Why is it that with the advent of the digital camera with the LCD screen that everyone stopped using the viewfinder? Did you notice any of the professional photographers during the Olympics holding their camera out at arms length? (Yes, most of the new high end professional camers do have the LCD viewers.) Have you been to a wedding lately? Do those photographers hold the camera out at arms length? NO!

Now for the hundred thousand dollar question: Do you know why?

Holding the camera at arms length is probably the most unstable (read: results in blurred pictures) way a camera can be held. I'm sure that you can attempt to balance it on your toe or something for a less stable position, but for a practical shot with your shoes still on, arms length is the worst. My personal favorite is the "I'm so cool that I can do the one handed arms length shot". If you've taken any photography course or read any book on the subject you know that it's recommended that at least one arm is tucked tightly against the body for stability.

I will admit that for some shots (such as those close to the ground or very close to an object where the viewfinder parallax is greatest) that the LCD (especially if it is able to be turned separate from the camera) is invaluable. I will also admit that framing is somewhat easier with the LCD for some shots but in that case a tripod or monopod is recommeded. But for most shots, looking through the viewfinder with a stable platform (arms in and all of that) will result in the best picture.

If you're going to inundate the world with your crazy vacation, family, event or whatever pictures, for the love of all that is good and pure, don't hold the camera at arms length!

And yes, I'm considering making a Things that really tick me off category.

For those that know me, seeing a title like Things that really tick me off elicits a large groan and probably some wonder as to if there is enough storage available on the planet to house all of them. But I digress.

I have always hated the term "cookie" with regard to the state mechanism used with HTTP. It's a token people! Call it what it is and there's less opportunity for confusion. Well, it seems that Sun has one-upped that with muffin (no, really).

• "What's a muffin?"
• "It's a cookie."
• "What's a cookie?"
• "It's a token."
• "Why didn't they just call it a token then?"
• [sigh]

Whee!

I would periodically run into a developer associate of mine and ask him how things are going. Invariably he would complain about a bug in an open source UML modelling tool whereby he could not cut and paste large diagrams. This went on for over a year. On one such encounter I asked him in jest "Did you file a bug report for it?". I had assumed that someone that would complain and have to work around a problem for over a year would have certainly filed a bug. To my horror his response was "No" -- and not just a normal "No" but one that dripped with "Why should I be the one that has to do it? Don't they know what's wrong with their own product?!?" I finally managed to convinced him that he should file the bug. The next time I saw him (about 2 weeks later) he was elated! They had fixed the bug and he was able to finally work at a reasonable pace.

The moral to this story is that it is the responsibility of every user of a project to file concise and reporducable bug reports. Developers of a project do not always encounter the cases that a user may encounter -- you may be the only one that has a particular use case. Don't fall into the trap of believing that "someone else will do it" or "the developers must have this problem and are just ignoring it".

File a bug today!

"The common belief that we gain 'historical perspective' with increasing distance seems to me to utterly misrepresent the actual situation. What we gain is merely confidence in generalization that we would never dare to make if we had access to the real wealth of contemporary evidence."

Otto Neugebauer