Care of equipment

[Publius]

I didn't see another thread on the topic, so let me start one (or get pointed to an existing thread)

Alain Briot wrote two columns on "Preparation In Fine Art Landscape Photography"

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/preparation_in_fine_art_landscape_photography.shtml
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/preparation_part_2___checklist.shtml

It is the second one I'm interesting in discussing. Briot makes it seem like photography equipment is quite fragile. Handle with extreme care.

I know many who do this, and it makes sense if the replacement of your equipment is a major expense. I'd recommend making sure your insurance is up-to-date for accidental damage.

I treat my equipment as tools. While I do not intentionally toss things about, I am less concern with being delicate and more concern with getting my shots. If I need to move my tripod, I can move it without disconnecting the camera/lens. I simply place a hand on the camera and grab the tripod to move where it needs to be. If I had every piece of equipment in my case separated by padded walls, I'd have half the equipment I want on the shoot (or twice the cases). My case is full, and things do not move much, but they do move and touch other equipment. I don't mind scratches and scrapes. The electronics and moving parts are more rugged than what many make them out to be.

As for care of the tripod legs. I store the tripod collapsed, and have pipe insulation covering them. The insulation also doubles as padding when I sling everything over my shoulder to hike down the path.

I realize not equipment is built for rugged use, but most can withstand more than a delicate touch.

[Rhossydd]

I'd agree that Alain's approach could come over as over pedantic and unduly cosseting of kit. There's also some curiosities about his list of 'necessary'  gear that probably say more about problems he's had in the past, rather than those most of us will experience.

It's very curious to recommend always extending a tripod to full height. That's it's least stable condition and assumes a high view point which may not be the best.

I think keeping gear separate is actually important. Just something to soften that final impact between items when subjected to shock can make all the difference between failure and continued performance.
Whilst the electronics of modern kit is very robust, things like IS systems and the delicate bits of AF systems in DSLRs can be prone to shock damage, so it's worth trying to avoid banging stuff around unnecessarily.
I always add an extra layer of foam into the bottom of camera bags to help avoid damage and vibration in transit.

[Bryan Conner]

I agree with keeping gear separated in the camera bag.  I think that it is better to be safe than to be sorry.  But, that is just my opinion, and if you never have problems without keeping things protected from each other then that is great.

I believe that what the author meant by raising the tripod to full height was to raise the tripod to your full height- so you can see through the viewfinder while standing fully upright if possible.  But, the text was not clear in this respect, so I am only guessing.

I also agree with the issue of carrying duplicates of what is necessary.  Extra body etc.  I shot weddings for several years, and I can not even begin to express the paranoia of equipment failure on the day of a wedding.  And sometimes, re-shooting a landscape scene can be just as unlikely as re-shooting a wedding. 

I am guilty of carrying my camera/tripod on my shoulder even though I know that it can be risky.  But, I have to weigh the risk of doing so compared to the time saved etc.  If I have to carry it over difficult terrain, or for a long distance, I will put the camera into the bag....and securely close the bag.  I have forgotten to securely close the bag while climbing over some rocks and had a lens almost fall out.  I was able to prevent it at the last moment.  But, I have been careless/lazy.  I went for a walk with the wife one winter afternoon and decided to leave the camera bag at home.  I put an extra lens in my coat pocket, but did not snap the pocket closed.  Being the sure footed rascal that I am  , I tripped on some steps, saved the camera around my neck from any damage, but the lens in my coat pocket did a really good impression of a basketball and bounced off of the concrete. €100 later, the lens was readjusted and able to focus properly.

[Rhossydd]

I believe that what the author meant by raising the tripod to full height was to raise the tripod to your full height- so you can see through the viewfinder while standing fully upright if possible. 

Even that is fundamentally wrong. The camera should be at the correct height for the best composition.

[telyt]

... If I need to move my tripod, I can move it without disconnecting the camera/lens...

On some cameras the tripod socket will break if subjected to excessive loads, which can be as seemingly minor as walking along with the camera on the tripod & tripod on the shoulder.  This has happened to two of my friends.  In both cases the camera's main casting broke & the camera was uneconomical to repair.

[Bryan Conner]

Even that is fundamentally wrong. The camera should be at the correct height for the best composition.

How can it be wrong when I ended my sentence with the two words "if possible"?  When it is not possible would include such situations as the composition dictates the height of the camera.  I should have stated "if your composition allows, raise the camera to a height that enables you to look through the viewfinder while standing fully upright.".  The important fact to take from the text is the idea.  If you can make your shot with the camera viewfinder at your upright standing position eye level, then doing so may prevent a back ache, or back fatigue.  His statement was very clear and seemingly common sense to me.  Sorry if I confused anyone by offering an opinion.

