[Leica] Technical detail--why?

[abridge at mac.com (Adam Bridge)]

Sonny, did you even think about what I wrote? Because I don't see how your 
response in any way addresses what I was talking about.

I spoke, DIRECTLY, to how I (that's ME, MYSELF) relate to metadata and how I 
use it and how IT serves ME.

I get that events are, for the most part ephemeral. But it's not like I'm a 
thoughtless boob just pushing the shutter release button on the camera. Most 
of the time I have time to think and the presence of mind to do so. So I do 
have a vision of what I want to accomplish. The camera records how I chose 
to capture it. (Or didn't choose because I was in a hurry, distracted, 
tired, whatever).

Is it so incredibly inconceivable that I should be able to go back and look 
at how the image was made and actually learn of it? REALLY??? Because I try 
to do that all the time. Each exposure is an opportunity to learn and the 
more information I have to go on the more I have a shot at learning.

It's all a creative process. The next moonrise I'll have an idea of what 
happened: gee, the NEX-7 behaves differently from the M8 in similar 
circumstances.

Personally I think that's what being a profession is: using all the 
information you have at hand to get the best result you can. I may not have 
the eye of Ted Grant, or the skill of approach and composition as Doug Herr, 
but that doesn't mean I can't work toward those goals in an intelligent and 
thoughtful manner.

I work alone. I don't have a support group to sit down with and talk with. I 
think I'd find the exposure unbearable. But I do care about my work, my 
vision, and my craft.

Maybe I'm doing it wrong, but I don't think so - at least not for me.

Adam

On Mar 25, 2013, at 7:56 PM, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> wrote:

> But Adam, They could paint three dots on the ground at Yellowstone,
> and at the appointed hour with an identical camera and identical
> plates and, well, you get the picture, Actually, I mean, you would not
> get the picture.  Moonrise is a non-repeatable.
> 
> You might come close, but why would you want to?   So you might have
> gotten a better result shooting wider, or faster or at a different
> ISO.  The conditions are gonna be different next time unless you are
> in a studio.
> 
> The whole point of what we do is to see something and show someone
> else what we see.
> 
> Look Adam, See what I see!
> 
> Behold!    Look!  See!   Emblepo!
> 
> There are  lots of variables in Photography, what we do out there is
> try to get them right.