Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/12/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Simon Stevens <simon@camera-craftsman.com> wrote: > She said it was a "very old fashioned camera." > But this is the first time I have had a cleint disparage my camera. Brougham <brougham3@yahoo.com> wrote; >How was that disparaging? This is a question about the belief in "progress." I am sympathetic to itt in limited situations, but not with respect to everything. Not everybody differentiates. From the tone of her voice and puzzled expression I'd say the individual in question on Saturday was a true believer. Like I am sure most of you, the results are all that really matter to me. An exception is the extent that first impressions can affect my income. The corporate bean counters who tend to hire me are always looking for a way to cut costs. One way is to not hire a professional when they need photography, and instead have the intern take pictures with a "modern" digital camera which "must be wonderful because it's brand new and cost $500" or even disposable cameras. While they usually regret the decision after they get the results, by then it's too late either for their pictures or my pocket book. These kind of people often seem very concerned about the equipment. They think the reason that professional's pictures are better is because we have better cameras and that when they hire a pro that's really the benefit they are getting for their dollars. What they haven't figured out is that what a photographer really does for them is bring his or her experience, not just a snazzy camera. Simon Stevens