Wonderful photo and indeed it's not over done at all it's perfect.

Thoramay I've answered your question maybe not the way you attended to but emotion are just that what I say, pleasure is induced by dopamine and various endorphins that's released by the brain as a rewarding system and that rewarding system is triggered by all sort of things some are "baked in" and some others come there by memories and experience. Why some laugh and others not comes down to experience and memories that have shaped us and of course we get some genes from our parents in the mix, that's what makes us.

Soul is basicly a person's total self, individuality, what make us us.
I answer that memories and genes makes us us and that's my point of view until I learn otherwise, although I don't think genes are necessary for a soul but being able to react something in a unique way, so individuality come by memories experience is a soul.
Probably not your view but it is mine.

Yes I want to seek answers and since I don't believe in a gift within us so i can't miss it. If you find that sad then you find it sad, I'm not here to change your view but I'm looking at things with other eyes.
I believe that you should not take something for granted and therefore it's hard for me to believe in a god or gods and I don't see how it would change my life if I did.
I'm simply here to make the most I can with my life and treat anyone like I want to be treathed so bascily do good feel good, do bad feel bad. If I do good and there is a god or gods I'm sure they aren't racists that would ban me to hell because I didn't believe in them.

Indeed Barrie stupid me, it isn't a primary life necessity or how do you call it
But what I try to say is there must be a simple answer for it but indeed entertainment is also among them.

What I mean is what drive/drove people like Ansel Adams, Annie Leibovitz, Henri Cartier, Helmut Newton, Herb Ritts, etc. to do create so much art, dictating their life to it. Do you think they have one feature/need/urge they all have in common?

What I was after with learn is that art is a way to communicate and the basic idea behind communicating is sharing information so learning.
So can we see those artist as teachers learning us emotions, different perspectives?

A change in aperture won't change that
The only thing a f/1.2 does over a f/1.4 is that at f/1.2 the field where in everything is harp is smaller and that more light falls onto the sensor so you could faster shutter-speed and lower iso but there isn't so much in between f/1.2 and f/1.4 though.

If you want a more zoomed out kind of lens you need a wider focal length like around the 35mm.

Well the first are all emotions triggered by hormones, a reason why drugs are so addictive.
The second are all memories and instinct, the soul so to say (human nature in your words).
Why do we've a soul? you ain't going to like it but evolution explains it. Creatures that are able to learn and remember and apply that knowledge survive better then those that don't.
The only problem is I can't fit art into evolution, I can however fit creativity in it, capability to imaging things and prepare us for things that might happen is a good strategy for survival.
I don't see how I would find the answer if I said that god or gods gave us art, because why would they have given that to us?

Indeed the step beyond this is why we are here at all but first let us focus why we even create art since it looks pretty pointless in terms of survival and therefore evolution.... or is art a way to express creativity, visions, ideas?

I'm not here to fight religion there is already more then enough blood shed for that but I believe that everything that happens, happens for a reason.

Cause and effect right, the effect is we make art, now the answer is what causes that?
We eat because we are hungry
we rest because we are tired
we sing because we are happy
we draw because...?
we sculpture because... we like to create?
we take photos because... our memory is so bad???

I'm quite convinced there must be a very simple answer to this, it's most probably that the answer is too simple that we don't believe that it can be the answer...

ps. Could it be that we make it because we learn, I know it's strange approach but what do you think?

Oh I actually quite like the last one, the way the light catches it and the play with DOF in the first one is very pleasant.
The second one is less because you crop off a flower and everything is boring sharp.

Yes Gareth but it does not completely blank a corner but only darkens it.

if you look at the photos from Adrian you know what he means.


Different right:

The polarization darkens the sky on the right side and he has a completely dark corner on the left so it certainly isn't the polarization effect.

Thoramay, you know that doesn't answer my question.
I'm also an absolute atheist but I also have my believes, but those believes don't drive me to make art and since we're both human, at least I hope we both are there must be a common factor between us all... although that factor seems to be lacking with some
I certainly won't deny that believe doesn't drive you.

I believe Sony is bringing out an Evil soon, I already said that Sony would be the first one to do that
Now next would be Olympish most likely.

I'm here with Mongoose,
Good low ISO is more important for me then high ISO, of course high ISO is useful but I believe not many of us use an ISO over 400 constantly.

Vic I believe the AF-500 has an Auto-mode that you can still use but only with the ist* camera's you can use TTL metering.
They don't use TTL any more because the results were not accurate enough.

Thank you AL, indeed that might all be it. ^^
Thank you Paul for your insight, most of us here indeed shoot with that mind thought.

I-berg you nailed it where I was after so it's just human to create art?

Yes Thoramay but there must be something driving them to express those emotions in form of art, what is that urge you're talking about... what make us different then a bird that sings so lovely. Of course the reason why it sings is different but if it would sing without those reasons then what?
It's the big question indeed

Indeed Andrew that's why I asked, I might asked it more since it does give you some insight behind the thought of the photo.
Indeed it was more philosophical but your answers were good