Do you list yer gear under yer sig?

[wxwax]

OK, here's a mild rant.

I am befuddled by folks who post their entire collection of camera gear under their sig. I'm sure that many dgrin members do so on other forums. Luckily, here it's in yer profile, which makes sense: if I want to know, I can look it up.

But what's the deal with shooters who feel obligated to list every little bittie piece of gear they have? Here's one I saw today on FM:

Canon EOS-1DMkII | 17-40/4L | 24-70/2.8L | 35/1.4 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 135/2 L | 70-200/2.8L IS | 100-400L IS | 300/2.8 IS L | 1.4X TC | 580EX & ST-E2 | Hakuba CF Tripod | Mamiya CF Monopod | Epson P2000 | 3-2GB Sandisk Ultra II & Lexar CF | Lowepro, Tamrac & Pelican Bags | Alien Bees AB800's | Sekonic L358

Jeebus, how did he forget to list his filters, lens cloth, sensor swipe and lens caps? :huh

So what's the deal? Is this some kind of convention? Or is it as I suspect: an ostentatious display of wealth/gear, the photography board equivalent of driving a Hummer? :wxwax

[4labs]

OK, here's a mild rant.

I am befuddled by folks who post their entire collection of camera gear under their sig. I'm sure that many dgrin members do so on other forums. Luckily, here it's in yer profile, which makes sense: if I want to know, I can look it up.

But what's the deal with shooters who feel obligated to list every little bittie piece of gear they have? Here's one I saw today on FM:

Canon EOS-1DMkII | 17-40/4L | 24-70/2.8L | 35/1.4 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 135/2 L | 70-200/2.8L IS | 100-400L IS | 300/2.8 IS L | 1.4X TC | 580EX & ST-E2 | Hakuba CF Tripod | Mamiya CF Monopod | Epson P2000 | 3-2GB Sandisk Ultra II & Lexar CF | Lowepro, Tamrac & Pelican Bags | Alien Bees AB800's | Sekonic L358

Jeebus, how did he forget to list his filters, lens cloth, sensor swipe and lens caps? :huh

So what's the deal? Is this some kind of convention? Or is it as I suspect: an ostentatious display of wealth/gear, the photography board equivalent of driving a Hummer? :wxwax
Maybe the guy just has a little Johnson?:dunno

[Andy]

OK, here's a mild rant.

I am befuddled by folks who post their entire collection of camera gear under their sig. I'm sure that many dgrin members do so on other forums. Luckily, here it's in yer profile, which makes sense: if I want to know, I can look it up.

But what's the deal with shooters who feel obligated to list every little bittie piece of gear they have? Here's one I saw today on FM:

Canon EOS-1DMkII | 17-40/4L | 24-70/2.8L | 35/1.4 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 135/2 L | 70-200/2.8L IS | 100-400L IS | 300/2.8 IS L | 1.4X TC | 580EX & ST-E2 | Hakuba CF Tripod | Mamiya CF Monopod | Epson P2000 | 3-2GB Sandisk Ultra II & Lexar CF | Lowepro, Tamrac & Pelican Bags | Alien Bees AB800's | Sekonic L358

Jeebus, how did he forget to list his filters, lens cloth, sensor swipe and lens caps? :huh

So what's the deal? Is this some kind of convention? Or is it as I suspect: an ostentatious display of wealth/gear, the photography board equivalent of driving a Hummer? :wxwax

i'm glad we have it in our profiles, not in the sig....

it is useful, occasionally, to look it up.

[Harryb]

In the words of the immortal Max Bialystock "if you got it baby, flaunt it, flaunt it"!

[wxwax]

In thje words of the immortal Max Bialystock "if you got it baby, flaunt it, flaunt it"!
You wear pants, Harry? :evil

:rofl

[Harryb]

You wear pants, Harry? :evil

:rofl
Actually no. Its warm down here in Florida so I'm usually in my Speedos
:lol4

[wxwax]

Actually no. Its warm down here in Florida so I'm usually in my Speedos
:lol4
:uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh :uhoh

[DoctorIt]

I actually saw one on FM the other day that DID list a lens cloth! I can't find it now, but I laughed pretty dang hard.

