> Thank you Greg.
>
> I would agree with you that the tech contributes about 20% to the
> quality of the nature sound recording, important, but the art and
> field craft are critical. That's why I wonder why the technology
> gets 95% of the discussion on this chat group. It's like having a
> chat group for artists who only talk about their paint brushes.
> (And each time a member joins, he/she wants to know which brushes
> to buy as if that mattered more than what and how to paint.)
>
> Wouldn't the artists be discussing their subjects, framing,
> perspective, and creativity? Wouldn't they, like French painters
> in the 1800s in Paris, be pushing the traditional envelop, learning
> from each other, and creating something new? Not that I don't
> appreciate the paint brush talk, (after all, it was me that asked
> the 1-bit question) but where are the artists and where is the talk
> about your art? Is there somewhere an Ansel Adams or a Van Gogh of
> nature sound recording? I'd love to hear about that from any of
> you and I'll continue to hope the group evolves to some degree in
> that direction.
>
> (To tell the truth, the group was originally more inclined toward
> the art of recording years ago.)
>
>
>
Kevin
Greg wrote:
> . And when you factor in mic placement and
> field craft, the total contribution of the technology alone is
> probably about 20%.
>
> - Greg Simmons
>
|