Photo forums or verbal masturbation?
I'm on the forums goof. Their regulars constantly press me (on any forum there are several incontinent people who literally climb into every topic, as if they have no freedom of expression in their lives), kicking about any occasion. Strange, but true: at one time I tried to parry them, which as a result led to the emergence of a lot of time-consuming discussion and the endless proliferation of the topic, throwing on the general thesis that life is, in fact, far from perfect, especially . The results, however, were different for me: I perfected the ability to accurately articulate thoughts (the first) and came to the conclusion that all forums are necessary for the release of unrealized ambitions through verbal masturbation (the second). Well, more forums are needed for the implementation of marketing strategies of foreign manufacturers - in the modern world, goods are promoted, including through the publication in thematic blogs and forums (our blog is no exception). By the way, only about 10% (perhaps even less) of all the topics brought up in the most worthy forums are useful from the point of view of new information.
There are either no photographers on the forums, or they go there by chance and God forbid if they write or comment on something. They are not visible, no one knows them - you can only recognize them by practical advice (naturally, a person can identify a “good” advice, at least who understands something in this) and by approach - they never enter into a dispute, and generally write little . It’s easier for them to go flip through models in the studio than to write about it on every corner. Accordingly, those who write about this are not real photographers.
Forum regulars are specialists with technical education (IT), who discuss not the technique of photography, but the technical aspects of the search for perfection. As a rule, they didn’t hold most of the models of the cameras under discussion - not to mention flashing a model for a couple of weeks (this is the only way you get used to its functions and controls, and their system differs from all manufacturers, even based on general principles ... speaking of "shortcomings" or "inconvenience", many forum users attribute their inability to adapt to the manufacturer’s conscience and then recommend it. And the approach to choosing fotik from these people is purely computer - computer performance is always determined by “hardware”, and the more it is and the more expensive it is, the (as a rule) the performance is higher (here, the postulate true in the computer world stumbles upon the need to possess specific knowledge and the talent of the artist, who compensate for the shortcomings of technology). Meanwhile, the difference in quality within the same class of cameras is within the permissible error of quality according to the standards applicable to technology (there are standards for noise and focus, for example, that apply to all cameras).
')
The forums also discuss “digital noise”, the term, by the way, is purely technical - there used to be “grain” on the film or just “grain” - have you ever thought about the meaning of this word? At the same time, 10Mp frames are considered at a 100% increase on the computer screen, completely forgetting that 2.16Mp is enough for printing 10x15 (with a standard resolution of 300dpi), i.e. more than four times smaller. Naturally, 1/5 part of the frame can be cut off and printed - this is an absolute advantage of a multi-pixel fotik, however, the clarity of the frame will be worse than that of a five-year 2-megapixel soap box, because a compact camera lens does not actually support this resolution (i.e., the matrix is ​​not for it). When printing the same 10Mp frame on modern technology (we leave aside home inkjet printers), it is unlikely to be distinguished from the 2Mp frame produced five years ago. Naturally, if the lenses are comparable (this is clear to any technically savvy person, for ordinary people, for example, Americans conduct tests with printing at different resolutions of the source code in order to prove this ). And the noise, whatever it was at 100% increase, will leave 50 percent due to the optical features of the printing machines - and in order to see it, you will need to look at your home album for a very long time.
Why, instead of noise or functions, for example, it is impossible to discuss statistics of breakdowns and contacting services on cameras of major brands? After all, the forums for this were created ... But in life everything is different: it is unprofitable for manufacturers, and they will try to hide this information away from prying eyes: put pressure on moderators, push profile advertising (it’s impossible to check the correctness of information on the forum, and write almost everyone can, including employees of manufacturing firms, so long as the writing methodology complies with the rules adopted at the forum).
Thinking about the reasons for this behavior, one involuntarily comes to the assumptions about the role of marketing in our life. Marketing, once a way to maximize profits by meeting the needs of the end customer, today has become the science of how to sell something new to a person - what is interesting, marketers also hide behind the scientifically sound argument that there can be no demand for the missing product. and it needs to be formed. Few marketers think about the usefulness of this product to a person (of course, the demand is not formed). Today's marketing has captured the minds of users, and to such an extent that we ourselves are guided by marketing categories: we judge the camera by the number of megapixels and thickness (stylishness of the case, and not the quality of the shooting), we talk about profits and costs ... But what difference does a user have, what are the costs are camera manufacturers? The main thing in the phone is that he keeps the connection, and in the camera that he takes it, and preferably the way you want, and not him.
