Inspirational photography

[Rob C]

That's an interesting perspective, Rob, which I hadn't considered.  I suppose I've been lucky enough to have been tinkering with digital imaging software since the early 90s, so to me it's given flexibility rather than complexity.   Do you think that it's becoming more 'pixelography' rather than 'photography' - writing with pixels rather than writing with light - which you seem to suggest by the loss of the organic bond between photographer and captured image?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=214590\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

James

I don´t think that´s quite what I feel; the main hassle for me is that I do not enjoy working with computers for many reasons, one of them being that after my heart attack I am not supposed to spend too long sitting down in one position - deep-vein thrombosis is an ever-present danger - but beyond the physical, the mental part of me doesn´t like the separation from wife, or whoever might be with us at the time, that sitting down in the office for hours demands. Even more, I think I can truthfully say that the moment of shooting the pic is the climax of it for me: everything else is sort of post-coital, in a vague sort of way, and I don´t even smoke.

That´s why transparencies were such a nice medium (for me) and why the current business practice of doing all the computer work that you can (because you might be able to charge extra for it) after the event is not an attraction.

It´s probably as well that I have retired because I would not have been able to work long enough at a stretch doing all this additional stuff now to deadlines, and I know I would not have enjoyed it, so whither the point?

Rob C

[John Clifford]

I can see why some do not like having to use a computer to interact with their photography, but for me digital photography has made it much easier.

I've done the darkroom bit, and if you have a dedicated darkroom it's not so bad... but it's still a hassle. Chemicals smell and have health issues, too. And, unlike digital photography, you don't know what you've got until it has been developed, and if you made a mistake there's no going back.

I put aside photography after my career kicked in, maybe taking a couple of rolls a year. Then digital cameras came out, and they have brought me back into it. No, I'm not a professional photographer, even though I did get paid for it in college and afterwards, but I can't see any disadvantages to digital. Certainly photojournalism has gone digital, as has most photography. Kodak didn't get out of the film business because the demand was increasing.

Today, my darkroom consists of a couple of Epson printers that I lug into the dining room when I want to print, and my laptop combines my development tanks and trays, my lightbox, and my enlarger. And, I have printed more in the past few years than I ever did... because it's cheaper, faster, and because I can control the output.

Re digital photography not having the same organic connection between photographer and image... I respectfully disagree. I still have to judge the light, have an eye for composition, and press the shutter to create that definitive moment; the process is identical whether I'm using my FE2 or my SD14 or my K20D. I'll offer that different digital cameras are much like choosing different types of film, with my Sigma dSLRs being much like Kodachrome, and my Pentax K20D being much like chromogenic film. If you really want the 'ease-of-use' of slide film, take JPEGs and let your camera do the processing, and rig up a digital projector. Digital photography doesn't require a complicated workflow, but it does allow it.

To the thinking photographer, digital photography offers capabilities that were impossible a decade ago. I can make beautifully large images that rival and exceed medium and large format film (multi-row panoramas), or I can take great images in low light, or I can shoot and see the exact image seconds later... I can do all of these things, and more, with my dSLRs. I've even taken a 40 MP image with my Fuji F31 digicam that makes a very nice 16"x16" print, with incredible detail, certainly more than from my FE2 and Kodachrome.

This is the Golden Age of Photography, and we are very lucky to be living it. The photographic greats of the 20th Century would be glad to trade equipment with us.

[dalethorn]

When I went digital, I never looked back. I shot originals, scanned all the film and paper I could, including documents of various kinds. But more importantly, I've changed my photo lab habits several times in the last few years. Since I'm not locked into a procedural s/w like Lightroom, I'm more flexible and agile. I keep a pool of current work in one area, and work on whatever suits my mood. Some images remain in the pool for months, getting an occasional edit, then they may be discarded, or get the final touch that makes them suitable for the permanent collection. Also, the main part of my permanent collection is a small (~3,000 images) set of what I call current or "working" images that are updated from the pool, and some of these even move back to the pool for an additional edit now and then. The general idea as I see it is to stay out of ruts, while also maintaining the integrity of a permanent collection.

[alainbriot]

"Si jeunesse savait et vieillesse pouvait!

Alain might wish to correct something there, but for me, it sums up the ultimate sadness of the human condition."

Rob,

You wrote it just the way it is :-)   I heard it once in France.  Not such a popular saying but a powerful one for sure.  It helps to hear it young I think.  Makes you wonder what you don't know that you should know ;-)

ALain

[dalethorn]

I work in software development, so I see this all the time. Feature creep and complexity tire the user, who is only vaguely aware of being overwhelmed until burnout sets in. I use a 10 year old version of Paint Shop Pro that does all the useful things that PS does, so the only time I get tired is from too many images to process, not from the process itself.

[jjj]

I don´t think that´s quite what I feel; the main hassle for me is that I do not enjoy working with computers for many reasons, one of them being that after my heart attack I am not supposed to spend too long sitting down in one position - deep-vein thrombosis is an ever-present danger

I have a desk I can sit or stand at. You need a tall chair, but you can vary positions a lot more.