Posts: 1,067
Threads: 181
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation:
0
very interesting Julian. I liked very much the definition of categories 1-4. 5 and 6 were a little vague for me.
Please see my photos at
http://mullerpavel.smugmug.com (fewer, better image quality, not updated lately)
or at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pavel_photophile2008/ (all photos)
Posts: 264
Threads: 35
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation:
0
It is a good article. I agree with Pavel about the categories.
I tried to place myself in a category, but that's hard to do subjectively. I'll need an outside opinion.
Posts: 3,291
Threads: 306
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation:
0
As Matthew said, for a lot of us it is a hobby, not a profession.
And I don't think anywhere near 6 levels covers photography. I understand the technicalities, but do not always wish to practise what I know.
Lumix LX5.
Canon 350 D.+ 18-55 Kit lens + Tamron 70-300 macro. + Canon 50mm f1.8 + Manfrotto tripod, in bag.
Posts: 5,739
Threads: 264
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation:
2
Its an interesting read, but stages 5 and 6 descend into personal artistic style bias, in my opinion. For example, do all stage 5 photographers start streamlining their kit to the essentials? Are all stage 6 photographers "bored" with taking professional quality photographs? ...or is just the author's personal style?
Posts: 3,291
Threads: 306
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation:
0
I suppose you could compare cameras with cycles. we start with anything and learn how to ride it. Only then do you decide if you want to compete, or just ride it for fun. Or buy a car and dump the cycle in the garage for if the weather is nice..
Similar, but not exactly.
Lumix LX5.
Canon 350 D.+ 18-55 Kit lens + Tamron 70-300 macro. + Canon 50mm f1.8 + Manfrotto tripod, in bag.