[Andy]

Actually no. Its warm down here in Florida so I'm usually in my Speedos
:lol4

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/15524733-Ti.gif

[Mongrel]

the point is so that other forum members can ask you about specific gear you own. Also, if you post a pic it gives an idea of what you may have used without having to type everytime-"20D with 85mm f/1.8, 550EX flash, or whatever.

I have my stuff listed, but I've toyed with the idea of removing it from my sig because it does seem a little *flaunty*.

[blackwaterstudio]

OK, here's a mild rant.

I am befuddled by folks who post their entire collection of camera gear under their sig. I'm sure that many dgrin members do so on other forums. Luckily, here it's in yer profile, which makes sense: if I want to know, I can look it up.

But what's the deal with shooters who feel obligated to list every little bittie piece of gear they have? Here's one I saw today on FM:

Canon EOS-1DMkII | 17-40/4L | 24-70/2.8L | 35/1.4 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 135/2 L | 70-200/2.8L IS | 100-400L IS | 300/2.8 IS L | 1.4X TC | 580EX & ST-E2 | Hakuba CF Tripod | Mamiya CF Monopod | Epson P2000 | 3-2GB Sandisk Ultra II & Lexar CF | Lowepro, Tamrac & Pelican Bags | Alien Bees AB800's | Sekonic L358

Jeebus, how did he forget to list his filters, lens cloth, sensor swipe and lens caps? :huh

So what's the deal? Is this some kind of convention? Or is it as I suspect: an ostentatious display of wealth/gear, the photography board equivalent of driving a Hummer? :wxwax
Its just like on a forum for cars, you list what you have, and what "mods" you have done to the car.

[Red Bull]

I can see maybe putting what camera and a few lenses you have, but not your entire collection of everything!http://dgrin.com/images/smilies/eek7.gif

[DavidTO]

OK, here's a mild rant.

I am befuddled by folks who post their entire collection of camera gear under their sig. I'm sure that many dgrin members do so on other forums. Luckily, here it's in yer profile, which makes sense: if I want to know, I can look it up.

But what's the deal with shooters who feel obligated to list every little bittie piece of gear they have? Here's one I saw today on FM:

Canon EOS-1DMkII | 17-40/4L | 24-70/2.8L | 35/1.4 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 135/2 L | 70-200/2.8L IS | 100-400L IS | 300/2.8 IS L | 1.4X TC | 580EX & ST-E2 | Hakuba CF Tripod | Mamiya CF Monopod | Epson P2000 | 3-2GB Sandisk Ultra II & Lexar CF | Lowepro, Tamrac & Pelican Bags | Alien Bees AB800's | Sekonic L358

Jeebus, how did he forget to list his filters, lens cloth, sensor swipe and lens caps? :huh

So what's the deal? Is this some kind of convention? Or is it as I suspect: an ostentatious display of wealth/gear, the photography board equivalent of driving a Hummer? :wxwax

Interesting question. For me, I got there partly because I'm lazy. I would never remember to update my profile, cause it's not in front of me. So then it would be out of date. Then I saw someone list theirs in their signature, and I thought I'd try it. Don't really need it there, or want it there, but never went back to remove it.

Now you're inspired me to remove it from my sig, and since I have the 20D, and see no hope for a major upgrade for a while, my profile will be sufficient.

Now, how about those people who put a big honkin' picture of their lens across their face in their avatar? ;)

[fish]

O
I am befuddled ...

Shirley, there must be more important things for you to be concerned with, eh?


:rolleyes

[DavidTO]

Shirley, there must be more important things for you to be concerned with, eh?


:rolleyes

Yeah, like when did my location become a hyperlink to google maps? Very cool.

[dkapp]

Actually no. Its warm down here in Florida so I'm usually in my Speedos
:lol4

It's going to take many years of counseling to get that image out of my head. :D

[dkapp]

I've seen some that are horrible. One item per line, double spaced & about 8" long my display. Talk about disrupting the flow of reading a thread.

Fred Miranda forums are the worst for this.

I'm against it. If you want to know what someone uses, ask.

Dave

[wxwax]

Shirley, there must be more important things for you to be concerned with, eh?


:rolleyes

World peace keeps me busy, but when I get a break, this sig business really gets my attention.

[Charlie Brown]

World peace keeps me busy, but when I get a break, this sig business really gets my attention.

nice mind if i use that for my .sig line? either that, or ill get a list of every component for my s50 from canon and list them all. from the screws to the battery, yup everything.


cb


actually i don teven know what my sig is anymore....hmm i guess ill look at my posts more often.

