Re: Your first camera
On Oct 26, 2006, at 9:02 PM, mike wilson wrote: Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. Maybe the things that women hunt require more colour finesse? Do women photograph in CMYK? - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
On Oct 27, 2006, at 1:43 AM, David Mann wrote: Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. Maybe the things that women hunt require more colour finesse? Do women photograph in CMYK? Only if they're going to press. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/25 Wed PM 11:06:01 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera mike wilson wrote: Being good with colours and having high spatial awareness would be prime attributes of a good hunter. Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. Maybe the things that women hunt require more colour finesse? - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Op Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:02:00 +0200 schreef mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/25 Wed PM 11:06:01 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera mike wilson wrote: Being good with colours and having high spatial awareness would be prime attributes of a good hunter. Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. Maybe the things that women hunt require more colour finesse? Most bargains and sales I see are rather bluntly color-coded :o) -- Regards, Lucas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
From: Lucas Rijnders (Privé) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/26 Thu AM 08:09:24 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera Op Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:02:00 +0200 schreef mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/25 Wed PM 11:06:01 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera mike wilson wrote: Being good with colours and having high spatial awareness would be prime attributes of a good hunter. Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. Maybe the things that women hunt require more colour finesse? Most bargains and sales I see are rather bluntly color-coded :o) That's not the hunt, that's the spoils of war. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Those two mushrooms look exactly the same in black white grin. mike wilson wrote: From: Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/25 Wed PM 11:06:01 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera mike wilson wrote: Being good with colours and having high spatial awareness would be prime attributes of a good hunter. Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. Maybe the things that women hunt require more colour finesse? - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
You may be onto something here Mark. Many claim that women have better social skills than mn, or the other way around. Test suggests that men and woman have _different_ social skills. Men tend to interact better in large groups, but women make closer or deeper relations, is what those tests suggest. This may be bulls, but if true I find it interesting. Could be the same with visual abilities. We may see the world _differently_. If that's true, then that may be the explanation for the success of the female photographers Frank talked about some posts earlier. If they see the world differently, they will make different photography. Different photography, with new interesting perspectives. But differently does not mean better, just different. If women rule photography for a century, it might be the other way around in 2106. Men could become avant-garde ;-) I'm not claiming this to be the truth. I just fool around, jogling with some ideas. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Roberts Sent: 26. oktober 2006 01:06 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Your first camera mike wilson wrote: Being good with colours and having high spatial awareness would be prime attributes of a good hunter. Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf/meanderings/herd.html * One can extrapolate that women work better in larger groups, since they tended to stay together in their daily activities. --graywolf *Please note that the opinion express therein are the authors. Tim Øsleby wrote: You may be onto something here Mark. Many claim that women have better social skills than mn, or the other way around. Test suggests that men and woman have _different_ social skills. Men tend to interact better in large groups, but women make closer or deeper relations, is what those tests suggest. This may be bulls, but if true I find it interesting. Could be the same with visual abilities. We may see the world _differently_. If that's true, then that may be the explanation for the success of the female photographers Frank talked about some posts earlier. If they see the world differently, they will make different photography. Different photography, with new interesting perspectives. But differently does not mean better, just different. If women rule photography for a century, it might be the other way around in 2106. Men could become avant-garde ;-) I'm not claiming this to be the truth. I just fool around, jogling with some ideas. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Roberts Sent: 26. oktober 2006 01:06 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Your first camera mike wilson wrote: Being good with colours and having high spatial awareness would be prime attributes of a good hunter. Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip they had smaller brains, they were illogical, all emotional, couldn't manage complicated tasks, understand technical things, etc. They sure sound like artists to me. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/25/2006 12:51:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip they had smaller brains, they were illogical, all emotional, couldn't manage complicated tasks, understand technical things, etc. They sure sound like artists to me. Uh huh. That's the part that is highly ironic when, on the flip side, according to *past* conventional wisdom men are supposed to be more visually oriented than women. Does not compute. Marnie aka Doe ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
But to say women are not visual oriented is just phooey. I'm not sure about this. There are a lot of studies of human sexuality indicating the opposite. Most sexologists suggest that men are turned on by visual stimuli, while women are turned on by other (often higher ranked) stimuli. There are also many tests indicating that men are better at spatial tasks. Both could be wrong. But if it's correct, it could indicate that men are more visual. I'd like you to be correct in this ;-) But I'm not as sure as you seem to be. Another thing. How do you define being visual? Is being visual, being good with colours, spatial abilities or what is it? I'd say that it is a bit of both. Is visual abilities a given (genetic) talent or is it an ability that can be trained? I think it is, and that strengthens your arguments. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24. oktober 2006 18:02 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera In a message dated 10/24/2006 12:15:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Women have too much practal sence (or sence of responsibility), to spend hours every week, reading and writing to people you don't really know (I onlly met Jostien in person, until now) - in stead of doing something useful around the house :-) === That's really it. A lot of women are busy with husbands, children, and other family members, too busy to waste time spending hours on a list. Take ERN who left to spend more time with her family. You will find this prevalent throughout the Net, not just on this list. Women are more busy with relationships on the whole. Less argumentative on the whole (these are all vast generalizations), and don't spend a lot of time debating issues in various forums. There are exceptions, but that's the general rule. Also men DO tend to be gear heads while women don't. I am pretty uninterested in most of the technical camera threads on list. I read some, not all, depending if I feel it will concern me at some point. I am much more interested in photos and OT threads than lots of the other threads. I am also interested in computer stuff, PS and printers profiles, etc., because I am a computer buff. But to say women are not visual oriented is just phooey. That seems to be fairly equally divided between the genders, it just depends on what fields they have been allowed, over the centuries, to express themselves in. And there have been a fair number of famous women photographers anyway. Also, look at Hollywood, more and more, given the chance, women are becoming directors, producers, etc. But they have to have the chance first. Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
