Doggre (Rich) wrote:
>Mike, I would bet you don't make your living with your hands. Those of us
>who work with tools and machinery don't think of them as "merely tools". A
>good tool is a work of art to the craftsman who uses it, an ingenious
>blending of form and function. You can pound nails with a $5 hammer, but if
>you want to experience the joy of driving nails, you get a $30 Estwing.
>
>Calling any high quality camera a "light trap" is about like calling a
>Ferrari or a Rolls Royce a "wheeled vehicle" (so is an ox cart). Man, where
>is your sense of imagination, your awe at life? I don't mean this to be a
>flame or to sound condescending, but to me, it doesn't have to be framed and
>hung on a wall to be art! That seems a little elitist.
Rich, I really do take that as condescending. Not only have I always made
my living with my hands, but high quality tools are very important to me.
Nonetheless, they are still, just tools. Doing what I do, it's not at all
uncommon to fabricate my own tools with my own hands, simply because of the
demands of the rather bizarre technical niche that I'm in. In case you're
wondering, I repair cryogenic lab equipment for a living. That takes more
than a smattering of knowledge of refrigeration, HVAC, plumbing,
electrical, electronics, high pressure gases, etc. ad naseum and means that
my need for no-compromise tools is quite high. I'm a field tech, not a
designer, but I have to know a bit about that aspect as well.
Just as Rolls Royces, Jaguars, Corvettes and Ferraris are all merely cars,
Olympus, Nikons, Rolleis and Fujis are all just cameras. It's not that I
have no imagination, or don't appreciate fine tools, it's that I don't
believe in worship of objects. There's a very fine line between
appreciation of a finely crafted instrument and obsession with the
instruments. I don't claim to always stay on the same side of that line,
but I am trying to.
My sense of awe of life, centers around the things that I choose to point
my light traps at. Nature, in all her beauty from the smallest microscopic
organisms, to the largest animals, to the weather, to the stars and what's
beyond fascinate me, awe me and humble me. Most manmade objects don't hold
that level of fascination for me. Some are more interesting than others.
Some work better than others. I think that for some of us, photography (or
bird watching or astronomy) are ways to peer into nature in a way that
let's us marvel at the levels of tools we humans are capable of making. But
some of us would be doing those things no matter if the tools were
extremely primitive or almost non-existant. Before I got into photography,
I dabbled very briefly with drawings and paintings. I'm not good at those,
so I sought better tools. But that's all I sought. I wanted good quality
tools to do the things that I wished to pursue. But more importantly, I
wanted to be able to share my wonderment with others, and that's what led
me to photography. It wasn't that I desired the tools themselves.
Eventually, I'll probably have to get a better PC and a scanner and learn
to put photos on the web, not because I care anything at all about the
rather drab plastic gizmos that can do that, but because they are tools
that will one day serve my purpose.
Be assured that I don't deride folks who get their enjoyment from
collections and appreciation of fine craftsmanship. Rather it's just not
where I get my particular spark.
Peace,
Mike Swaim
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|