[wxwax]

nice mind if i use that for my .sig line? either that, or ill get a list of every component for my s50 from canon and list them all. from the screws to the battery, yup everything.


cb


actually i don teven know what my sig is anymore....hmm i guess ill look at my posts more often.
Who's that in your avatar, Charlie? :evil

[david_h]

One of the things I like about this forum is that it seems to be about taking photos, not about what gear someone owns. Even the good old Canon/Nikon rivalry appears to be in fun, unlike some other forums.

In the unlikely event anyone is interested in my gear, I have a Nikon thingy, a couple of Canon thingies and, oh yes, some other whatsit. Adds up to a hellava lot of pixelthingies, which I read somewhere is good. :D

[Tim Kirkwood]

Yeah, like when did my location become a hyperlink to google maps? Very cool.

Hey Dave glad you noticed.... Here is my thread on this...Right (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=7479) here

[wxwax]

Hey Dave glad you noticed.... Here is my thread on this...Right (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=7479) here
Like I said...yer handy. :evil

[Andy]

Even the good old Canon/Nikon rivalry appears to be in fun, unlike some other forums.

yep. the dgrin charter allows one nikonian to join up per month. and they rotate cleaning the kitchen, and they have to clean up after our friday night parties :lol3

[david_h]

yep. the dgrin charter allows one nikonian to join up per month. and they rotate cleaning the kitchen, and they have to clean up after our friday night parties :lol3 If I show up for the party with my Canon P&S can I get out of it? I'll bring some beer - honest :D

[Khaos]

I guess I did it because I spent more on the damn camera and lenses than I did on anything else in the last 5 years.:uhoh

Probably because I'm always curoious about everyone elses gear. Hint taken.

[Mitchell]

http://williams.smugmug.com/photos/15524733-Ti.gif
Andy, that is one harsh emoticon!!

[Andy]

Andy, that is one harsh emoticon!!

not as harsh as seeing mr. behret in a pair of speedos :huh

[Shay Stephens]

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what camera or equipment one uses. Photography is all smoke and mirrors anyway. Listing every spec of equipment one has in every thread one posts to doesn't help anyone. In fact, I find it to me more of a distraction than anything. And it makes searching impossible.

One of the most humorous examples of this is when you show a great photo and instead of asking how it was taken, people ask what camera was used, as if that had the overriding influence on the outcome.

Another one is, same scenario, but the question instead is what settings were used, like there is one magic setting combo that will yield great photos (like computer game cheat codes).

To all the beginners out there, the sooner you can learn that it's not the equipment that makes the shot, its the person behind the camera, the sooner you will make progress in your own photography. Getting caught up in the equipment list is a distraction that slows you down. Spend your energy on composition, lighting, and understanding exposure. That is the meat and potatoes of the photographic meal. The equipment used is only the utensils used to eat the meal.

If you must procalim to the world how much crap you have, put it in your profile.

OK, here's a mild rant.

I am befuddled by folks who post their entire collection of camera gear under their sig. I'm sure that many dgrin members do so on other forums. Luckily, here it's in yer profile, which makes sense: if I want to know, I can look it up.

[pathfinder]

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what camera or equipment one uses. Photography is all smoke and mirrors anyway. Listing every spec of equipment one has in every thread one posts to doesn't help anyone. In fact, I find it to me more of a distraction than anything. And it makes searching impossible.

One of the most humorous examples of this is when you show a great photo and instead of asking how it was taken, people ask what camera was used, as if that had the overriding influence on the outcome.

Another one is, same scenario, but the question instead is what settings were used, like there is one magic setting combo that will yield great photos (like computer game cheat codes).

To all the beginners out there, the sooner you can learn that it's not the equipment that makes the shot, its the person behind the camera, the sooner you will make progress in your own photography. Getting caught up in the equipment list is a distraction that slows you down. Spend your energy on composition, lighting, and understanding exposure. That is the meat and potatoes of the photographic meal. The equipment used is only the utensils used to eat the meal.

If you must procalim to the world how much crap you have, put it in your profile.


