4 ms·

This applies even more to the moon, in my opinion. Looking at the moon, that's one thing. But taking a picture of the moon? Go to NASA or Wikipedia for a great

by CarVac 6y ago

This applies even more to the moon, in my opinion. Looking at the moon, that's one thing. But taking a picture of the moon? Go to NASA or Wikipedia for a great high-res picture.

probably_wrong 6y ago
I think the key to understanding the allure is by extending your line of reasoning even further. Why play piano? There are plenty of recordings of people who play better than I ever will. Why play chess? I will never be able to beat my computer anyway. Why paint portraits? I will never be as good as Rembrandt, and my camera is infinitely better anyway. I think the point of the activity is not "I will take the best picture of this plane/the moon that anyone has ever taken". Rather, it's "I will take the best picture that I ever took".
- CarVac 6y ago
  My issue with the moon, in particular, is that: a) it's not hard, it just requires a long focal length. b) it's not a creative act. The moon drowns out anything else, so it ends up being just a picture of an orb surrounded by black. Piano is extremely challenging, and playing something well gives you that feeling of having overcome a worthwhile challenge. Chess is likewise a battle of self-improvement. Same with painting. Moon photography? There's zero creativity involved, it's just about whether you've gone out and bought that 150-600 zoom you've been eyeing.
lm28469 6y ago
At this point just stay in your bed and wait for death. Everything you'll ever do has been done better in the past. Humans need to keep busy and build/do shit, most of it is useless in the grand scheme of things Setting up a camera capable of taking quality pics of celestial bodies sounds like a fun hobby, see: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/166334-debayering-a-dslrs-bayer-matrix/page/9/ https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/166334-debayering-a-dslrs...

4 ms·

This applies even more to the moon, in my opinion. Looking at the moon, that's one thing. But taking a picture of the moon? Go to NASA or Wikipedia for a great

by CarVac 6y ago

This applies even more to the moon, in my opinion. Looking at the moon, that's one thing. But taking a picture of the moon? Go to NASA or Wikipedia for a great high-res picture.

probably_wrong 6y ago
I think the key to understanding the allure is by extending your line of reasoning even further. Why play piano? There are plenty of recordings of people who play better than I ever will. Why play chess? I will never be able to beat my computer anyway. Why paint portraits? I will never be as good as Rembrandt, and my camera is infinitely better anyway. I think the point of the activity is not "I will take the best picture of this plane/the moon that anyone has ever taken". Rather, it's "I will take the best picture that I ever took".
- CarVac 6y ago
  My issue with the moon, in particular, is that: a) it's not hard, it just requires a long focal length. b) it's not a creative act. The moon drowns out anything else, so it ends up being just a picture of an orb surrounded by black. Piano is extremely challenging, and playing something well gives you that feeling of having overcome a worthwhile challenge. Chess is likewise a battle of self-improvement. Same with painting. Moon photography? There's zero creativity involved, it's just about whether you've gone out and bought that 150-600 zoom you've been eyeing.
lm28469 6y ago
At this point just stay in your bed and wait for death. Everything you'll ever do has been done better in the past. Humans need to keep busy and build/do shit, most of it is useless in the grand scheme of things Setting up a camera capable of taking quality pics of celestial bodies sounds like a fun hobby, see: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/166334-debayering-a-dslrs-bayer-matrix/page/9/ https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/166334-debayering-a-dslrs...