[JohnKoerner]

I'd agree that Alain's approach could come over as over pedantic and unduly cosseting of kit. There's also some curiosities about his list of 'necessary'  gear that probably say more about problems he's had in the past, rather than those most of us will experience.
It's very curious to recommend always extending a tripod to full height. That's it's least stable condition and assumes a high view point which may not be the best.
I think keeping gear separate is actually important. Just something to soften that final impact between items when subjected to shock can make all the difference between failure and continued performance.
Whilst the electronics of modern kit is very robust, things like IS systems and the delicate bits of AF systems in DSLRs can be prone to shock damage, so it's worth trying to avoid banging stuff around unnecessarily.
I always add an extra layer of foam into the bottom of camera bags to help avoid damage and vibration in transit.

Yep. That is how everything he writes comes across to me. Pedantic and inane, really.

For instance, in part one of his (ahem) Essay, Alain says to "1 - Study the Area; To study an area I have not been to before I read books on the area and browse the web looking for information and photographs.  I talk or exchange emails with other photographers who have been to that area.  I also look for forum threads and blog posts about this area."

And then he immediately contradicts himself in the next paragraph by saying, "2 – ... I used to look at photographs taken by other photographers a lot ... Today, I rarely intentionally look at the images created by other photographers.  When I do it is usually because I come across images on the web, in books or in magazines, or because someone else shows me photographs."

Well, which is it Alain? Do you purposely and extensively research and study the photos/advice/blogs of other photographers, to get an idea of a new area, or do you not? Alain claims he does not want to look at other photographers' work so he could focus on his own original creativity, right after telling people he directly researches other photographer's blogs, websites, etc.

What I found most hilarious about this "advice" was, if Alain really wanted to teach someone how to be "original" as an artist in his interpretation of a new area, and study that area from a perspective that was entirely of his own unbiased frame of reference, that the most obvious solution to accomplish this wasn't even mentioned ... namely, physically going to the location first, studying it with one's own two eyes and perspective for a few days, unfettered by anyone else's blog or experiences, and then making creative decisions based on nothing but one's own instinctive assessments. Instead, Alain recommends browsing books and other photographer's blogs/photos, etc. as a way to "be original"

Sorry all, but I found the article to be pretty comical, really, and most of the "advice" to be communicating to the readers as if we are all idiots. Except of course this gem of knowledge: "8 – Pack your bag; Packing your bag is important.  There are different approaches in that regard ..."

No shit, Alain?



Jack



.

[Rhossydd]

His statement was very clear and seemingly common sense to me. 

It's only 'common sense' if you've a specific back problem, in every other respect it's poor advice or just plain lazy.
If I'd just put a camera at height convenient to see the viewfinder I would never have had a successful career as a cameraman.

In engineering terms the higher the tripod, the less stable it becomes.

Just put the camera where it needs to be for the best composition if you're serious about making the best possible images.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Yep. That is how everything he writes comes across to me. Pedantic and inane, really.

As a noob I enjoyed reading his article, and feel I have learnt something. This is true of all of his articles, and every article on LuLa without exception.

Well, which is it Alain? Do you purposely and extensively research and study the photos/advice/blogs of other photographers, to get an idea of a new area, or do you not? Alain claims he does not want to look at other photographers' work so he could focus on his own original creativity, right after telling people he directly researches other photographer's blogs, websites, etc.

I have an alternate explanation (which might not be what he meant, of course). If I'm going to a new location, I might look at images on the internet to give me an idea of what I might find there - in terms of content - so I can plan accordingly. I'm looking for subjects, not ideas.

He's probably talking about travel blogs and amateur travel photography. I could be wrong, but when I was reading the essay, this is the impression I got. I do a lot of location recce and research in my line of work (film production), and I follow a similar workflow. There's nothing wrong with having a plan and then doing what you have suggested:

the most obvious solution to accomplish this wasn't even mentioned ... namely, physically going to the location first, studying it with one's own two eyes and perspective for a few days, unfettered by anyone else's blog or experiences, and then making creative decisions based on nothing but one's own instinctive assessments.

Why can't one do both, if one felt one's time was a precious commodity? If I really wanted to just keep seeing, I won't be doing any photography, right? How do you decide the length of 'for a few days'?

[Bryan Conner]

It's only 'common sense' if you've a specific back problem, in every other respect it's poor advice or just plain lazy.
If I'd just put a camera at height convenient to see the viewfinder I would never have had a successful career as a cameraman.

