On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 05:34:49PM -0400, frank theriault scripsit: > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> > wrote: > > Yes, relying on technology sucks completely. The true purist would disable > > all the features of his camera with a sledgehammer. He could then draw his > > pictures, unburdened by any assistance from mechanical or electronic > > devices. What could be more pure? > > But alas, pencils and paintbrushes are mechanical devices (being > levers, they're simple machnes). Indeed, paper, canvas, easels: > they're all "technology". > > I fear the purist can only view a scene and recount what he saw to > anyone interested. I believe it's called "storytelling".
One can always gather rocks and grind them in mammoth fat from a mammoth you killed yourself to get pigments, chew alder shoots for brushes, and paint the pictures in a cave... Pretty sure the problem with the extremely simple digital camera is twofold; tiny market, and shrinking market. Fewer and fewer people know how to fully set a camera manually, and fewer want to have to do so. I'm starting to have a nodding acquaintance with most of the things I would need to worry about, but I'd really hate to have to do that each and every time, in large part because the picture quality would tank badly for a long time. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