Marnoie. After sending this post, I realized you are gone out in the real world for a couple of weeks. I also realised my last sentence came out very odd. It should be I think it is the latter,. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Øsleby Sent: 25. oktober 2006 19:44 To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: RE: Your first camera But to say women are not visual oriented is just phooey. I'm not sure about this. There are a lot of studies of human sexuality indicating the opposite. Most sexologists suggest that men are turned on by visual stimuli, while women are turned on by other (often higher ranked) stimuli. There are also many tests indicating that men are better at spatial tasks. Both could be wrong. But if it's correct, it could indicate that men are more visual. I'd like you to be correct in this ;-) But I'm not as sure as you seem to be. Another thing. How do you define being visual? Is being visual, being good with colours, spatial abilities or what is it? I'd say that it is a bit of both. Is visual abilities a given (genetic) talent or is it an ability that can be trained? I think it is, and that strengthens your arguments. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24. oktober 2006 18:02 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera In a message dated 10/24/2006 12:15:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Women have too much practal sence (or sence of responsibility), to spend hours every week, reading and writing to people you don't really know (I onlly met Jostien in person, until now) - in stead of doing something useful around the house :-) === That's really it. A lot of women are busy with husbands, children, and other family members, too busy to waste time spending hours on a list. Take ERN who left to spend more time with her family. You will find this prevalent throughout the Net, not just on this list. Women are more busy with relationships on the whole. Less argumentative on the whole (these are all vast generalizations), and don't spend a lot of time debating issues in various forums. There are exceptions, but that's the general rule. Also men DO tend to be gear heads while women don't. I am pretty uninterested in most of the technical camera threads on list. I read some, not all, depending if I feel it will concern me at some point. I am much more interested in photos and OT threads than lots of the other threads. I am also interested in computer stuff, PS and printers profiles, etc., because I am a computer buff. But to say women are not visual oriented is just phooey. That seems to be fairly equally divided between the genders, it just depends on what fields they have been allowed, over the centuries, to express themselves in. And there have been a fair number of famous women photographers anyway. Also, look at Hollywood, more and more, given the chance, women are becoming directors, producers, etc. But they have to have the chance first. Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
But to say women are not visual oriented is just phooey. I don't think anybody has said that women are not visually oriented. What I said was that men are _supposedly_ more visually oriented. A very different thing. Note also that I did not say that I agreed with this claim. -- Cheers, Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Tim Øsleby wrote: But to say women are not visual oriented is just phooey. I'm not sure about this. There are a lot of studies of human sexuality indicating the opposite. Most sexologists suggest that men are turned on by visual stimuli, while women are turned on by other (often higher ranked) stimuli. There are also many tests indicating that men are better at spatial tasks. Both could be wrong. But if it's correct, it could indicate that men are more visual. I'd like you to be correct in this ;-) But I'm not as sure as you seem to be. Another thing. How do you define being visual? Is being visual, being good with colours, spatial abilities or what is it? I'd say that it is a bit of both. Being good with colours and having high spatial awareness would be prime attributes of a good hunter. Is visual abilities a given (genetic) talent or is it an ability that can be trained? I think it is, and that strengthens your arguments. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24. oktober 2006 18:02 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera In a message dated 10/24/2006 12:15:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Women have too much practal sence (or sence of responsibility), to spend hours every week, reading and writing to people you don't really know (I onlly met Jostien in person, until now) - in stead of doing something useful around the house :-) === That's really it. A lot of women are busy with husbands, children, and other family members, too busy to waste time spending hours on a list. Take ERN who left to spend more time with her family. You will find this prevalent throughout the Net, not just on this list. Women are more busy with relationships on the whole. Less argumentative on the whole (these are all vast generalizations), and don't spend a lot of time debating issues in various forums. There are exceptions, but that's the general rule. Also men DO tend to be gear heads while women don't. I am pretty uninterested in most of the technical camera threads on list. I read some, not all, depending if I feel it will concern me at some point. I am much more interested in photos and OT threads than lots of the other threads. I am also interested in computer stuff, PS and printers profiles, etc., because I am a computer buff. But to say women are not visual oriented is just phooey. That seems to be fairly equally divided between the genders, it just depends on what fields they have been allowed, over the centuries, to express themselves in. And there have been a fair number of famous women photographers anyway. Also, look at Hollywood, more and more, given the chance, women are becoming directors, producers, etc. But they have to have the chance first. Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
mike wilson wrote: Being good with colours and having high spatial awareness would be prime attributes of a good hunter. Interesting then that women generally have better color vision than men. In fact, 1% of women (and 0%of men, because it requires two X chromosomes) have tetrachromatic color vision and can perceive a vastly wider gamut than those with ordinary (for humans) trichromatic vision. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
I have bought my son (15 years) several cameras - film as well as digital. He shows no interest in photography. But both of my daughters (grown up) do photograph - one of them sometimes uses a Super A :-) Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Tim Řsleby Sendt: 22. oktober 2006 20:37 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Your first camera Point taken Marnie. Three is a good number ;-) I have two sons, no daughters. None of them shows much interest of photography :-( I'll try to do better when grandchildren start rolling in. Hopefully it will be some years before that happens. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. oktober 2006 18:46 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera In a message dated 10/22/2006 9:37:00 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marnie. I did not write the quoted part, Bob did. Blame him, not me ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) === Aha, but I didn't think it was you. However, I didn't think it was Bob either. Okay, he's blamed. ;-) Hehehehehe. Girl children are still given dolls and boy children are still given trucks. Though, these days both may also be given action figures and light sabers. My point is, if you want your daughters (and granddaughters) to grow up enjoying photography, hand them a camera young. Marnie aka Doe :-) Well, I've said that three times -- that should do it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.10/491 - Release Date: 10/23/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
