Pablito
coco frío
Richard, when I got that question (from an aggressive male) I replied "Yes, 'cuz you look cute."
You should have seen him run away. 🙂
BTW, I didn't take his photograph. He arrogantly assumed so. I wonder why... 😉
So was he cute?
Richard, when I got that question (from an aggressive male) I replied "Yes, 'cuz you look cute."
You should have seen him run away. 🙂
BTW, I didn't take his photograph. He arrogantly assumed so. I wonder why... 😉
Likewise. After all, there are rarely many advantages in being recognized as a photographer, rather than as "just another guy with a camera". To most people, after all, a Leica just looks like an upmarket, old-fashioned point-and-shoot. To those who say, "It is just an upmarket, old-fashioned point-and-shoot", I say, "Fine, go and take some pictures."Was rarely mistaken for a professional, even when I was one.
Likewise. After all, there are rarely many advantages in being recognized as a photographer, rather than as "just another guy with a camera". To most people, after all, a Leica just looks like an upmarket, old-fashioned point-and-shoot. To those who say, "It is just an upmarket, old-fashioned point-and-shoot", I say, "Fine, go and take some pictures."
A handful of times, though, I've been recognized as myself, largely thanks to my portrait in Amateur Photographer magazine: "Are you Roger Hicks?" I can live with this. Put it this way: I'm not going to shave off my beard or stop wearing a monocle. Then again, I don't know how often other bearded monocle wearers have been mistaken for me.
Cheers,
R.
Well, I am, but he isn't. Wrong camera; I don't wear a hat; my beard is now white; and the moustache is too big. See http://www.rogerandfrances.com/aboutus.htmlARE you Roger Hicks?
So was he cute?
Did any of your listeners ever point out the "Invisible Gorilla test" to you. It's an example of being oblivious to something when your attention is directed to something else.A tall man? I never even saw him!
I laugh about that regularly. It's great to have an unpaid shill work the crowd for you.
Did any of your listeners ever point out the "Invisible Gorilla test" to you. It's an example of being oblivious to something when your attention is directed to something else.
Hi,
Interesting comments about lens hoods some posts back.
I've often mentioned that I like putting together outfits from the cameras period and it's blindingly obvious that lens hoods were not seen as important. Well, not important enough to fit into a (say) Leitz fitted case (ETTRE?). If you look at them there's space for extra lenses, extra cassettes, an arsenal of filters, even the right handed view finder but nowhere to fit a lens hood.
And look at the adverts for Leica from the 20's and 30's and, again, you'll find the lens hoods get left out of the package the shops are trying to push. Mostly the package is the camera, a cassette and a pack of 3 films with the ERC. Go for something more and they'll suggest a couple of extra cassettes.
Ditto in the 50's when the cameras were shown without lens hoods. I wonder if it's to draw attention to the lens and the name on the lens ring...
Anyway, I don't blame the users for not thinking about lens hoods.
BTW, when I wander around with the pre-war Leicas I get lots of smiles from people and one or two chat. And people sometimes offer me their old film cameras.
Regards, David
A professional, not really, but a hipster, yes.
I shoot mostly with Rolleiflex and some people have asked me if my camera works....
I speak to anyone carrying any kind of camera and have had some wonderful conversations. Others may know more.