The user, not knowing what to buy, goes to the forum and asks what to buy for 300 bucks. To which he replied: “buy it,” and to those who have already answered, there should be ten answers about the fact that “it’s better to stretch out and spend money on this and that, because of the functionality ...” (I just want to write “Functional” or “Functional”), followed by a long chatter about the fact that DSLRs are better than soap dishes in quality. Of course, this does not lead to any results. And if it's easier to write “our recommendations on choosing cameras” on a blog, then the question “what to buy” is asked every day on the forum, and the answer to it, even though it’s already worked out, is written anew. Efficiency tends to zero. Although it is beneficial for forum owners - more page views and, accordingly, advertising hits. And what's more, even the user has the conviction that 300 bucks for the camera are pennies, with which you can buy even a little dirt. By the way, in many cases, in general, instead of an answer, they send “to the search”, after which a feeling is created that the search is some other indecent place like assholes.
Meanwhile, why do most people need a camera? If you look at the albums, the standard is “beautiful,” according to the average user, of a photo - a person (with rich make-up or drunk) flashed by the flash on an incomprehensible background. But the fact is that any camera can even create it, even if it is built into the phone (believe me, they are also made with flashes), and therefore (as in advertising) “why buy more” - after all, it will still be dusting for half a year on the shelf and shine. The significance of photography in the life of an ordinary person is much lower than for us, assholes.
In fact, the problem with most cameras is that some can quickly break down (and slowly be repaired in services), and have key settings somewhere so deep, and therefore a person prefers to shoot at full automatic, not even choosing story scenes, specially thought out by people associated with photography. Some of the key requirements are few - but for some reason none of the masters in the manufacture of equipment remembers this. And even on the forum, recommending to you a specific model, rarely anyone thinks that it can easily break even on the warranty period, and maybe a year later. But after all, we are used to dealing with Japanese equipment, which has not been broken for years (and serves faithfully) - a trend swept away by modern devices.
Now the findings and brief information for those who "niasilil . "
And in general, get used to thinking with your head and making decisions without trying to shift the responsibility to others. Good luck.
No offense, but in the original article has a more radical title.
There are either no photographers on the forums, or they go there by chance and God forbid if they write or comment on something. They are not visible, no one knows them - you can only recognize them by practical advice (naturally, a person can identify a “good” advice, at least who understands something in this) and by approach - they never enter into a dispute, and generally write little . It’s easier for them to go flip through models in the studio than to write about it on every corner. Accordingly, those who write about this are not real photographers.
Forum regulars are specialists with technical education (IT), who discuss not the technique of photography, but the technical aspects of the search for perfection. As a rule, they didn’t hold most of the models of the cameras under discussion - not to mention flashing a model for a couple of weeks (this is the only way you get used to its functions and controls, and their system differs from all manufacturers, even based on general principles ... speaking of "shortcomings" or "inconvenience", many forum users attribute their inability to adapt to the manufacturer’s conscience and then recommend it. And the approach to choosing fotik from these people is purely computer - computer performance is always determined by “hardware”, and the more it is and the more expensive it is, the (as a rule) the performance is higher (here, the postulate true in the computer world stumbles upon the need to possess specific knowledge and the talent of the artist, who compensate for the shortcomings of technology). Meanwhile, the difference in quality within the same class of cameras is within the permissible error of quality according to the standards applicable to technology (there are standards for noise and focus, for example, that apply to all cameras).
')
The forums also discuss “digital noise”, the term, by the way, is purely technical - there used to be “grain” on the film or just “grain” - have you ever thought about the meaning of this word? At the same time, 10Mp frames are considered at a 100% increase on the computer screen, completely forgetting that 2.16Mp is enough for printing 10x15 (with a standard resolution of 300dpi), i.e. more than four times smaller. Naturally, 1/5 part of the frame can be cut off and printed - this is an absolute advantage of a multi-pixel fotik, however, the clarity of the frame will be worse than that of a five-year 2-megapixel soap box, because a compact camera lens does not actually support this resolution (i.e., the matrix is ​​not for it). When printing the same 10Mp frame on modern technology (we leave aside home inkjet printers), it is unlikely to be distinguished from the 2Mp frame produced five years ago. Naturally, if the lenses are comparable (this is clear to any technically savvy person, for ordinary people, for example, Americans conduct tests with printing at different resolutions of the source code in order to prove this ). And the noise, whatever it was at 100% increase, will leave 50 percent due to the optical features of the printing machines - and in order to see it, you will need to look at your home album for a very long time.