Tim Wrote: Just look at this (mainly) SLR list. How many of the regulars are woman? Not a handful. It does not prove anything, but it is a strong indication. Women have too much practal sence (or sence of responsibility), to spend hours every week, reading and writing to people you don't really know (I onlly met Jostien in person, until now) - in stead of doing something useful around the house :-) However, the PDML has made me a better photgrapher, I belive. I guess I've been around (PDML) since 1999 - on and off. At that time photography was a monthly expence. Today, it has become an income (althoug small, but it's there) :-) Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Tim Øsleby Sendt: 22. oktober 2006 16:41 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Your first camera To me, it is pretty obvious that you are correct. Men are gear heads. It is a part of our identity as men. And being a gear head is also the ticket into the world of male bonding. So if you are a man, and you want to make sure your son becomes a man among men, you give him gear, photo gear and other gear. Thats pretty dumb logic, but I believe that is how it is. Just look at this (mainly) SLR list. How many of the regulars are woman? Not a handful. It does not prove anything, but it is a strong indication. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. oktober 2006 03:35 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.10/491 - Release Date: 10/23/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
On 10/22/06, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. A better way to make your son a man amongst men (assuming that's something to be desired, which I think is highly debatable) is to teach him to like football beer. There are few sadder sights than a cluster of middle-aged men in beige peering longingly into the window of a camera shop. *this is not necessarily a direct result of any genetic differences, but could derive from the greater social power of men historically. While it may (or may not) be that a larger percentage of (so-called) serious photographers are men, I think it's true that in it's early days, a photography (at least in its higher levels) included a larger percentage of women than other visual arts. Think Margaret Bourke-White, Imogen Cunningham, Dorothea Lange, Tina Mondetti, Julia Cameron, Leni Reifenstal (a great photographer despite what may have been her politics). I've always thought that was because photography was, at the time, a relatively new medium, and was struggling to be accepted as a true art. There was less resistance to women participating as there wasn't so much of an establishment as there was in other artforms. Not only that, but as a newer artform, it may have naturally attracted women who had an artistic bent, but were effectively shut out from more established visual arts. Interesting that someone mentioned automobiles as a guy thing that rears it's head on this list on a more-than-regular basis. As most of you know, I'm an ardent cyclist. It's interesting that in it's infancy in the late 1800's, cycling (a new technology at the time) was embraced by women, and has been seen as a great liberating force, not just due to the freedom afforded by personal transportation, but due to the fact that bikes can't be ridden with high-button boots, long dresses and corsets. Physically liberating clothing was required, which was greatly resisted by many (if not most) males of the time. Many of the movements to allow women on bicycles (with appropriate dress) were direct forerunners of the suffragette movement and therefore women's liberation. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/24 Tue AM 11:52:43 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera On 10/22/06, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. A better way to make your son a man amongst men (assuming that's something to be desired, which I think is highly debatable) is to teach him to like football beer. There are few sadder sights than a cluster of middle-aged men in beige peering longingly into the window of a camera shop. *this is not necessarily a direct result of any genetic differences, but could derive from the greater social power of men historically. While it may (or may not) be that a larger percentage of (so-called) serious photographers are men, I think it's true that in it's early days, a photography (at least in its higher levels) included a larger percentage of women than other visual arts. Think Margaret Bourke-White, Imogen Cunningham, Dorothea Lange, Tina Mondetti, Julia Cameron, Leni Reifenstal (a great photographer despite what may have been her politics). I've always thought that was because photography was, at the time, a relatively new medium, and was struggling to be accepted as a true art. There was less resistance to women participating as there wasn't so much of an establishment as there was in other artforms. Not only that, but as a newer artform, it may have naturally attracted women who had an artistic bent, but were effectively shut out from more established visual arts. Interesting that someone mentioned automobiles as a guy thing that rears it's head on this list on a more-than-regular basis. As most of you know, I'm an ardent cyclist. It's interesting that in it's infancy in the late 1800's, cycling (a new technology at the time) was embraced by women, and has been seen as a great liberating force, not just due to the freedom afforded by personal transportation, but due to the fact that bikes can't be ridden with high-button boots, long dresses and corsets. Physically liberating clothing was required, which was greatly resisted by many (if not most) males of the time. Many of the movements to allow women on bicycles (with appropriate dress) were direct forerunners of the suffragette movement and therefore women's liberation. I always wondered if Dubya might have had better luck in the long term by dropping Raleighs on Baghdad. Mil spec ones should cost about 20K, so everyone would be happy. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
mike wilson wrote: From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/24 Tue AM 11:52:43 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera On 10/22/06, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. A better way to make your son a man amongst men (assuming that's something to be desired, which I think is highly debatable) is to teach him to like football beer. There are few sadder sights than a cluster of middle-aged men in beige peering longingly into the window of a camera shop. *this is not necessarily a direct result of any genetic differences, but could derive from the greater social power of men historically. While it may (or may not) be that a larger percentage of (so-called) serious photographers are men, I think it's true that in it's early days, a photography (at least in its higher levels) included a larger percentage of women than other visual arts. Think Margaret Bourke-White, Imogen Cunningham, Dorothea Lange, Tina Mondetti, Julia Cameron, Leni Reifenstal (a great photographer despite what may have been her politics). I've always thought that was because photography was, at the time, a relatively new medium, and was struggling to be accepted as a true art. There was less resistance to women participating as there wasn't so much of an establishment as there was in other artforms. Not only that, but as a newer artform, it may have naturally attracted women who had an artistic bent, but were effectively shut out from more established visual arts. Interesting that someone mentioned automobiles as a guy thing that rears it's head on this list on a more-than-regular basis. As most of you know, I'm an ardent cyclist. It's interesting that in it's infancy in the late 1800's, cycling (a new technology at the time) was embraced by women, and has been seen as a great liberating force, not just due to the freedom afforded by personal transportation, but due to the fact that bikes can't be ridden with high-button boots, long dresses and corsets. Physically liberating clothing was required, which was greatly resisted by many (if not most) males of the time. Many of the movements to allow women on bicycles (with appropriate dress) were direct forerunners of the suffragette movement and therefore women's liberation. I always wondered if Dubya might have had better luck in the long term by dropping Raleighs on Baghdad. Mil spec ones should cost about 20K, so everyone would be happy. Actually, the MilSpec bikes cost about $600, but they fold for Airborne use. This actually came up in a thread on a forum I read often (About what to do the next time some idjit E-6 requisitions a 'vehicle' instead of a truck, the suggestion was to issue a pink girl's bike). -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