I'm with Shay here - cameras originally were just boxes with a small hole in one end and a place to hold film. Lighting, perspective, composition are really what we need to discuss. I find the lists ostentatious and disconcerting and slightly embarrassing :huh And some of the lists are kind of 'small' too....

The exif data is on my Smugmug site if someone really feels the need to know what lens or camera I used.

[Andy]

...yadda yadda yadda...

That is the meat and potatoes of the photographic meal. The equipment used is only the utensils used to eat the meal.

:eat :nod

[Shay Stephens]

hahahaha, oh ya, I forgot you have that food sensitivity hehehe. Well I hope it gave you a thrill :wink

:eat :nod

[Andy]

hahahaha, oh ya, I forgot you have that food sensitivity hehehe. Well I hope it gave you a thrill :wink

yes, i had david_s85 cobble together a vbulletin->dgrin->apple g5 hotwire, so i hear about any and all foodstuffs within picoseconds of being posted.

carry on
or, better yet,

carrion

[David_S85]

working on it Andy....

http://users.aol.com/bikedave1/OnFoodFound.gif

[Andy]

working on it Andy....

http://users.aol.com/bikedave1/OnFoodFound.gif


:lol3 :lol3

now *that* is hilarious. i want it. really.

[bkriete]

I don't mind a one-liner listing camera or whatever...it's when a sig grows longer than the majority of the user's posts that I get annoyed.

[Andy]

I don't mind a one-liner listing camera or whatever...it's when a sig grows longer than the majority of the user's posts that I get annoyed.

yabbut

we have an equipment field here at dgrin, under profile, for the same thing :D

[Mitchell]

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what camera or equipment one uses. Photography is all smoke and mirrors anyway. Listing every spec of equipment one has in every thread one posts to doesn't help anyone. In fact, I find it to me more of a distraction than anything. And it makes searching impossible.

One of the most humorous examples of this is when you show a great photo and instead of asking how it was taken, people ask what camera was used, as if that had the overriding influence on the outcome.

Another one is, same scenario, but the question instead is what settings were used, like there is one magic setting combo that will yield great photos (like computer game cheat codes).

To all the beginners out there, the sooner you can learn that it's not the equipment that makes the shot, its the person behind the camera, the sooner you will make progress in your own photography. Getting caught up in the equipment list is a distraction that slows you down. Spend your energy on composition, lighting, and understanding exposure. That is the meat and potatoes of the photographic meal. The equipment used is only the utensils used to eat the meal.

If you must procalim to the world how much crap you have, put it in your profile.
Well said, Shay.:clap

I have been impressed with photos from all different types of cameras. The lighting and composition are really responsible for the appearance of most photos.

Having said that, I'm still saving my pennies for a D2x:rofl

[Shay Stephens]

No one would blame you for wanting to use silverware instead of a plastic spork ;-)

Having said that, I'm still saving my pennies for a D2x:rofl

[Nikolai]

..., sometimes it *does* make sense to ask about equipment/settings.

While not being a "pro" I know enough of the whole process to understand that sometimes a shot is taken under technically challenging conditions, so my natural question is what the author did to overcome them.
It would not mean any kind of disrespect for the composition, postprocessing or artisitc sense, only a desire to learn from the master and, if similar conditions will present themselves for myself, know about possible technical "gotchas".

Example: "Shoot for the skies".
Many novice photographers ruine their ""creek on the forest glade" type of shots simply because they have their camera to read exposure setting off the middle of the trees, or, even worse, their darkest roots. This gets the upper part of the shot totally washed out, and no PS magic can get it back.
What they don't realize is that if they "shoot for the skies" (half-press - fix the exposure - reframe - shoot) the picture (while being originally dark) would contain enough information to restore the bottom, darker bart in the post processing, even without shooting in RAW.

Would it be a legitimate question to ask "how did you get your shot properly exposed" in this case?

Same goes about the equipment. If I learn from the answer, that a - again, technically challenging - shot was taken with 20D at ISO3200 f/1.8 1/30s, I probably recognize the fact, that my Sony 828 (which, unfortunately, gets very "noisy" above ISO200) simply would not be able to do this without additional lighting or at least a tripod and super-long exposure...

After all, it's all about learning... (and, FOOD, too:-)

Cheers!:1drink

[lynnesite]

To all the beginners out there, the sooner you can learn that it's not the equipment that makes the shot, its the person behind the camera, the sooner you will make progress in your own photography. Getting caught up in the equipment list is a distraction that slows you down. Spend your energy on composition, lighting, and understanding exposure. That is the meat and potatoes of the photographic meal. The equipment used is only the utensils used to eat the meal.

