michael_maddox_france

<p>I'm sorry, but when I saw this, I couldn't resist. It's not the best of photos that I have, but it's about the best kid picture in my ensamble, so...here ya go. lol</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/11001793-md.jpg" alt="" width="250" height="334" /></p>

<p>I don't know how much my say matters, considering I just started exploring the wonderful world of DSLRs late last year, but I honestly think that you should do one of two things - either save your money further so that you can get a lens that matches your needs (say a 105 Micro Nikkor, as you mentioned, or a wide-angle lens), or invest in the Nikon Creative Lighting system (though I don't own any of the items from said system, I suggest getting one or two SB-600s; if you want to get creative with using your flashes, you can afford about two or three of those flashguns and an SU-800 Commander to control them remotely. Investing in a couple of reflectors would probably be wise too, whether you decide to invest in flash guns or not; those things are invaluable in many lighting situations.)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Humbleness and Humility are not particularly common qualities in North America....Respects, Robert"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I couldn't disagree more. While we have a lot of conceded and egocentric people in this continent which I call home, there are plenty of people who are also very humble. Furthermore, I don't believe that humbility and humility are reasons to attend therapy - these are quite admirable traits that frankly few have mastered in any corner of the world. If anything, I'd say that it's those who are haughty and self-assured of their abilities that need to see a therapist. Nobody has ever truely mastered a trade because mastery equals perfection. Frankly, no human being is capable of perfection in any facet of the word.</p>

<p>To answer Linda's question, I can't say if I would feel comfortable saying I'm a photographer or not... Of course, in the capacity of taking photographs, recording a still image in a film or digital format, I'd say that I am a photographer. Any person who is capable of grasping ahold of a camera, turning it on and hitting the shutter button is a photographer in that broad brushed sense. However, in the sense that I'm a photographer who carefully observes a scene, makes sure to set the camera to record the light as accurately or artistically as possible, and makes sure that the composition is right, thus combining all of these elements to carefully tell a compelling story about what exactly is being captured, I'm very much a work in progress. On a scale of 1-10, 1 being "I like to just take pictures of what catches my eye" and 10 being "I'm as close to a master as a photographer can get", I'd rate myself a 3.5. I'm well past the stage of "Ooh, a flower! I wanna take a picture of it!" and just taking snapshots. I'm learning to carefully watch the composition of the image and learn how to get the basic exposure settings (aperture and shutter speed) set right for the purpose at hand, but I'm still very underexperienced. Because of this, I'm studying a lot of books on photography and am reading a lot of articles on site such as photo.net (you all have helped me a lot). </p>

<p>Because I recognize my limitations, I am one to say this: I'm a photographer, but if you want professional results, look elsewhere.</p>