frank theriault wrote: While it may (or may not) be that a larger percentage of (so-called) serious photographers are men, I think it's true that in it's early days, a photography (at least in its higher levels) included a larger percentage of women than other visual arts. Think Margaret Bourke-White Shall I taunt you again about the great Maragret Bourke-White exhibit we had in Pittsburgh last year? :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/24/2006 12:11:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have bought my son (15 years) several cameras - film as well as digital. He shows no interest in photography. But both of my daughters (grown up) do photograph - one of them sometimes uses a Super A :-) Regards Jens Bladt === Cool. Way to go. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/22/2006 8:43:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. == Phsaw, phooey, and crap. Double crap. Culturally over the centuries women were held back from becoming artists, etc. Had to have babies and feed the male hordes, including male artists and sculptors, etc. Their place was in the home, they had smaller brains, they were illogical, all emotional, couldn't manage complicated tasks, understand technical things, etc. For instance, I grew up when there were no women news anchors on TV, and the most available jobs for women were: teacher, teller, stewardress, nurse, and social worker -- the helper fields. It hasn't been all that long since gender prejudices were socially acceptable and active. And in some instances still are, although women have made a lot of progress since the 1960's. And I am still only talking about Western cultures, since those prejudices are still quite active, barring women from jobs, in other cultures. So now that Western women are supposedly liberated and supposedly can hold any job, get back to me in another 200-1,000 years and see if those artist/photographer percentages haven't changed. If you want you daughters to grow up enjoying photography, hand them a camera young. I have three daughters. The two older ones took a photography course when they were 15 and 11 respectively. I bought them both a nice PS 35mm film camera for the course. At a birthday, I passed on one of my Pentax SLR film cameras and some lenses to the oldest, she has contributed to the PUG and in PDML discussions in the past. The youngest then got interested and I got her the Optio-S when she turned 10. After that initial enthuthiasm, she has not picked up the camera in years. The middle daughter got herself a PZ-10 + 2 zooms on eBay, and uses it occasionally, and now wants to go digital. I may get her a K100D for her birthday in a few months. As a female programmer, a very small minority in that field in my age group, I am pretty familiar with gender stereotypes and unconscious assumptions and prejudices. I know what some of these assumptions and prejudices are, and in raising my girls, we avoided any bias towards any gender specific toys. They still gravitated towards dolls, role playing, etc. They all have had difficulty mastering advanced math past puberty, but have done brilliantly in literary arts. Of course this is just a datapoint and I'm not making generalizations, but I was surprised by this trend in my own girls despite our heroic efforts to tutor them Trig, Calculus, etc when they were having an extremely hard time. Arts and Crafts, quilting, needlepoint, lace making, sewing, etc. were socially acceptable visual fields for women for centuries. They couldn't lift a brush, not appropriate for most past eras and places, but, boy, they were allowed to lift a needle. Have a Nice Day!, Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/24/2006 12:15:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Women have too much practal sence (or sence of responsibility), to spend hours every week, reading and writing to people you don't really know (I onlly met Jostien in person, until now) - in stead of doing something useful around the house :-) === That's really it. A lot of women are busy with husbands, children, and other family members, too busy to waste time spending hours on a list. Take ERN who left to spend more time with her family. You will find this prevalent throughout the Net, not just on this list. Women are more busy with relationships on the whole. Less argumentative on the whole (these are all vast generalizations), and don't spend a lot of time debating issues in various forums. There are exceptions, but that's the general rule. Also men DO tend to be gear heads while women don't. I am pretty uninterested in most of the technical camera threads on list. I read some, not all, depending if I feel it will concern me at some point. I am much more interested in photos and OT threads than lots of the other threads. I am also interested in computer stuff, PS and printers profiles, etc., because I am a computer buff. But to say women are not visual oriented is just phooey. That seems to be fairly equally divided between the genders, it just depends on what fields they have been allowed, over the centuries, to express themselves in. And there have been a fair number of famous women photographers anyway. Also, look at Hollywood, more and more, given the chance, women are becoming directors, producers, etc. But they have to have the chance first. Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/24/2006 8:53:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have three daughters. The two older ones took a photography course when they were 15 and 11 respectively. I bought them both a nice PS 35mm film camera for the course. At a birthday, I passed on one of my Pentax SLR film cameras and some lenses to the oldest, she has contributed to the PUG and in PDML discussions in the past. The youngest then got interested and I got her the Optio-S when she turned 10. After that initial enthuthiasm, she has not picked up the camera in years. The middle daughter got herself a PZ-10 + 2 zooms on eBay, and uses it occasionally, and now wants to go digital. I may get her a K100D for her birthday in a few months. = Neat. Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
On 10/24/06, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shall I taunt you again about the great Maragret Bourke-White exhibit we had in Pittsburgh last year? :-) Go ahead, taunt me. I don't mind... g -frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/24/2006 4:58:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: While it may (or may not) be that a larger percentage of (so-called) serious photographers are men, I think it's true that in it's early days, a photography (at least in its higher levels) included a larger percentage of women than other visual arts. Think Margaret Bourke-White, Imogen Cunningham, Dorothea Lange, Tina Mondetti, Julia Cameron, Leni Reifenstal (a great photographer despite what may have been her politics). I've always thought that was because photography was, at the time, a relatively new medium, and was struggling to be accepted as a true art. There was less resistance to women participating as there wasn't so much of an establishment as there was in other artforms. Not only that, but as a newer artform, it may have naturally attracted women who had an artistic bent, but were effectively shut out from more established visual arts. cheers, frank = Good point. There may be something to that, frank. New fields/mediums sometimes arrive with no gender attached. I.E. people haven't assigned a gender to them yet in their heads. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Adam Maas wrote: This actually came up in a thread on a forum I read often (About what to do the next time some idjit E-6 requisitions a 'vehicle' instead of a truck, the suggestion was to issue a pink girl's bike). With pink handlebar tassels, and, of course, a pink banana seat. Might need to include a couple of clothes pins, but I'm sure they already have a deck of cards. ;-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
frank theriault wrote: Go ahead, taunt me. I don't mind... Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time. -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
re: Your first camera
It is interesting. In my experience - to women, size matters most. The smaller the better. I have known men to have a similar approach to buying a camera too. I never really cared much about the size of a camera. I don't carry a camera where ever I go. I photograph when, I go out to photograph - not when I'm doing other things. If I do, I have small cameras for such occasions - like a Minox GL. That's probably one explanation for women being less prone to buy a SLR. Do you actually know of any statistics on this matter? I simply love cameras and lenses. Some are just beautiful. I guess I like cameras the same way woman like jewellery. Women buy jewellery - men buy cameras, cell phones, GPS, nice tools, nice knives or guns etc. In Germany they sometimes call a pretty, high quality camera smuckstuck which means an object that makes you look good. Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 22. oktober 2006 03:35 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: Your first camera Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
