咁影法,唔係靠撞彩仲係乜?
睇過佢d相,完全唔知影乜,偏偏佢就覺得「好有feel」
完全理解唔到.


網主有講除左相之外也可同在場客人的ice breaking, 就好似玩下魔術攪下氣氛甘.
d相裡面被拍的都笑得幾開心自然, 唔係婚禮上的果d四萬笑容, 幾好wow
頭像
GreenLover
員外
員外
 
文章: 2558
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: Dewdney Ave.

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章香港至NET超人 » 2010-05-09, 17:04

係我既攝影世界, 唔理A可唔可以取代B, 我只會考慮成本效益,
我要咩質素, 就用最平方法處理, 但必須係可靠地工作, 而非靠撞彩.
如要拍某些東西要用某獨特器材, 會視乎能力負擔, 與及有無辦法取代,
ROUNDSHOT就係最好例了, 用過數碼接駁, 用過NOBLEX既2條駁埋,
唔得就係唔得, 有一個駁痕都唔得, 就要比錢.

平鏡有佢特性, 貴錢亦有, 但我不會用PENTAX SMC去扮DIANA, 買部
DIANA根本不成數目, 沖幾筒菲林都貴過吧, 唔需要扮鬼扮馬. 而另一
層次係用其他機去扮LOMO之類拍出來的效果, 尤其是拍攝是心態,
我覺得亦無必要咁做, 係BUY LOMO既, 唔爭在三幾百銀玩具機, 反
正LOMO都唔係出咁多, 久唔久又轉款, 未來升值大有可能. 但我唔
BUY LOMOGRAPHY, 玩具機咪唔玩囉, 唔好浪費人生去拍D自己都
唔鍾意既相.

因夠些名不經轉既相機而帶動菲林拍攝, 我覺得係好事, 人係需要
新鮮感, LOMO/DIANA正如設合後生一輩的玩樂心理, INSTANT FILM
亦如事. 傳統120系統, 器材成本高, 使用麻煩, 又重又大舊, 仲好
多時間需要連同腳架拍攝, 唔係資深攝影人, 根本唔會考慮買一套.
正正就係方便二字, 殺了很多出色的東西, 如黑膠唱盤, 幻燈機,
座檯打字機, 連渣波車都殺埋咁滯, 傳統工藝級作品走向小眾, 還
不需要再解釋吧.

攝影分門分派, 志至群組同好而互相影響, 集思廣益. 但現代人分
幫分派, 目的已經不同, 有的內部自我崇拜, 有的存在高排他性,
不管是器材, 還是影藝, 都有呢個問題. 有時候我也齒冷本地沙龍,
痛恨做假文化, 對求求其其是LOMO文化也看不上眼, 但其實我做
的, 又是否高級過他們? 理論上係, 但手底功夫見真章, 學業問一
句「20年後你好打過我啦」, 在於任何學術世界, 都無達者, 只
會有人愈來愈遠離岸邊, 不再游的, 笑別人游錯方向是個笑話吧.
我的腳架蝦兵蟹將, 輕輕鬆鬆廿年良伴:
G炭5+G5板, SLIK PRO4, M074+G5板, CT3371+G3板, G1227+M438, C297+G1270M, V640+PH273;
C127+G1板, 614CF+R25BH, TILTALL JUNIOR, M390套, M728套, 444SPOT套, 笨仔鴨腳, FLATBOY;
仲有後備: CAMBO BALL, FOBA MINI, G1270, G0板, M128, V51Q.........
頭像
香港至NET超人
企堂
企堂
 
文章: 14261
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: 香港.gif

Re: 世界輪流轉

文章OldCake » 2010-05-10, 08:58

GreenLover 寫:
當我地日常生活已被四正完美的相片包圍住, 不如就回到其本層面上, 來d有缺陷的, 免去管理器材的精力, 等個雙眼, 個腦同身體都有空間去伸展一下.


Edmond,......未敢苟同這句>>當我地日常生活已被四正完美的相片包圍住, 不如就回到其本層面上, 來d有缺陷的,

為何要有"缺陷的"來取代四正完美的相片? 用更有內容的唔得? 用觸動心靈的得唔得?

"缺陷的"就比"四正完美"的更好.....更有藝術感? 更有......feel?

>>免去管理器材的精力, 等個雙眼, 個腦同身體都有空間去伸展一下

管理器材在資深攝影人中......要花精力?

用左要"管理的器材".....就不可以用"雙眼, 個腦同身體都有空間去伸展一下"???
D80 真係機動性强
百尺竿頭仍需進、錦上何妨再添花
拍靚的照片取悅眼晴,拍好的照片觸動心靈........^o^
老餅和餅嫂相簿
頭像
OldCake
掌櫃
掌櫃
 
文章: 23827
註冊時間: 2005-01-01, 11:26
來自: 香港老餅家

上一頁下一頁

回到 攝影討論

誰在線上

正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者:沒有註冊會員

cron