No need to worry...

[aizan_sasayama]

Ok, here's a question: Why does Alex Majoli use a p&s digicam instead of a dslr? I

don't think he's doing it to prove to pnetters that "it's the photographer, not the gear",

and I don't think it's cuz he's on Olympus's payroll.

[dennis_couvillion]

"Brad Pitt lost all cred with the recent departure of Angelina..."

 

LOL...

 

Peter:

 

For once, you and I are on the same side, man... I couldn't agree more. What a dish! I've got an actor friend who worked with Billy Bob on "Monster's Ball" (which was filmed around here) and he hung out with Billy Bob and Angelina. He said they were a strange pair. I saw him recently and I'm trying to get this guy out one night so he can tell me the good stories. I'll let you know all about it if you're interested.

 

As for my Leica... shoot, it's history. I'm buying an Alex Majoli Olympus... I wanna win me some contests. I wanna be famous! ;>)

[Brad_]

No Dennis, my work didn't improve after switching to a dSLR. At least that's my assesment

and was my expectation.

 

Do you really think your work would improve, say, if you switched to a different cam, say a

Hassleblad or soemthing?

[dennis_couvillion]

"Why does Alex Majoli use a p&s digicam instead of a dslr?"

 

Aizan:

 

The same reason people shoot with Leicas... because it's an instrument they feel comfortable with.

[Brad_]

<I>I wanna win me some contests. I wanna be famous! ;>)</I><P>

 

A response pretty much expected from Dennis. You're really sad...

[dennis_couvillion]

"No Dennis, my work didn't improve after switching to a dSLR. At least that's my assesment and was my expectation."

 

So... there was no need for you to waste the money on the DSLR? The P&S you had was perfectly fine as far as the most important thing... the pictures. Okay, I got it now...

 

Sorry you wasted the money, Brad. Bummer...

[zeos_386sx]

He uses P&S digi's because he can shoot photos of people without them knowing it. His one complaint seems to be that the digi's have more shadow detail than film and he likes the higher contrast, so he works over his digital pictures to make them look like they were taken with tri-x.

[Brad_]

<I>So... there was no need for you to waste the money on the DSLR? The P&S you had was

perfectly fine as far as the most important thing... the pictures. Okay, I got it now...</I><P>

 

No you don't get it - but that's understandable knowing what your objectives are. Still

playing gotcha - and looking foolish in the process. I'll try one more time, if you still don't

get it then you really are dumb as rocks: A dSLR has lower noise at high ISOs. If that still

makes no sense to you, try doing a web search and educate yourself on the subject.

[Brad_]

<I>Sorry you wasted the money, Brad. Bummer...</I><P>

 

Ah, more insincerity from an insecure and sad person. Is that what your life is about?

[dennis_couvillion]

But, Brad, I'm so confused... I thought it was all about the PICTURES. In fact, I think I might have read your comments to that effect a couple of hundred times. You know, you've ripped people who buy more expensive gear (like Leicas) that doesn't do a thing to improve their pictures. Man, you win contests with your P&S but, Brad, you're just like the rest of us, I guess... you couldn't resist buying more expensive gear that didn't improve your pictures one damn bit (according to you). Welcome to humanity, Brad...

 

BTW, it's okay to be human and laugh at yourself sometimes, Brad... in fact, in your case it would be a good idea just to laugh more.

[Brad_]

<I>But, Brad, I'm so confused..</I><P>

 

No, just an insincere, insecure person who enjoys getting even and is still smarting when

a half dozen people panned one of your photos 6 months ago.<P>

 

Yes, it is abuout the pictures. Do you really believe otherwise? <P>

 

 

<I>you couldn't resist buying more expensive gear that didn't improve your pictures one

damn bit (according to you).</I><P>

 

I love how you need to embellish (one damn bit) to prop up your position - a sign of

weakness. Do you really think that adds credibility to your case?<P>

 

But again, you're making zero sense... There is a big difference between improving one's

photography and making photos that one could not otherwise make with a particular

camera. Is that really so hard to understand? For example, if I wanted to make panoramic

photos, I would buy a panoramic camera. I do not expect it to improve my photography.

Please don't ask me to explain that one...<P>

 

But I know, you're confused...

[dennis_couvillion]

"No, just an insincere, insecure person who enjoys getting even..."

 

No, just a person who enjoys putting the needle to pomposity... :>)

 

Good night, Brad. Sleep tight.