Why, instead of noise or functions, for example, it is impossible to discuss statistics of breakdowns and contacting services on cameras of major brands? After all, the forums for this were created ... But in life everything is different: it is unprofitable for manufacturers, and they will try to hide this information away from prying eyes: put pressure on moderators, push profile advertising (it’s impossible to check the correctness of information on the forum, and write almost everyone can, including employees of manufacturing firms, so long as the writing methodology complies with the rules adopted at the forum).
Thinking about the reasons for this behavior, one involuntarily comes to the assumptions about the role of marketing in our life. Marketing, once a way to maximize profits by meeting the needs of the end customer, today has become the science of how to sell something new to a person - what is interesting, marketers also hide behind the scientifically sound argument that there can be no demand for the missing product. and it needs to be formed. Few marketers think about the usefulness of this product to a person (of course, the demand is not formed). Today's marketing has captured the minds of users, and to such an extent that we ourselves are guided by marketing categories: we judge the camera by the number of megapixels and thickness (stylishness of the case, and not the quality of the shooting), we talk about profits and costs ... But what difference does a user have, what are the costs are camera manufacturers? The main thing in the phone is that he keeps the connection, and in the camera that he takes it, and preferably the way you want, and not him.
The user, not knowing what to buy, goes to the forum and asks what to buy for 300 bucks. To which he replied: “buy it,” and to those who have already answered, there should be ten answers about the fact that “it’s better to stretch out and spend money on this and that, because of the functionality ...” (I just want to write “Functional” or “Functional”), followed by a long chatter about the fact that DSLRs are better than soap dishes in quality. Of course, this does not lead to any results. And if it's easier to write “our recommendations on choosing cameras” on a blog, then the question “what to buy” is asked every day on the forum, and the answer to it, even though it’s already worked out, is written anew. Efficiency tends to zero. Although it is beneficial for forum owners - more page views and, accordingly, advertising hits. And what's more, even the user has the conviction that 300 bucks for the camera are pennies, with which you can buy even a little dirt. By the way, in many cases, in general, instead of an answer, they send “to the search”, after which a feeling is created that the search is some other indecent place like assholes.
Meanwhile, why do most people need a camera? If you look at the albums, the standard is “beautiful,” according to the average user, of a photo - a person (with rich make-up or drunk) flashed by the flash on an incomprehensible background. But the fact is that any camera can even create it, even if it is built into the phone (believe me, they are also made with flashes), and therefore (as in advertising) “why buy more” - after all, it will still be dusting for half a year on the shelf and shine. The significance of photography in the life of an ordinary person is much lower than for us, assholes.
In fact, the problem with most cameras is that some can quickly break down (and slowly be repaired in services), and have key settings somewhere so deep, and therefore a person prefers to shoot at full automatic, not even choosing story scenes, specially thought out by people associated with photography. Some of the key requirements are few - but for some reason none of the masters in the manufacture of equipment remembers this. And even on the forum, recommending to you a specific model, rarely anyone thinks that it can easily break even on the warranty period, and maybe a year later. But after all, we are used to dealing with Japanese equipment, which has not been broken for years (and serves faithfully) - a trend swept away by modern devices.
Now the findings and brief information for those who "niasilil . "
- listen to the thoughts expressed on the forums with big quibbles and be sure to match the answers with the question asked
- try not to enter into discussions if you only need to know the answer to your question (of course, the question needs to be formed as accurately as possible, and not like “Which camera to buy?” )
- get used to solve it yourself - no one will help you on the forums, they will only express their opinion, and then refer to what you have been recommended.
- spit on marketing - think over each function: “Do I need this?”
- if you ask for advice, then the photographers, and not the hackers who bought the camera
- megapixels, speed, image stabilizer do not teach you to take pictures and do not define picture quality by themselves
- compare the price and value of what you are going to buy (this applies not only to cameras) - if the price is higher than your ideas about the value of the object, spit and buy cheaper
And in general, get used to thinking with your head and making decisions without trying to shift the responsibility to others. Good luck.
No offense, but in the original article has a more radical title.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/30203/
All Articles