Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Amateur Photographer
From: "A.H.SCHMIDT" <horsts@actek.com.au>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:20:32 +1000

- --------------69834D2F279104DB9BFEA7AE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This message was send once before, but I received an rrror message, telling
me it was not send..

I am sending it again.

Horst Schmidt



> Dr. Joseph Yao wrote:
>
> Snip:
>
> Perhaps the title of the magazine says it all:
> 'AMATEUR Photographer'.
>
> Dr. Joseph Yao,
>
> I agree with most of your comment about the Amateur Photographer
> magazine.
>
> However I strongly disagree with the meaning ofyour last sentence. You
> are inferring, that amateurs are of lower standards and of inferior
> capabilities as the Professionals.
>
> I suppose you are considering your self as professional. It is true,
> that in some fields, the professional is to be preferred. E.G., I don't
> think I would like to be operated on by an amateur brain surgeon. In
> other fields however, to be an amateur is not necessarily a sign of
> inferiority. For example, in the field of astronomy, more comets and
> stars have been detected, then by professionals. I suppose you don't
> watch the Olympic games, because most of the athletes are, or are
> supposed to be, amateurs. In the Photographic field, I don't believe,
> contrary to you as it seems, that an amateur is not able to
> differentiate between a good or an inferior camera, or picture. On the
> contrary, an amateur can often  afford to experiment and try , whith out
> having to worry, if the result is negative, where the next pay comes
> from. A professional often does not have this privilege, because of time
> restraints.  I also don't think, despite your professionalism, that you
> grasped the meaning of the publication, behind the title Amateur
> Photographer. The title does not, and I repeat
> not, refer to the Staff of the magazine. It refers to the readers of the
> magazine. Are you calling all the readers, simple?. The Editorial staff
> are most probably professionals.They are surly professional journalists
> and included are surely quite a few professional photographers. It just
> shows you, just because one calls himself a professional, does not mean,
> you produce a professional product.
> I suggest therefore, you apologize to all the amateur LUG members. Maybe
> you would  prefer that the LUG turns in to a Professional only forum.
> Without a mixture, the LUG would bee doomed. It would turn in to a forum
> where the members bore each other to death.
>
> Horst Schmidt
>
> NB. I am in no way affiliated with, or have shares, or a brother or
> uncle, in the" Amater Photographer" publication.



- --------------69834D2F279104DB9BFEA7AE
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>
<TT>This message was send once before, but I received an rrror message,
telling me it was not send..</TT>

<P><TT>I am sending it again.</TT>

<P><TT>Horst Schmidt</TT>
<BR>&nbsp;
<BR>&nbsp;
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>Dr. Joseph Yao wrote:

<P>Snip:

<P>Perhaps the title of the magazine says it all:
<BR>'AMATEUR Photographer'.

<P>Dr. Joseph Yao,

<P>I agree with most of your comment about the Amateur Photographer
<BR>magazine.

<P>However I strongly disagree with the meaning ofyour last sentence. You
<BR>are inferring, that amateurs are of lower standards and of inferior
<BR>capabilities as the Professionals.

<P>I suppose you are considering your self as professional. It is true,
<BR>that in some fields, the professional is to be preferred. E.G., I don't
<BR>think I would like to be operated on by an amateur brain surgeon. In
<BR>other fields however, to be an amateur is not necessarily a sign of
<BR>inferiority. For example, in the field of astronomy, more comets and
<BR>stars have been detected, then by professionals. I suppose you don't
<BR>watch the Olympic games, because most of the athletes are, or are
<BR>supposed to be, amateurs. In the Photographic field, I don't believe,
<BR>contrary to you as it seems, that an amateur is not able to
<BR>differentiate between a good or an inferior camera, or picture. On
the
<BR>contrary, an amateur can often&nbsp; afford to experiment and try ,
whith out
<BR>having to worry, if the result is negative, where the next pay comes
<BR>from. A professional often does not have this privilege, because of
time
<BR>restraints.&nbsp; I also don't think, despite your professionalism,
that you
<BR>grasped the meaning of the publication, behind the title Amateur
<BR>Photographer. The title does not, and I repeat
<BR>not, refer to the Staff of the magazine. It refers to the readers of
the
<BR>magazine. Are you calling all the readers, simple?. The Editorial staff
<BR>are most probably professionals.They are surly professional journalists
<BR>and included are surely quite a few professional photographers. It
just
<BR>shows you, just because one calls himself a professional, does not
mean,
<BR>you produce a professional product.
<BR>I suggest therefore, you apologize to all the amateur LUG members.
Maybe
<BR>you would&nbsp; prefer that the LUG turns in to a Professional only
forum.
<BR>Without a mixture, the LUG would bee doomed. It would turn in to a
forum
<BR>where the members bore each other to death.

<P>Horst Schmidt

<P>NB. I am in no way affiliated with, or have shares, or a brother or
<BR>uncle, in the" Amater Photographer" publication.</BLOCKQUOTE>
&nbsp;</HTML>

- --------------69834D2F279104DB9BFEA7AE--