 

Hey, Peter, do you know where someone could get naked pictures of Angelina? Maybe Majoli's got some... that bastard. ;>)

[Brad_]

<I>No, just a person who enjoys putting the needle to pomposity... </I><P>

 

Please try and get over yourself. Maybe you can point out the pomposity in this thread?

[terry_rory]

Get a room.

[stephen_w.]

Exactly

[bill_thorlin]

Just get out of here.

[patricks]

boy, am i glad i started this thread.

 

whatever happened to the essense, i.e. discussing matters of weight and importance, like brad pitt and miss jolie?!

[shoebox]

Here you go.<div></div>

[edmo]

Dennis, how do you know Majoli shoots with a digital P&S? You shoot with him or are you just repeating what you read in an Olympus ad?

[dennis_couvillion]

"Dennis, how do you know Majoli shoots with a digital P&S? You shoot with him or are you just repeating what you read in an Olympus ad?"

 

Yea, Ed, I used to shoot with Majoli but he's mad at me right now because Angelina liked me better. ;>)

 

 

You might want to check out this thread:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CQqc

 

 

This thread:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CS6c

 

 

And this article:

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6468-7844

 

 

I still think Majoli and Leica would make a great pairing. Can you imagine a full page Leica ad featuring a picture of Majoli with a new Leica digital rangefinder hanging around his neck... with Majoli saying how the new Leica is a blend of the what he liked about his Leica M cameras but with all the digital features he's wanted? I wouldn't buy one because I don't shoot digital but I suspect it might entice other amateurs to take interst in a Leica digital rangefinder that meets the specs of Alex Majoli. Leica now uses Ralph Gibson, Nan Goldin and others to hawk their M cameras.

 

FWIW, I really admire Majoli's work, all kidding aside. I do think it's hilarious, though, that while some keep looking for more bells and whistles in their digital kits, Majoli uses the basic P&S. It should make some folks rethink their actual digital needs... same as film camera buffs sometimes need to rethink whether a more expensive camera is really the ticket to better photography.

[jim_mcbride]

I don't give a rat's a_ _ about Alex Majoli or about what camera he does or doesn't use.

[Brad_]

<I>I do think it's hilarious, though, that while some keep looking for more bells and whistles

in their digital kits, ...</I><P>

 

Who are these <I>some</i>, anyway? What is hilarious is you jump into a discussions you

know little about with insincerity and baiting while claiming the high-road on <I>intellectual

integrity</I>. Sad...

[Brad_]

Dennis still apparently doesn't understand the difference about buying equipment to give

you a capability that you didn't have previously, vs buying equipment to <I>improve your

photography</I>. Buying a panoramic camera to take panoramic photos is an example.

But he stands on the intellectual integrity high-ground and refuses (or perhaps is unable)

to see the difference. Not being able to understand the difference probably puts him in the

camp that thinks buying more equipment makes one a better photographer. The path to

better photography is being able to understand that difference<P>

 

 

His claim about Majoli using a <I>basic</I> point and shoot is more obfuscation

designed to deceive and bolster a weak argument. Just more confusion on the role of

equipment providing capability in certain situations vs equipment making one a better

photographer.

[barefoot]

Brad,

 

You should try and get more sleep. You're beginning to sound paranoid.

[dennis_couvillion]

Ed:

 

Let me qualify and amplify what I said about the Leica/Majoli connection. Alex Majoli alone isn't going to sell Leicas... he may help jump-start company sales but the prerequisite is that Leica must build a worthy digital rangefinder.

 

 

Consider the broader implications of the Majoli article. What if Majoli's colleagues start saying "Hey, Alex is on to something here; we can carry smaller, lighter gear and get the job done just as good... maybe better." I'm not suggesting that the P&S will supplant the DSLR in photojournalism as I suspect there are still situations in which the DSLR is the better tool. But it may change the kits that photojournalists carry to include smaller, lightweight digital rangefinders. What that does is create an opening for Leica to get back in the photojournalism game. If Leica can build a goat-tough digital rangefinder that suits the needs of photojournalists Leica is a player again.

 

 

I don't envision myself shooting digital so I won't be a customer for a Leica digital rangefinder. But I'd like to see Leica stay in operation. While there are certainly more important things in life than corporate Leica remaining viable I think it would be sad to see disappear the brand that pioneered the 35mm rangefinder.

 

Dennis