heri_rakotomalala

<p>Hi Adam<br>

I am interested on knowing if a kickstarter project is going to succeed or not, if there's a way to estimate chances of success before actually putting it live.</p>

<p>I'm not sure when you mention M1 plus 22/2. Is it the Olympus OMD-EM1 ? Or the Canon M with the 22mm pancake?</p>

<p>If you're hungry for business, asking for deposits will get you less customers. <br>

If your calendar is already full, requiring deposits makes a lot of sense</p>

<p>If lots of people find something beautiful, over and over, isn't that what we should aim for? <br>

What's bad is when someone takes a snapshot and doesn't try take the best shot possible</p>

<p>Isn't this the same for any kind of art? The same questions are asked in painting, cinematography, sculpture etc.</p>

<p>I have started a significant project that took well over 3 months to put together and preparing now for an exhibition at an art gallery<br>

Before 2013 I was always doing light/easy photography<br>

It's good to work on a big project so you can push to the limits your skills</p>

<p>I'm using the Canon EF to M adapter and using the Dog Schidt 58 lens - a vintage lens from the 60's<br>

It gives nice flares and orange hues - good for fall and winter shots. I've <a href="http://heriphotography.com/2013/12/31/canon-eos-m-for-video-and-photography/">put a video here</a> (a review I wrote covering the Canon EOS-M) </p>

<p>The Panasonic GF1 + 20mm is very similar to the Leica MP + Summilux 50mm<br>

Panasonic also makes the DMW-LVF1 viewfinder which is important to you. <br>

The whole package is more expensive than the G11, but the quality will be much better. <br>

The only problem I have with my GF1 is how Panasonic's colors. All pictures need to be taken RAW and corrected in post-processing.</p>

<p>A new heavy-duty tripod and head would cost you less than a new lens, plus rooting firmly the legs in the ground</p>

<p>I dropped mine with the 24-70mm f2.8L lens. It was about 3 or 4 foot drop on very hard floor. Not a scratch, works no problem. Was surprised due to the weight of the 24-70mm. <br>

So plastic or not plastic, it's superb engineering. If plastic saved my camera, then hail the plastic.</p>

<p>I think in the process of image-making a photographer should aim to get technique and its effects invisible in a photograph, at least to the profane viewer. If most viewers comment on a technique in a photo, then it's the technique which was the photographer, not you. That photograph is merely a demonstration of the technology's capability.<br>

So technique should be mastered, like a painter who knows his brushes (mastered as in spending countless hours learning on how to use it properly, and finally taking a picture with the right quantity of technology, no more, no less)</p>

<p>Don,<br>

by oneness with nature or oneness with subject, I meant understanding the subject, by being in the same state. The opposite of "oneness with subject" would be acting like a movie director and viewing the scene and its elements as if they were mere props on a movie set, to be setup and placed according to your own vision of what they should be instead. That's where objectification begins; and instead of capturing the essence of a moment and a subject, you are instead adding your own reality. It works and many do it, but in my opinion, a great photograph taken in the "movie director" mindset requires much more preparation time than just capturing the essence, since you need to fine-tune every object or person's position and pose and light, and spend a great deal of time to try to make it look good. In the other mindset, it requires more time at the beginning to recognize what's in front of you, but imho it makes ultimately better photographs.</p>

<p>Fred,</p>

<p>For what is sublimation, for me it's more about transformation. You see a lone crane looking for food on a shore. You like the scene. You sit down and take the time observe it. Then you realize it's the gracefulness of the crane that makes the scene beautiful. The way its thin long legs dip into the water. Its delicate yet precise movements. How the crane stops serenely time to time. As a photographer, you fully dedicate your skills to capture it... And a great photograph is taken.</p>

<p>So you transformed an ordinary scene into an illustration of gracefulness. The crane was sublimated into gracefulness. <br>

Never in the process the subject was objectified. Instead you understood the nature of the crane.</p>

<p>... and yes of course, it's possible to objectify or exploit in photography. A camera is only just a tool after all</p>

<p>@Don Interesting that Freud calls it erotic energy; I do not completely agree that this is what drives us to create photographs. The article on Sublime might be more relevant for what photography can be : nothingness of photographer and oneness with Nature (oneness with subject), self-forgetfulness, seeing the greatness in the subject and being astonished by it. </p>

<p>in my humble opinion, great photographs <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublime_(philosophy)#Schopenhauer">sublimate</a> a person, an animal or a place.<br>

in order to do this, the photographer has to fully understand or feel the present situation and connect with what's in front of him or her. In such a state, he cannot objectify, let alone exploit.</p>

<p>Thomas, with the motion blur, it looks like a screenshot from "Flight Simulator X". <br>

As for the noise... I would have taken the picture at f4 or at most f5.6 to get more light. Also at ISO 100, there would have been less noise.</p>

<p>I make sure all the gear i have can be carried by one person, on a day walk. You're forced to optimize your bag and you need to know what's in there. At one point, it requires selling or throwing away stuff, which is hard, but makes you focus even more.</p>

<p>I would get</p>

<ul>

<li>Canon 28mm f1.8 for low-light, indoors, walk-around</li>

<li>+ Canon 70-200mm f4L for sports, landscapes</li>

</ul>

<p>Both are good to excellent lenses (especially 70-200mm), and compatible with full-frame bodies.<br>

There is around $450 left for a third lens, which can be either:</p>

<ul>

<li>Canon 100mm f2.8 macro, in case the 70-200mm is too slow, also for macro. Can be your portrait lens of choice.</li>

<li>or Sigma 12-24mm, best ultra-wide angle lens. If you plan architecture shots</li>

<li>or Tamron 28-74 f2.8. as good as the Canon 24-70mm L</li>

</ul>