4 ms·

This is hilarious. The author disparages Norvig, from the shaky ground of apparently having barely one decent photograph to his name. I restrained myself earl

This is hilarious. The author disparages Norvig, from the shaky ground of apparently having barely one decent photograph to his name. I restrained myself earlier from posting a comment to the effect that Norvig had demonstrated, but not strongly enumerated one key idea, that you should restrict yourself to taking pictures of things that you care about. Andrew says this "When it comes to photography, engineers spend a disproportionate amount of time following compositional rules, shooting photos with straightforward narratives, and thinking about their photos as bullet points of technique before, during, and after shooting. It's as if the aim is for an acceptable, homogeous pastiche with the consistency of oatmeal." then shows us pictures of coffee cups on the grass. Thanks for demonstrating oatmeal.

andrewvc 15y ago
"coffee cups on the grass". Hey, could be worse, I coulda taken a photo of a lemon! http://www.abstract-art.com/abstraction/l2_grnfthrs_fldr/g013v_manet_lemon.html http://www.abstract-art.com/abstraction/l2_grnfthrs_fldr/g01... Who does this Manet character think he is anyway?
- watmough 15y ago
  There's obviously nothing wrong with taking pictures of a lemon, but to criticize Norvig for writing a great tutorial on available light photography, illustrated with great portraits of a superb subject, then to have almost nothing of comparable worth, seems like putting yourself on very shaky ground. I'll make no claims on my own account, but if you're going to put yourself out there, you should expect to be called. Obviously, I've been hammered by collective opinion, so the YC crowd obviously digs your Starbucks container in the park or whatever. Good luck to you!