As a photographer, it is kind of frustrating thinking about what a shame it is more dogmen are not into photography.

Why do I say this?

Well, just think about what a difference it would make to the history of our breed if everyone had possessed a halfway-decent camera, and then really took the time to photograph some of our history's greatest dogs? Instead of a small, blurry blurb of a photo, just imagine if most dogmen had excellent cameras and took some really excellent shots of their dogs? It would make writing a book about them easier, as well as make reading about them that much more enjoyable. I know Evo has taken some great shots of Machobuck and others, and there were some great shots of Mayday too (and a couple of Jeep), but for the most part quality photography of bulldogs is utterly lacking.

In today's "cell phone generation," people are into the "quick shot" of a dog ... but if you really have a good dog, it's nice to have a camera to document that really good dog for history-sake. I sure wish I knew more about photography back when I started out. I got some decent shots of some old-time dogs, but I sure wish I would have done so with a better camera!

Deep down, all of us appreciate a great picture of a great dog, and yet for some reason few of us ever really bother to purchase a halfway-decent camera to enable ourselves to do so. A basic, quality camera only costs about $500 nowadays, and a halfway-decent lens costs about the same amount. $1000 is a small investment to put out in order to get back a lifetime's worth of crystal-clear memories of your very best dogs ... and, who knows, maybe that dog will go down in history someday ... so why not have a really great shot of him/her, taken at a fantastic angle, rather than a murky shot taken at a poorly-composed angle.

Something to think about anyway ...

Jack