If you must procalim to the world how much crap you have, put it in your profile.

Thanks, Shay :clap :clap :clap Yep, equipment used shouldn't be the first question anyway, unless it's about filters used mebbe (like neutral density and grad nd's as an alternative speaking to Nik's q.)

When I see a list like that, I just think to myself "...I'd like one of THOSE and maybe THAT" sometimes, it's a list of what might be nice to have and what might be worth saving for.

I think the "little Johnson" idea might be perfectly valid. :rofl

[Shay Stephens]

Your example is a good one, but it is not the norm. Your questions here are how was that photo taken. My examples were illustrating people who don't want that info, but instead are seeking quick fixes to their lack of skill and knowledge.

My example (standard portrait of person in plenty of light):
Wow great shot what camera was used.
Wow great shot what settings were used.

Those are general questions showing no understanding. They think the camera makes the shot or some secret scene mode setting. I don't enjoy responding to people like this. They just don't understand yet, and the explanations usually go over their head anyway.

Your example (challenging situations:Low light, high dynamic range):
Wow great shot, what camera did you use to get a low light action shot like that?
Wow great shot, what settings did you use to not blow out the sky?

These are specific questions to specific challenging issues that show that the person asking the question understands what they are talking about. I love responding to people like that :-)


Would it be a legitimate question to ask "how did you get your shot properly exposed" in this case?

Same goes about the equipment. If I learn from the answer, that a - again, technically challenging - shot was taken with 20D at ISO3200 f/1.8 1/30s, I probably recognize the fact, that my Sony 828 (which, unfortunately, gets very "noisy" above ISO200) simply would not be able to do this without additional lighting or at least a tripod and super-long exposure...

[Nikolai]

Those are general questions showing no understanding. They think the camera makes the shot or some secret scene mode setting. I don't enjoy responding to people like this. They just don't understand yet, and the explanations usually go over their head anyway.

Sounds very familiar. :-) Even me, being only a photo hobbyist, not a pro, have to deal with them a lot. I take it, with your exposure to a general public, you have quite a percentage of Type1 over Type2:-).

One story I saw somewhere at stf/dpr always comes to mind when talking abouyt Type1:
A photographer was invited over to a dinner at friends' house. He brought some shots from his portfolio to share. Looking though the pictures, a hostess made a comment: "Nice shots, you must have had a pretty good camera".
When the dinner was over and everybody was leaving, he said his goodbyes and told the hostess: "The food was delicious, you must have had pretty good pots and pans".:):

Cheers!:1drink

[fish]

World peace keeps me busy, but when I get a break, this sig business really gets my attention.
How about diverting your efforts toward boiling the ocean?

[fish]

My examples were illustrating people who don't want that info, but instead are seeking quick fixes to their lack of skill and knowledge.
Wow Shay, that's a great idea. What keyboard did you use to type that on? :D

[wxwax]

How about diverting your efforts toward boiling the ocean?
Already well underway. :evil

[lynnesite]

Sounds very familiar. :-) Even me, being only a photo hobbyist, not a pro, have to deal with them a lot. I take it, with your exposure to a general public, you have quite a percentage of Type1 over Type2:-).

One story I saw somewhere at stf/dpr always comes to mind when talking abouyt Type1:
A photographer was invited over to a dinner at friends' house. He brought some shots from his portfolio to share. Looking though the pictures, a hostess made a comment: "Nice shots, you must have had a pretty good camera".
When the dinner was over and everybody was leaving, he said his goodbyes and told the hostess: "The food was delicious, you must have had pretty good pots and pans".:):

Cheers!:1drink

That's a good one Nik. I always smile at the questioner and say, "It's not the camera..." (and shut up, to see if they're clueless or not.)

With the advent of dSLRs, everyone thinks they can take great horse photos...until they try.

[Seamus]

That's a good one Nik. I always smile at the questioner and say, "It's not the camera..." (and shut up, to see if they're clueless or not.)

With the advent of dSLRs, everyone thinks they can take great horse photos...until they try.
With the advent of dslrs taking pictures of anything got a lot harder.:rofl