On 22/10/06, Jens Bladt, discombobulated, unleashed: In my experience - to women, size matters most. The smaller the better. Mark! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/21/2006 10:09:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Maybe I am helping to break that past trend. Both of my oldest daughters have shown great interest. My oldest has both an MX and *ist film cameras. My next daughter just finished shooting a wedding with me yesterday using one of my *istD's. -- Best regards, Bruce = You probably are. :-) You want your daughters to grow up to be photographers (hobbyist or otherwise)? Hand them a camera young. Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
To me, it is pretty obvious that you are correct. Men are gear heads. It is a part of our identity as men. And being a gear head is also the ticket into the world of male bonding. So if you are a man, and you want to make sure your son becomes a man among men, you give him gear, photo gear and other gear. Thats pretty dumb logic, but I believe that is how it is. Just look at this (mainly) SLR list. How many of the regulars are woman? Not a handful. It does not prove anything, but it is a strong indication. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. oktober 2006 03:35 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. A better way to make your son a man amongst men (assuming that's something to be desired, which I think is highly debatable) is to teach him to like football beer. There are few sadder sights than a cluster of middle-aged men in beige peering longingly into the window of a camera shop. *this is not necessarily a direct result of any genetic differences, but could derive from the greater social power of men historically. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Øsleby Sent: 22 October 2006 15:41 To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: RE: Your first camera To me, it is pretty obvious that you are correct. Men are gear heads. It is a part of our identity as men. And being a gear head is also the ticket into the world of male bonding. So if you are a man, and you want to make sure your son becomes a man among men, you give him gear, photo gear and other gear. Thats pretty dumb logic, but I believe that is how it is. Just look at this (mainly) SLR list. How many of the regulars are woman? Not a handful. It does not prove anything, but it is a strong indication. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
A better way to make your son a man amongst men (assuming that's something to be desired, which I think is highly debatable) is to teach him to like football beer. And to like cars, don't forget cars. Cars and trucks are what make society go round. It's what makes the universe go round ;-) BTW. Talking cars is important at PDML. It is funny observing the flame wars. When they reach the end, then the threads tend to end up discussing cars. Talking cars is male bonding. You are probably right Bob. Camera gear heads are probably geeks or half men ;-) The thing is. We don't understand it our self. So we believe we do our children a favour making them camera geeks ;-) Note my ironic smilies. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob W Sent: 22. oktober 2006 17:01 To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: RE: Your first camera it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. A better way to make your son a man amongst men (assuming that's something to be desired, which I think is highly debatable) is to teach him to like football beer. There are few sadder sights than a cluster of middle-aged men in beige peering longingly into the window of a camera shop. *this is not necessarily a direct result of any genetic differences, but could derive from the greater social power of men historically. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Øsleby Sent: 22 October 2006 15:41 To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: RE: Your first camera To me, it is pretty obvious that you are correct. Men are gear heads. It is a part of our identity as men. And being a gear head is also the ticket into the world of male bonding. So if you are a man, and you want to make sure your son becomes a man among men, you give him gear, photo gear and other gear. Thats pretty dumb logic, but I believe that is how it is. Just look at this (mainly) SLR list. How many of the regulars are woman? Not a handful. It does not prove anything, but it is a strong indication. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Well, my first camera was given to me by a elderly lady, Mrs. Looney, no less. My second was handed down to me by my Mom as I went off into the Air Force, because she wanted me to send her photos probably. Now, my dad, he did a great job of teaching me how to think poor, only I did not get the part about hoarding my money grin. I am trying to think whether the girls had cameras, I believe most of them did (pink or purple ones), but at 10 or so I did not pay much attention to girls, sorry. In my neighborhood none of the kids had real cameras. Factory workers in the 50's were not particularly well to do. --graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Sure, a Nikon in the 70's was as much a man's necklace as a photo tool. Jens Bladt wrote: It is interesting. In my experience - to women, size matters most. The smaller the better. I have known men to have a similar approach to buying a camera too. I never really cared much about the size of a camera. I don't carry a camera where ever I go. I photograph when, I go out to photograph - not when I'm doing other things. If I do, I have small cameras for such occasions - like a Minox GL. That's probably one explanation for women being less prone to buy a SLR. Do you actually know of any statistics on this matter? I simply love cameras and lenses. Some are just beautiful. I guess I like cameras the same way woman like jewellery. Women buy jewellery - men buy cameras, cell phones, GPS, nice tools, nice knives or guns etc. In Germany they sometimes call a pretty, high quality camera smuckstuck which means an object that makes you look good. Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 22. oktober 2006 03:35 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: Your first camera Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/22/2006 8:43:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. == Phsaw, phooey, and crap. Double crap. Culturally over the centuries women were held back from becoming artists, etc. Had to have babies and feed the male hordes, including male artists and sculptors, etc. Their place was in the home, they had smaller brains, they were illogical, all emotional, couldn't manage complicated tasks, understand technical things, etc. For instance, I grew up when there were no women news anchors on TV, and the most available jobs for women were: teacher, teller, stewardress, nurse, and social worker -- the helper fields. It hasn't been all that long since gender prejudices were socially acceptable and active. And in some instances still are, although women have made a lot of progress since the 1960's. And I am still only talking about Western cultures, since those prejudices are still quite active, barring women from jobs, in other cultures. So now that Western women are supposedly liberated and supposedly can hold any job, get back to me in another 200-1,000 years and see if those artist/photographer percentages haven't changed. If you want you daughters to grow up enjoying photography, hand them a camera young. As a female programmer, a very small minority in that field in my age group, I am pretty familiar with gender stereotypes and unconscious assumptions and prejudices. Arts and Crafts, quilting, needlepoint, lace making, sewing, etc. were socially acceptable visual fields for women for centuries. They couldn't lift a brush, not appropriate for most past eras and places, but, boy, they were allowed to lift a needle. Have a Nice Day!, Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Historically, most men were allowed to work out of the house. That has little to do with innate ability. Besides real men do not take pictures, they play football, and join the army. -- Bob W wrote: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. A better way to make your son a man amongst men (assuming that's something to be desired, which I think is highly debatable) is to teach him to like football beer. There are few sadder sights than a cluster of middle-aged men in beige peering longingly into the window of a camera shop. *this is not necessarily a direct result of any genetic differences, but could derive from the greater social power of men historically. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Øsleby Sent: 22 October 2006 15:41 To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Subject: RE: Your first camera To me, it is pretty obvious that you are correct. Men are gear heads. It is a part of our identity as men. And being a gear head is also the ticket into the world of male bonding. So if you are a man, and you want to make sure your son becomes a man among men, you give him gear, photo gear and other gear. That’s pretty dumb logic, but I believe that is how it is. Just look at this (mainly) SLR list. How many of the regulars are woman? Not a handful. It does not prove anything, but it is a strong indication. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
