Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Camera Fatigue  (Read 13638 times)

theguywitha645d

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 970
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #20 on: March 21, 2012, 11:53:23 am »

Holgas and Cell Phones, that is where it is at...
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #21 on: March 21, 2012, 12:01:40 pm »

You think film photography was user friendly ? or easy and simple to learn ? Take off those rose tinted glasses and be objective.
Rob you often go on about how difficult it is for modern photographers to make a living now, just remember that one of the key reasons why photography was a well paid profession then was because it wasn't easy or simple.




Yes, I repeat: I do think it was easy.

Hell, even I was able to learn it more or less by myself, with the gloss put on over a few years in industry. Yes, I did have to go to night school too (not my choice), but left in disgust with the crap I was being sold by teachers for whom I could scrape no respect.

The reason it (the business) used to be great was that, post-WW2, the world’s economy went into overdrive. There was a huge volume of work available, more than could be easily met by the infrastructure that was already there; there was room for expansion, and boy, did it expand after a few golden years! Post Blow Up, every goddamn guy who’d heard of the Shrimp or Vogue suddenly became infatuated with the idea of holding a camera and watching girls peel. Right, in your well-paid dreams, perhaps, but in your wedding and passport studio, possibly not. All at once, there was far more supply than demand and the market ruled, even then. This growth-cum-gradual financial decline came about decades prior to digital, I might add. It had nothing to do with the job being difficult or not; it was all about supply and demand, as I said.

The other, economy-related problem that came along, was the change in the stock industry, that imaginary 'pension' we were all building up. Poor investment, it turned out - not for widows, orphans or photographers!

“ 'Personally I think digital moves us more into paying attention to the technical as compared to the art of photography.'

What bunk people tell themselves. Fortunately some of us are old enough and wise enough to know better.“

Yep, and I’m probably a hell of a lot older than you, and remember it all very well indeed. And I confirm that I did and do indeed see it that way, that film photography was all about photography and digi is far more techno-centric in its appeal to the general public; as I have often suggested, it attracts a different mindset.

Rob C




Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #22 on: March 21, 2012, 12:05:13 pm »

With the benefit of hindsight, if film was the only game in town, I simply wouldn't bother playing.




That astounds me; and you a Hasselblad Master at that!

It must be the pills - I know what they can do to a guy.

;-)

Rob C

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2012, 12:08:57 pm »

Holgas and Cell Phones, that is where it is at...




You may not be far wrong, joshing or not.

Here are my digital bookends; they seldom do much - the cellphone gets more air.

Rob C
« Last Edit: March 21, 2012, 12:12:08 pm by Rob C »
Logged

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3183
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #24 on: March 21, 2012, 02:39:09 pm »

Yes, I repeat: I do think it was easy.
Hell, even I was able to learn it more or less by myself,
I can only assume you've forgotten how difficult film based photography was when you started (and probably didn't have much experience of dealing with beginners to it to realise how tricky it was(is)).
Then you go on to imply that never really expected to be able to learn it by yourself which in turn implies you thought it difficult at the time anyway.

Now people expect all sorts of technology to be easy, including photography, and by and large it usually is. It's now easier to get acceptable results without needing any detailed knowledge than it's ever been before. Squeezing the absolute quality out of photographic systems, wet or dry, is and always was, the preserve of those enthusiastic enough to fully engage with the process.
Quote
And I confirm that I did and do indeed see it that way, that film photography was all about photography and digi is far more techno-centric in its appeal to the general public;
Photography has always had it's share of people fascinated and obsessed by the technicalities of the technology and has sold it's products on the merits of their specifications, nothing's really changed.
Back before the digital revolution they bought camera magazines, bought books, went to camera club meetings and expected their local camera shop to be experts that could answer all their problems.
Time has moved on; now they read the internet and don't have a local camera shop. What they do have is forums like this where they can obsess or seek help on their their hobby/passion/business at any time of the day or night with similarly minded people around the world. Look around and you'll find people obsessing about wet processes in huge detail, there's just far fewer of them than the digital mass market.