In engineering terms the higher the tripod, the less stable it becomes.

Just put the camera where it needs to be for the best composition if you're serious about making the best possible images.

The article is directed at Landscape Photography.  I believe that it is possible that a very large percentage of landscape photography is such that the movement of the camera even several inches is not going to have a distinguishable affect on the point of view in the final image.  I am talking about the type of landscape photography that is illustrated in each of the images that the author included in his text.  In each of those shots, the movement of the camera the small distance that we are talking about on a tripod would not be noticeable in the final image.

So, in some instances, a tripod can support a camera/lens combination stable enough and at a height that prevents the shooter from bending over, thus allowing the shooter to look through the viewfinder in a natural stance while having the best composition.  To argue about the statement in the article further is splitting hairs and we would spend our time just as well to go and argue with a fencepost. 

[JohnKoerner]

As a noob I enjoyed reading his article, and feel I have learnt something. This is true of all of his articles, and every article on LuLa without exception.

Well, alrighty then

I have an alternate explanation (which might not be what he meant, of course). If I'm going to a new location, I might look at images on the internet to give me an idea of what I might find there - in terms of content - so I can plan accordingly. I'm looking for subjects, not ideas.

All well and good, but don't say out of one side of your mouth "I do these things" ... and then say out of the other "I never look at other photographer's photos." Not only is this a sanctimonious load of *** (not to mention an insult to all other photographers), it is also patently absurd. If he is actively reading other photographers' blogs, then he is actively looking at other photographers' pictures, is he not?

Speaking of which, isn't "looking for subjects" on other people's blogs essentially the same thing as looking for their ideas?

He's probably talking about travel blogs and amateur travel photography. I could be wrong, but when I was reading the essay, this is the impression I got. I do a lot of location recce and research in my line of work (film production), and I follow a similar workflow. There's nothing wrong with having a plan and then doing what you have suggested:

Wait a minute, which self-assertion would you like to commit to: 1) your original posit that "you are a noob who learned a lot" from this article or 2) that you are a traveling film producer who already follows a similar work flow?  

In the end, Alain's first two premises are hypocrtical, not to mention the fact is is presented in an "I am the teacher, you are the idiot-student," manner.

And where did I ever say that a person shouldn't have a plan and then work it, LOL, as a person would have to be pretty dimwitted not to know this already

Why can't one do both, if one felt one's time was a precious commodity?

Nice try at turning this around

Where did "I" ever say that one cannot first research a site and then go to the site? I never said this. What I said was that Alain, in claiming to do extensive research of other photographer's sites online out of one side of his mouth, and then claiming that he "rarely" looks at other photographers' work out of the other, is self-contradictory.

I simply think that Alain using as an excuse (for "rarely" looking at other photographers' work) the posit that he does so "to improve his own original creativity," is a direct contradiction to his "extensively researching other photographer's blogs, websites, etc." for their ideas/experiences on where to go and what to do at new places

I personally believe it is great to look at other people's work, and to get ideas from other people, so I am not personally arguing against this kind of research at all. Hope this clarifies.

If I really wanted to just keep seeing, I won't be doing any photography, right? How do you decide the length of 'for a few days'?

Huh? Wow. LOL

Take care,

Jack

Did you "learn a lot" from the 8- Pack your bag; Packing your bag is important.  There are different approaches in that regard" section too?  



.

[Publius]

In engineering terms the higher the tripod, the less stable it becomes.

The wider footprint makes the tripod more stable - less likely to tip over. I believe that is what the author meant.
Of course, fully extended means the legs have more flex in them.

On tripods, he does not even mention the evils of a center post.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

If he is actively reading other photographers' blogs, then he is actively looking at other photographers' pictures, is he not?

Speaking of which, isn't "looking for subjects" on other people's blogs essentially the same thing as looking for their ideas?

I can't answer for him as to his absolute intentions. Regarding your second question, what should one do instead to 'ethically' research an area (especially a large one)?

Wait a minute, which self-assertion would you like to commit to: 1) your original posit that "you are a noob who learned a lot" from this article or 2) that you are a traveling film producer who already follows a similar work flow?  

I'm a noob to photography. Surely you agree that the job of a photographer and film producer are fundamentally different enough to make that distinction? But like a doctor and a chef travelling on the same bus, surely we also have things in common to discuss and learn from each other?

And surely I don't have to commit to a rigid position, especially when I know as a professional I could be totally wrong, and sometimes as a noob I could be brilliant. Why categorize like Socrates, just to win debates?

In the end, Alain's first two premises are hypocrtical, not to mention the fact is is presented in an "I am the teacher, you are the idiot-student," manner.