Well done. I see both you and Graywolf managed successfully to ignore this part of my email: *this is not necessarily a direct result of any genetic differences, but could derive from the greater social power of men historically. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 October 2006 17:02 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera In a message dated 10/22/2006 8:43:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. == Phsaw, phooey, and crap. Double crap. Culturally over the centuries women were held back from becoming artists, etc. Had to have babies and feed the male hordes, including male artists and sculptors, etc. Their place was in the home, they had smaller brains, they were illogical, all emotional, couldn't manage complicated tasks, understand technical things, etc. For instance, I grew up when there were no women news anchors on TV, and the most available jobs for women were: teacher, teller, stewardress, nurse, and social worker -- the helper fields. It hasn't been all that long since gender prejudices were socially acceptable and active. And in some instances still are, although women have made a lot of progress since the 1960's. And I am still only talking about Western cultures, since those prejudices are still quite active, barring women from jobs, in other cultures. So now that Western women are supposedly liberated and supposedly can hold any job, get back to me in another 200-1,000 years and see if those artist/photographer percentages haven't changed. If you want you daughters to grow up enjoying photography, hand them a camera young. As a female programmer, a very small minority in that field in my age group, I am pretty familiar with gender stereotypes and unconscious assumptions and prejudices. Arts and Crafts, quilting, needlepoint, lace making, sewing, etc. were socially acceptable visual fields for women for centuries. They couldn't lift a brush, not appropriate for most past eras and places, but, boy, they were allowed to lift a needle. Have a Nice Day!, Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
Marnie. I did not write the quoted part, Bob did. Blame him, not me ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. oktober 2006 18:02 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera In a message dated 10/22/2006 8:43:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. == Phsaw, phooey, and crap. Double crap. Culturally over the centuries women were held back from becoming artists, etc. Had to have babies and feed the male hordes, including male artists and sculptors, etc. Their place was in the home, they had smaller brains, they were illogical, all emotional, couldn't manage complicated tasks, understand technical things, etc. For instance, I grew up when there were no women news anchors on TV, and the most available jobs for women were: teacher, teller, stewardress, nurse, and social worker -- the helper fields. It hasn't been all that long since gender prejudices were socially acceptable and active. And in some instances still are, although women have made a lot of progress since the 1960's. And I am still only talking about Western cultures, since those prejudices are still quite active, barring women from jobs, in other cultures. So now that Western women are supposedly liberated and supposedly can hold any job, get back to me in another 200-1,000 years and see if those artist/photographer percentages haven't changed. If you want you daughters to grow up enjoying photography, hand them a camera young. As a female programmer, a very small minority in that field in my age group, I am pretty familiar with gender stereotypes and unconscious assumptions and prejudices. Arts and Crafts, quilting, needlepoint, lace making, sewing, etc. were socially acceptable visual fields for women for centuries. They couldn't lift a brush, not appropriate for most past eras and places, but, boy, they were allowed to lift a needle. Have a Nice Day!, Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/22/2006 9:37:00 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marnie. I did not write the quoted part, Bob did. Blame him, not me ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) === Aha, but I didn't think it was you. However, I didn't think it was Bob either. Okay, he's blamed. ;-) Hehehehehe. Girl children are still given dolls and boy children are still given trucks. Though, these days both may also be given action figures and light sabers. My point is, if you want your daughters (and granddaughters) to grow up enjoying photography, hand them a camera young. Marnie aka Doe :-) Well, I've said that three times -- that should do it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
Point taken Marnie. Three is a good number ;-) I have two sons, no daughters. None of them shows much interest of photography :-( I'll try to do better when grandchildren start rolling in. Hopefully it will be some years before that happens. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22. oktober 2006 18:46 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Your first camera In a message dated 10/22/2006 9:37:00 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marnie. I did not write the quoted part, Bob did. Blame him, not me ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) === Aha, but I didn't think it was you. However, I didn't think it was Bob either. Okay, he's blamed. ;-) Hehehehehe. Girl children are still given dolls and boy children are still given trucks. Though, these days both may also be given action figures and light sabers. My point is, if you want your daughters (and granddaughters) to grow up enjoying photography, hand them a camera young. Marnie aka Doe :-) Well, I've said that three times -- that should do it. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
I'd disagree with one thing, many men who aren't into photography will buy an SLR because it's the biggest and most complicated camera. Then they'll borrow their wife/GF's PS for most use (My father is a classic example of this). -Adam Vic Mortelmans wrote: Hi, it's true, I also got into photography by having inherited the Pentax Spotmatic F after having been owned by my uncle and my father. But about the male-female thing I have another view. Are you not too easily assuming that everyone who owns a camera, is really in to photography? Anyone (male or female) who wants a camera just for the occasional snapshot, will rather get a small ps than a SLR. Just like cars: someone travelling long distances each day will ride a big car, while small cars are sufficient of occasional trips for shopping. So the better question is: why are more men in to photography than women?. Groeten, Vic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Hi, it's true, I also got into photography by having inherited the Pentax Spotmatic F after having been owned by my uncle and my father. But about the male-female thing I have another view. Are you not too easily assuming that everyone who owns a camera, is really in to photography? Anyone (male or female) who wants a camera just for the occasional snapshot, will rather get a small ps than a SLR. Just like cars: someone travelling long distances each day will ride a big car, while small cars are sufficient of occasional trips for shopping. So the better question is: why are more men in to photography than women?. Groeten, Vic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Just tagging into the thread here with a couple of comments. First camera was a 620 Kodak Brownie. Birthday present from the parents. When I showed some interest my father let me use his Argus C3. My