Is the following statement true?

if you know aircraft you would know what a F2 is
 
It is not a necessary truth. It is a conditional statement of the form 'if x then y': if you know about photography then you will know what a [an?] F2 is'

It can be disproved by finding someone who knows about photography who does not know what an F2 is. Shouldn't be difficult, should it?
"If you know about photography, you will know what a F2 is."
 
OK, there's an F2 camera, an F2 flash, f2 is an aperture... there are lots more, no doubt.

In the words of Number 5, "Need content, more content." Some words to put the F2 in context would help us know if it is true or not.
--
Being a photographer is easy; just take lots and lots of pictures.
 
  • a Formula 2 - race car not quite as fast as a Formula one?
  • a business hotel even crappier than the French F1 chain?
  • A Fluor based component whose stability remains to be proven?
or an old Nikon manual camera?... :-)

But back to the point, I guess that although there are probably very good photographers with little knowledge of the history of their art, I guess that most would indeed have at least heard about the Nikon F2 (FE2 or FM2).

Cheers,
Bernard
 
I never know the track names on the CDs of my favourite artists, and I certainly couldn't name all the individuals in the band - does that make me less of a music fan?

"Knowing" photography is so much more than being able to reel off names of cameras and brands - however iconic or groundbreaking they are.

For most, it's the ability to either take a good picture, or appreciate a good picture that matters. I know lots of people who "know" photography, but don't know what DOF is, for instance.

Equally, I suspect a some of the people who know what F2 is, don't really "know" photography.

To return to the music analogy, I know what a Guild M20 (3/4) and a diminished 7th is, does that mean I can play like Nick Drake? Sadly not.

Take care - Big Tom.
 
that makes me feel better. I shouldn't let the film purists get to me, but I don't like the way they insinuate that my photographic skills are diminished by the fact that I have little knowledge of film-based photography.
 
You can also see an logo on surfboards.

The idiots who made the statement ou refer to are just stupid snobs and very sectarian. Stay away from them and talk to real photographers.
 
Interesting, I actually wrote - an F2 logo - but put that in between brackets which probably was interpreted as an html statement to be ignored.

This gives me a chance to say it again: people who swear by one brand of camera only and expect the wole world to think as they do are lunatics more than photographers.
 
proving he knows nothing about music. But why does he getting royalty checks? ;-)

Marc
I never know the track names on the CDs of my favourite artists,
and I certainly couldn't name all the individuals in the band -
does that make me less of a music fan?

"Knowing" photography is so much more than being able to reel off
names of cameras and brands - however iconic or groundbreaking they
are.

For most, it's the ability to either take a good picture, or
appreciate a good picture that matters. I know lots of people who
"know" photography, but don't know what DOF is, for instance.

Equally, I suspect a some of the people who know what F2 is, don't
really "know" photography.

To return to the music analogy, I know what a Guild M20 (3/4) and a
diminished 7th is, does that mean I can play like Nick Drake? Sadly
not.

Take care - Big Tom.
--
All shots are A1 unless otherwise noted
http://www.pbase.com/mbaumser
 
I'm well acquainted with my keyboard and my computer applications, so I know what F2 is.
 
. . . the subtext of a statement like this is almost invariably, "I'm really smart, and you're an idiot. Neener, neener, neener!"

To which the most appropriate response is, "oh yeah? Why don't you go home and shave your mother's back again. . . "

--
Regards,
Paul
http://www.bangbangphoto.com
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top