Isn't he (and Michael, for that matter), at least to newcomers like me? If I had the attitude to critique everything I read (without bothering to experience it), I wouldn't get very far. I'm also aware that in due course, if my real-world experiences are contradictory to what I have read, then I still would be grateful for having had someone tell me what they felt is important. I wouldn't want a mentor who didn't have a point of view. Imagine having a teacher telling me that I could pack my bags in twenty different ways but doesn't give me an opinion on his/her preference.

As a noob, do I have any other choice?

[JohnKoerner]

I can't answer for him as to his absolute intentions.

No, what you can't seem to do is answer a question honestly or directly. The contradiction I stated is as obvious as is the sanctimonious "Holier-Than-Thou" manner of writing.

Instead, you evade committing to the obvious responses by asking mock questions of your own.

Regarding your second question, what should one do instead to 'ethically' research an area (especially a large one)?

Case in point

I'm a noob to photography. Surely you agree that the job of a photographer and film producer are fundamentally different enough to make that distinction? But like a doctor and a chef travelling on the same bus, surely we also have things in common to discuss and learn from each other?

Wow. Another childlike response on your part, side-stepping obvious conclusions, and coming up with inane questions of your own as strawmen to take the place of honest answers. (BTW, doctors and chefs do not have as many professional "things in common" as do photographers and videographers.)

And surely I don't have to commit to a rigid position, especially when I know as a professional I could be totally wrong, and sometimes as a noob I could be brilliant.

As a man, it actually would be more honorable to commit to a rigid position, when asked a direct question, than it would be to forever respond with inane, irrelevant "mock scenarios" of your own ... just to avoid having to answer a question directly.

Why categorize like Socrates, just to win debates?

It is not a matter of "winning debates"; it is an effort to reach the truth, or at least an agreement, through providing logical responses to questions. It is only through precise, honest answers to questions (in a mutually-honest attempt to narrow things down to a conclusion), that any debate can finally be settled. And, toward this end, at least Socrates was blessed with opponents who did answer his questions honestly, and who did follow all conclusions logically, which is more than I can say for you.

Isn't he (and Michael, for that matter), at least to newcomers like me?

There you go again, pettifogger, taking a new dishonest path of now throwing Michael (and every other "teacher" who ever lived) into the same pedantic pile as Alain. I have not criticized Michael here, nor any other teacher, only this particular individual, Alain.

And, though I may often find myself as a student, I never perceive myself as an idiot-student. However, if you want to perceive yourself as an idiot-student, who am I to argue?

If I had the attitude to critique everything I read (without bothering to experience it), I wouldn't get very far.

If you had the attitude of a direct and honest man, we could have gotten far enough in this debate to reach its obvious conclusion a long time ago. However, because you choose to evade answers and respond with one mock-scenario after another, we are just spinning our wheels here.

In the end, if you think all writers and educators are equal ... and if you don't have the wherewithal to critique what you read, and the ability to differentiate truly valuable advice from wasted typing ... then you really won't get very far. You see, some instructors really are exceptionally helpful ... while others are not ... and if you do not have the wherewithal to distinguish between the two as you read along then allow me to re-direct back to the 2nd paragraph of the previous response above 

I'm also aware that in due course, if my real-world experiences are contradictory to what I have read, then I still would be grateful for having had someone tell me what they felt is important. I wouldn't want a mentor who didn't have a point of view.

Huh? Wow. LOL

The truth is, I would never accept any mentor "as" a mentor whom I felt was a hypocrite. I would also never accept any mentor "as" a mentor who was so self-absorbed that he claimed not to look at any other photographers' photos ... right after saying he soaks-up all the advice he can about a location online from other photographers.

I personally would like and trust a mentor a lot more, who freely admitted to deriving enjoyment/inspiration out of the creative ideas of his peers, and who gave credit where it was due, rather than trying to act like a sanctimonious "law unto himself," contradicting himself in the process.

And I also enjoy reading instruction that is written at a level where the author perceives his audience as already having some basic horse sense, rather than as idiots who need to be reminded to breathe and wipe their nose.

Imagine having a teacher telling me that I could pack my bags in twenty different ways but doesn't give me an opinion on his/her preference.
As a noob, do I have any other choice?

Imagine actually being a person bright enough not to require "being told" you need to pack your bags for a trip ... and imagine further being a person who actually has the wherewithal to choose from among your own possessions what you need to bring and what you do not ... all by yourself

I am done here ... have a good one

Jack




.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

No, what you can't seem to do is answer a question honestly or directly.