Which gets back to the OP's point; he's bored of that sort of continual discussion about the latest models. Sorry, but that's just what goes happens in forums like this. If you want something different there are other sites to follow.
Logged

ACH DIGITAL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 612
    • http://www.achdigital.com
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #25 on: March 21, 2012, 03:05:43 pm »

I never get enough from Photography. It's my work, my hobbie, my passion.. I read a lot at the forums, I read books related to idea, concept, psychology, all to learn more and to make my photography better.
In my spare time I play with cameras and lenses, to learn more about them. I change cameras every now and then.. I like digital and new technologies. I like software and computers..
In the old film days I used to do the same, shoot through the window and check different lenses and stuff.
Since digital came out, I fill I'm more interested in color and quality because is more palpable, it's at your hands.
Alongside that, there's my loved family and time for them. How about that  :D
« Last Edit: March 21, 2012, 03:08:26 pm by ACH DIGITAL »
Logged
Antonio Chagin
www.achdigital.com

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #26 on: March 21, 2012, 05:16:18 pm »

I can only assume you've forgotten how difficult film based photography was when you started (and probably didn't have much experience of dealing with beginners to it to realise how tricky it was(is)).
Then you go on to imply that never really expected to be able to learn it by yourself which in turn implies you thought it difficult at the time anyway.



This is a strange reasoning/interpretation/argument you pose.

On the contrary, I've implied over and over that I did NOT find it difficult; that I DID more or less teach myself; that the 'expert' bit came from working at the thing full-time. I'm not sure why you infer as you do.

As for dealing with beginners, wasn't I exactly that? Why would I want to mess with other beginners, I'm not interested and never was interested in teaching. No, I didn't ever feel it difficult; I felt and found it fascinating, and that removed any fear of it or of my abity to do it. It's the way you pick up anything: you just do it. I'd never shot a fashion shot prior to the day I opened my studio; I never, for a moment, felt it was beyond me or difficult. On the contrary, I believed it was what I'd been born to do. And as it turned out, I was right. Or at least, for as long as the clothing industry survived in my area.

Maybe you should re-read my posts without the colour of preconceptions?

Rob C

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3183
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #27 on: March 21, 2012, 05:58:11 pm »

As for dealing with beginners, wasn't I exactly that? Why would I want to mess with other beginners,
You're making a fundamental error in assessing the difficulty of the technology here.
"I was a beginner once, I didn't find it difficult" you've equated to "It's easy"
It may have been easy for you, you're presumably the sort of person that finds technical subjects accessible, logical, understands them easily and has sufficient dexterity and mechanical sympathy to learn them with relative ease. Not everyone's brains work that way.

Not having 'messed with other beginners' you're demonstrating that you've little experience of understanding how other people might find the technical challenge of learning photographic practice. You can be assured that the vast majority of people found the technical challenges of photography difficult, not only the intellectual challenge of understanding the basics of exposure, focusing etc, but sometimes even the manual dexterity needed of loading a film was beyond a lot of folk.
The other side of not regularly dealing with novices is that is too easy to forget how difficult tasks were when you first attempted them.





Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #28 on: March 21, 2012, 08:50:32 pm »

Rob, I agree with Rhossydd, it's much easier for your average clueless technophobe to get half decent results from modern cameras than it ever was with film.
And very, very importantly you get instant feedback if you screw up.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2012, 08:52:05 pm »

I do have camera fatigue.
Physically tired from hauling my Canon DSLR and L lenses around.
Yup, modern DSLRs/lenses are bulky and heavy things in comparison to my old film gear.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17835
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #30 on: March 21, 2012, 09:15:50 pm »

Nope ... quite the contrary.

36MP DSLRs?  Mirrorless wunderkids?  Precisely machined tech cameras with removable 180MP backs?

Are you kidding?  This is the Golden Age ...   

If you are a (rich) camera collector (a.k.a. hipster). If you are a photographer, any age is golden.

scooby70

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 489
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #31 on: March 21, 2012, 10:21:12 pm »

Ref digital v film... I resisted going digital but over a period of weeks I just snapped and went digital and the deciding factor for me was that the quality of the shots I was getting back from the processor nosedived. I assume they'd cut costs but whatever the reason that nose dive in quality drove me to digital and I'm now in control of my image quality (I never attempted to process film at home.)

Digital has massive advantages, IMVHO. Changing the ISO from shot to shot and being able to review shots instantly spring to mind as being two massive plus points.