next camera was a screw mount Spotmatic that I used until just a few years ago. When the kids were younger I kept them supplied with single-use/disposables. As they've grown and the world transitioned to digital I've supplied them all with a decent digital point and shoot. None of them, boys or girls, want to carry an SLR. They are more interested in getting photos than the equipment. On the other subject, I've mentioned before that, by a large margin, more women than men sign up for my photo classes. Overall, there are more point and shooters, but the trend is to a much larger percentage of SLRs. See you later, gs http://georgesphotos.net On 10/22/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/22/2006 8:43:53 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: it is a truism* that historically most artists, sculptors etc. are also men, and men are supposedly more visually-oriented than women. So a non-gearhead explanation could be that men are more likely to want to go out and take pictures. == Phsaw, phooey, and crap. Double crap. Culturally over the centuries women were held back from becoming artists, etc. Had to have babies and feed the male hordes, including male artists and sculptors, etc. Their place was in the home, they had smaller brains, they were illogical, all emotional, couldn't manage complicated tasks, understand technical things, etc. For instance, I grew up when there were no women news anchors on TV, and the most available jobs for women were: teacher, teller, stewardress, nurse, and social worker -- the helper fields. It hasn't been all that long since gender prejudices were socially acceptable and active. And in some instances still are, although women have made a lot of progress since the 1960's. And I am still only talking about Western cultures, since those prejudices are still quite active, barring women from jobs, in other cultures. So now that Western women are supposedly liberated and supposedly can hold any job, get back to me in another 200-1,000 years and see if those artist/photographer percentages haven't changed. If you want you daughters to grow up enjoying photography, hand them a camera young. As a female programmer, a very small minority in that field in my age group, I am pretty familiar with gender stereotypes and unconscious assumptions and prejudices. Arts and Crafts, quilting, needlepoint, lace making, sewing, etc. were socially acceptable visual fields for women for centuries. They couldn't lift a brush, not appropriate for most past eras and places, but, boy, they were allowed to lift a needle. Have a Nice Day!, Marnie aka Doe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/22/2006 9:12:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Well done. I see both you and Graywolf managed successfully to ignore this part of my email: *this is not necessarily a direct result of any genetic differences, but could derive from the greater social power of men historically. -- Cheers, Bob == Grumble. Sort of dirty pool, putting in disclaimers at the bottom. In fine print. Marnie aka Doe ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
In a message dated 10/22/2006 1:31:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So the better question is: why are more men in to photography than women?. Groeten, Vic == Are they? This list is nothing to go by. Scraping booking has become a big industry and that is done mainly by women, and it includes photos. I do think more men then women are into SLRs and DSLRs and I think the fact they were often given SLRs while young has one heck of a lot to do with it. Just based on what people said in this thread, and based on my own experience with cameras and women of my acquaintance experiences with cameras. SLRs can be a bit intimidating unless one gets into it when young. (Also read gs' post, and in all the photography classes I have taken women seriously outnumber men. Also on your next trip see who is using PSs.) I'll qualify what I said before -- If you want your daughters to grow up to be hobbyists photograhers, hand them a SLR/DSLR young. (Just like you would a son.) Marnie ;-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
When I met my wife, she was using a Spotmatic and doing wonderful flower and nature shots. She had started young with an Exacta her father gave her when he moved on to Nikons. I talked her into upgrading to an ME Super so we could share lenses on our bicycle tours. She now happily uses an Optio 555 and has no interest in SLR's or DSLR's. I think it is a pragmatic thing - she is not enamored with the mechanism, just wants to be able to take pictures without too much fuss. Stan On Oct 22, 2006, at 5:06 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: It is interesting. In my experience - to women, size matters most. The smaller the better. I have known men to have a similar approach to buying a camera too. I never really cared much about the size of a camera. I don't carry a camera where ever I go. I photograph when, I go out to photograph - not when I'm doing other things. If I do, I have small cameras for such occasions - like a Minox GL. That's probably one explanation for women being less prone to buy a SLR. Do you actually know of any statistics on this matter? I simply love cameras and lenses. Some are just beautiful. I guess I like cameras the same way woman like jewellery. Women buy jewellery - men buy cameras, cell phones, GPS, nice tools, nice knives or guns etc. In Germany they sometimes call a pretty, high quality camera smuckstuck which means an object that makes you look good. Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 22. oktober 2006 03:35 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: Re: Your first camera Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
First I used (1955ish) was some square boxy camera from Kodak. First one I bought (1958) was a Kodak 8mm movie camera. Next (1962) was a Kodak 35mm camera; no coupled viewfinder, aperture and speed set w/ levers on the lens. Next (1967-68?) was a Nikkormat. My brother-in-law at the time was in the Navy, had made several stops through Hong Kong, and had 2-3 Nikon F bodies and pretty much every lens Nikon made. I had his collection to store and use for a year during one of his Vietnam tours. I decided I liked the simpler Nikkormat and found that none of the other lenses could replace the 105mm in my affections. Next (1978-79?) I supplemented the Nikkormat with a MInox GT (?), one of the 35mm Minox cameras. Match-needle metering. Which turned out to be far more accurate than the Nikkormat. Next (1980) I got an OM-1 to replace the Nikkormat, in part because the smaller/lighter body was easier to carry on my mountain expeditions, in part because I was tired of the annual treks to a repairman to fiddle with the N's metering. Next (1983?) I replaced the OM-1 due to dissatisfaction with the metering. On my brother's advice, I got an ME-Super. Next (1994-5?) I inherited my Dad's several ME-Supers and associated lenses, started doing eBay, got confused by the variety of Pentax lenses, found PDML, and was enabled into a PZ-1p. Then came the second PZ-1p, the 5-6 LXen, the 2 P645's, the 2 MZ-S's, and finally the *ist-D. Next (November 2006?) comes the K10D. Stan On Oct 16, 2006, at 2:20 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: My first camera was a 127 film Kodak Brownie Starmite, which I was given about age 6. After that, a 126 format Kodak Instamatic 300. First camera I bought that had user control of aperture and shutter was a Minolta 16p. A whopping $23 when I was 8 yo. 1967-1968, my mom let me use her Argus C3, then my grandfather gave me his 1949 Rolleiflex. After that, during school year 1968-1969, I bought a Nikon F Photomic FTn with my uncle's help, and later in 1969 a pair of Leicas (IIc and IIf with 5.0 and 3.5cm lenses) for $99. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
