Thanks for the comments on my photo’s Dimi/Rickmeister. I’m kinda proud of some shots my self.
Photography is really not that different from CG. I mean that in the sense that the tools can be very technical, but in the end you just need to use them to get the picture your want. An expensive tool will not get you a better picture automatically, you still need to work the tool to get the result you want.
What’s funny, is that I spent some time on Photography forums and you have people asking what camera is best, what lens is good etc etc. Reminds me a lot of what also happens on CG forums, where people have endless talks about weather they should get a Mac, use Maya or get a new motherboard. It has nothing to do with the art or media itself. But I guess that’s human behaviour.
And there’s more similarities. For instance the problem/use of Dynamic Range or Global Illumination. When you render a 3D scene, it can be quite difficult to light it properly so that light area’s aren’t blow out and dark areas still contain detail.
In Photography you have the same problem, especially since digital sensors still lack the same dynamic range that the human eye has. There’s a lot of people using multiple shots to create HDR images, it’s sort of the big hip thing in Photography.
Also since I make more photo’s, I’ve never been so much aware of the Depth Of Field properties of a lens/eye. I used to render everything in full focus. I’m positive I will never do that again. Most pictures come out so much better if they have a little or a lot Depth of Field, except maybe landscapes.
Basically I would advise anyone doing CG to also get out and take pictures. Just pick a subject and try to work with it. Don’t take shots that you plan to use in CG, it doesn’t have to be that way. Shots can serve a purpose by themselves too.
But I’m getting ahead of myself, this thread needs more mayhem 
That’s what being a travelling student gets you these days… er, not that things were better in the ‘old days’ when it comes to technology.