Why do you presume I have to answer anything, or I might have the answer to anything? 

But if you do want to force me in my 'idiot-student' corner, then my short and direct answer is:

I consider Alain more than a teacher than you, since in all the words you have typed so far on this topic you haven't offered one constructive piece of advice. Furthermore, Michael (whom you profess to be tolerant towards), is okay with Alain contributing to this website. Maybe you should take up the issue with him directly, if you want to see how much your opinions are really worth on this site and to its more discerning members.

I am done here ... have a good one

Who's being childish now?

[Wayne Fox]

Even that is fundamentally wrong. The camera should be at the correct height for the best composition.

which a great many times the height doesn't matter.  I think we're taking alain a little too literally on this one, certainly from his work he well aware that there are times one must use extremes in camera heights to get the right angle.  But to be honest often it just doesn't matter much, so starting at a comfortable height makes sense.  This assumes you don't just look through your viewfinder to consider compositions.

[alainbriot]

I made changes to the 'tripod height' section.  I did mean 'extend to your full height' as was pointed out by Wayne.  I also added 'unless your composition requires a lower or higher tripod height' to prevent all possible misunderstandings.

This list is based on my experience, as was also pointed out, as well as on teaching thousands of students and seeing what works and does not work in the field (I have been photographing since 1981 and teaching workshops since 2001).

I do mention the importance of packing your camera bag (in part 1) and of using a padded camera bag (in Part 2).  I very well understand that packing your bag and using a camera bag is common sense, however you'd be surprised at how many photographers don't use a camera bag at all.

On recent workshops I have had students carry cameras in shopping bags or handbags, with lenses, bodies and other gear scraping and bouncing against each other.  I have had other students sling multiple camera bodies over their shoulders then put them down in the sand once at the location (we were photographing a sand dune area on that day).  And of course I have had students hike to a location only to find out that they left the gear they need in their car (hence the importance of packing your bag).

This list is aimed at helping less experienced photographers have a successful shoot and avoid damage to their equipment. If you have been photographing for a long time, you may not be the primary target audience for this essay. However, if you are getting started, the goal of this list is to save you money and aggravation by preventing damage to your equipment and by helping you avoid the most common mistakes (I made all the mistakes listed in the essay by the way and damaged a large amount of gear.  We all start at the beginning and we all have to learn.)

Thank you for your comments.  I just found this thread today otherwise I'd have made changes earlier.

Alain

[Publius]

thanks for the clarifications.

I had a good chuckle envisioning people carrying their gear in shopping bags. One thing I tell newbies is to not purchase a camera bag that looks like a camera bag, especially one that has a big Canon or Nikon logo on it. Thieves appreciate those that do mark their equipment.

I do not mind a few scratches on my equipment. I'm not taking pictures of my equipment. A scratched hammer can pound nails just as well as a pristine hammer.

I tend to pack my case full, so there is little bouncing. Movement for certain, but not much. Perhaps if I was using all plastic gear, I might think otherwise.

A week ago, I was on a group shoot, when rain storms hit. I was surprised by the number of people scrambling to cover their gear and stopped shooting. The equipment I was using was rated as weather resistant, so I didn't mind getting it a little wet.

[alainbriot]

There's a wide range of knowledge and experience levels in photography, from beginner to seasoned professional. As a professional I consider cameras and camera gear tools.  However there's a wide diversity of tools out there.   You don't carry a woodworking chisel the way you carry a framing hammer. It's preferable, in my opinion, to start on the careful side until you find out how much abuse a tool can get.  There's fewer opportunities for damage that way.  

Damaging your camera, lenses, etc. when you are just starting photography can be traumatizing, especially if you don't have the funds to replace it.  That's why I bend on the 'more careful' side rather than on the 'cameras can take all sorts of abuse' side. I know the limits because I damaged, broke or otherwise destroyed a wide variety of expensive gear.  I'm trying to prevent others from going through the same traumatic experience. There's no reason to attend the school of hard knock if you can avoid it. This essay is intended to provide a pass.  Of course, if you already got a pass either through personal experience or study, you may not be the intended audience.

[ced]

Alain a bit late but better late than never.  Any advice to a novice and even some none novices are welcome I am sure unless they think themselves above needing that kind of info (but then they can give it a skip without being nasty about it) some people are so excited when arriving at their chosen site and yes some forget the very gear that they undertook the very outing to use it on,  back at their base.
Yes and carrying uncovered lenses etc. and gear chaffing against each other causes terrible damage and so that advice will save them some hard earned cash.
Well done and keep giving students such good info!  You will be remembered for your kindness.