My 50 years of photography: 1950'ies Agfa Clack 1960'ies Kodak PS, probably an Instamatic 104 1973 Yaschica TL Electro X (SLR with M42 lenses compaible with Pentax screw mount lenses) 1981 Pentax MX, darkroom equipment (for a long time I only had the M 2.8/35mm which is not very sharp - still have one) 1980'ies Pentax ME Super 1990'ier PZ-1, RolleiflexTLR (best performes ever - unbeatable image quality), lots of lenses, bellows, flashes etc. and a Gossen Lunasix F meter. 1997: My first computer and image editing software 2000: Pentacon Six TL lots of lenses 2002, Pentax MZ-S, Super A, P30n, P50, K1000 - more lenses, scanner, printer 2004 Pentax *ist D (I still got a P50 and a MZ-S) - more lenses, even some fast ones. 2006 Some old 6x6 folders and an FA* 2.8 80-200mm and 31mm, 43mm, 77mm Limited. The D has done about 45000 shots - in two years! 2006-07 K10D (hopefully) My best Pentax lenses are probably K 2.8/105mm, K 2.5/135mm, A 2.8 20mm, FA* 2 24mm, FA 1.4 50mm, M 1.7 50mm, the 3 Limited lenses, the M* 4 300mm and perhaps even the A 3.5 35-105mm. All keepers! Best Flash's ever are the Metz 60 CT2 and the 45 CT-5 (two tubes). Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Stan Halpin Sendt: 21. oktober 2006 18:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: Your first camera First I used (1955ish) was some square boxy camera from Kodak. First one I bought (1958) was a Kodak 8mm movie camera. Next (1962) was a Kodak 35mm camera; no coupled viewfinder, aperture and speed set w/ levers on the lens. Next (1967-68?) was a Nikkormat. My brother-in-law at the time was in the Navy, had made several stops through Hong Kong, and had 2-3 Nikon F bodies and pretty much every lens Nikon made. I had his collection to store and use for a year during one of his Vietnam tours. I decided I liked the simpler Nikkormat and found that none of the other lenses could replace the 105mm in my affections. Next (1978-79?) I supplemented the Nikkormat with a MInox GT (?), one of the 35mm Minox cameras. Match-needle metering. Which turned out to be far more accurate than the Nikkormat. Next (1980) I got an OM-1 to replace the Nikkormat, in part because the smaller/lighter body was easier to carry on my mountain expeditions, in part because I was tired of the annual treks to a repairman to fiddle with the N's metering. Next (1983?) I replaced the OM-1 due to dissatisfaction with the metering. On my brother's advice, I got an ME-Super. Next (1994-5?) I inherited my Dad's several ME-Supers and associated lenses, started doing eBay, got confused by the variety of Pentax lenses, found PDML, and was enabled into a PZ-1p. Then came the second PZ-1p, the 5-6 LXen, the 2 P645's, the 2 MZ-S's, and finally the *ist-D. Next (November 2006?) comes the K10D. Stan On Oct 16, 2006, at 2:20 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: My first camera was a 127 film Kodak Brownie Starmite, which I was given about age 6. After that, a 126 format Kodak Instamatic 300. First camera I bought that had user control of aperture and shutter was a Minolta 16p. A whopping $23 when I was 8 yo. 1967-1968, my mom let me use her Argus C3, then my grandfather gave me his 1949 Rolleiflex. After that, during school year 1968-1969, I bought a Nikon F Photomic FTn with my uncle's help, and later in 1969 a pair of Leicas (IIc and IIf with 5.0 and 3.5cm lenses) for $99. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date: 10/20/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about the same.) Guys were handed cameras young. Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
Maybe I am helping to break that past trend. Both of my oldest daughters have shown great interest. My oldest has both an MX and *ist film cameras. My next daughter just finished shooting a wedding with me yesterday using one of my *istD's. -- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, October 21, 2006, 6:34:51 PM, you wrote: Eac Sidebar - It's been interesting to me how many men on this list started young Eac -- given a camera by their father, uncle, neighbor, some older male. Sort of Eac a male thing. Maybe even a male bonding thing. Eac I know in my family, my father gave a 35mm camera to my older brother and not Eac me (got a new one, passed the old one along). Guys are supposed to techie or Eac something, right? Well, those assumptions were definitely prevalent back then. Eac Later when I was going to take a trip to Tahiti in my thirties I got myself a Eac Pentax PS and that was my first real camera. Eac Anyway, I started wondering if that isn't one reason more men than women use Eac SLRs and DSLRs. (I think with PSs the gender percentages are probably about Eac the same.) Eac Guys were handed cameras young. Eac Idle speculation, but interesting. At least to me. Eac Marnie aka Doe :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
My first camera was a 127 film Kodak Brownie Starmite, which I was given about age 6. After that, a 126 format Kodak Instamatic 300. First camera I bought that had user control of aperture and shutter was a Minolta 16p. A whopping $23 when I was 8 yo. 1967-1968, my mom let me use her Argus C3, then my grandfather gave me his 1949 Rolleiflex. After that, during school year 1968-1969, I bought a Nikon F Photomic FTn with my uncle's help, and later in 1969 a pair of Leicas (IIc and IIf with 5.0 and 3.5cm lenses) for $99. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
My first camera was a Voigtlander Vito CD in 1966: fixed 50mm Color-Skopar lens, rangefinder focussing, selenium meter, linked shutter and aperture rings so that changing either was very quick and easy, without upsetting the metering. Decent results, I shot mainly Kodachrome and recently scanned one slide for another group and was well pleased with the results. Moved to Pentax in 1968 with an SV + 55/1.8 Super Takumar - lovely camera, but no meter so some of my exposures were wy out! Got a meter for it in Cape Town in 1969, which improved results no end. Then I bought an identical kit in Adelaide in 2004 just for the nostalgia value - but the damned thing still takes great pictures! John Coyle Brisbane, Australia - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 8:29 AM Subject: OT: Your first camera Foregive me if you had this thread before. I believe it's kinda fun to look back, especially if it involves pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/269112157/ My first camera was a Agfa Clack. I believe it was 1958 or 1959. 20 years befor I got my first Pentax: An MX - that was in 1981. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/475 - Release Date: 10/13/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
The first camera I remember using was my grandfather's Brownie 2A. I still have it. The first camera I owned was a Brownie Hawkeye with a screw on flash attachment that used Press 25 bulbs. At that time, color film, if available was relatively expensive, so I used Verichrome Pan. Bill -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 6:30 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: OT: Your first camera Foregive me if you had this thread before. I believe it's kinda fun to look back, especially if it involves pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/269112157/ My first camera was a Agfa Clack. I believe it was 1958 or 1959. 20 years befor I got my first Pentax: An MX - that was in 1981. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/475 - Release Date: 10/13/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
My first was also an instamatic. Am I unique (or stupid, or both) in only using slide film in my instamatic. I have a box full of square format slides somewhere in the study. I graduated from that to a Zenit E (compulsory for any budding photographer in the 1970s UK), then on to an ME Super and it's been Pentax all the way since then. Have been out today in the Rocky Mountain National Park and am developing a new technique for landscape photography. 1. Identify potential shot. 2. Use istDL2 as polaroid to review exposure, lens coverage etc. 3. Take killer shot on 645 It'll be interesting if the hit rate from the trannies is better than usual. Peter - Original Message - From: Paul Ewins [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' pdml@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 2:09 AM Subject: RE: Your first camera First camera was a Kodak 126 Instamatic. My parents bought me a K1000 when I was 16 and my 35mm and digital cameras have been Pentax ever since. Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Your first camera
First camera was a Kodak 126 Instamatic. My parents bought me a K1000 when I was 16 and my 35mm and digital cameras have been Pentax ever since. Paul Ewins Melbourne, Australia -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Your first camera
The first camera I owned was a Spotmatic, vintage 1969, bought by a friend in Nam for $98 USd. Up til then I used my brother's Zeiss Ikon Contina RF a Voightlander folder. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Your first camera Foregive me if you had this thread before. I believe it's kinda fun to look back, especially if it involves pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/269112157/ My first camera was a Agfa Clack. I believe it was 1958 or 1959. 20 years befor I got my first Pentax: An MX - that was in 1981. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/475 - Release Date: 10/13/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