Fatigue... I've just sold a 20D after using it for 7 years and I now have a 5D as my only SLR. If it wasn't for the new small form cameras I doubt I'd be buying any new gear. I have MFT and very rarely used compacts and I would like to sell my GF1 as I don't like shooting without a VF and perhaps get something a little better than my G1.
Logged

aboudd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
    • Aboud Dweck - A Body of Work
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #32 on: March 22, 2012, 06:37:44 am »

With the amount of gear being churned on all of the buy/sell forums it does not seem like camera fatigue exists. For me it is more like wallet fatigue.

As to the simplicity of film, really? I was one of those guys working at Ritz Camera in the late 60s teaching customers how to load film, what film to choose, etc. Later, as a pro shooting architecture I would have to deal with color balance of different light sources. That meant putting gels on windows, filters on lenses or multiple exposures with different light sources on 4X5 sheet film. This is much easier dealt with digitally. What was that about the simplicity of film?

Photography like every other art form evolves with technology. It is neither good or bad, it just is and even a geezer like myself can adapt and make good use of it.

Logged
A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer in your pants.
www.dweckgallery.com

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
    • Tree Without a Bird
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #33 on: March 22, 2012, 08:45:08 am »

I can only assume you've forgotten how difficult film based photography was when you started (and probably didn't have much experience of dealing with beginners to it to realise how tricky it was(is)).
Then you go on to imply that never really expected to be able to learn it by yourself which in turn implies you thought it difficult at the time anyway.

Now people expect all sorts of technology to be easy, including photography, and by and large it usually is. It's now easier to get acceptable results without needing any detailed knowledge than it's ever been before. Squeezing the absolute quality out of photographic systems, wet or dry, is and always was, the preserve of those enthusiastic enough to fully engage with the process.Photography has always had it's share of people fascinated and obsessed by the technicalities of the technology and has sold it's products on the merits of their specifications, nothing's really changed.
Back before the digital revolution they bought camera magazines, bought books, went to camera club meetings and expected their local camera shop to be experts that could answer all their problems.
Time has moved on; now they read the internet and don't have a local camera shop. What they do have is forums like this where they can obsess or seek help on their their hobby/passion/business at any time of the day or night with similarly minded people around the world. Look around and you'll find people obsessing about wet processes in huge detail, there's just far fewer of them than the digital mass market.

Which gets back to the OP's point; he's bored of that sort of continual discussion about the latest models. Sorry, but that's just what goes happens in forums like this. If you want something different there are other sites to follow.

I think if you know the basics the cameras are easier to use with film. Because digital is so adaptable it's easy to overlook a setting or knock a switch from say AF to MF. Something like a Hasselblad you loaded the film set your meter then adjusted exposure/focus as required and you expected to do it for each shot, you constantly checked.
I was loading cameras with film from about age 8, so it can't of been that difficult, a lot easier than learning a new TV recorder.
I'm sure the public find a digital P&S easier than film, they just set and go.
 I would not want to explain jpg quality settings, sensor size advantage or raw v jpg to them, how to use the software for editing, sending the files to get printed, why everything taken at night has coloured blobs on, which card to buy, why less megapixels might be better for them, why they need to backup treasured files to another HD. That would make explaining how a film fits a camera quite simple.
Posting a Kodachrome to Box 14 Hemel Hempstead, I thought quite easy.

Kevin.

Kevin.
Logged
Kevin.

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3938
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #34 on: March 22, 2012, 10:17:55 am »

I think if you know the basics the cameras are easier to use with film. Because digital is so adaptable it's easy to overlook a setting or knock a switch from say AF to MF. Something like a Hasselblad you loaded the film set your meter then adjusted exposure/focus as required and you expected to do it for each shot, you constantly checked.
I was loading cameras with film from about age 8, so it can't of been that difficult, a lot easier than learning a new TV recorder.
I'm sure the public find a digital P&S easier than film, they just set and go.
 I would not want to explain jpg quality settings, sensor size advantage or raw v jpg to them, how to use the software for editing, sending the files to get printed, why everything taken at night has coloured blobs on, which card to buy, why less megapixels might be better for them, why they need to backup treasured files to another HD. That would make explaining how a film fits a camera quite simple.

So true. I hardly ever had out of focus shots till I started using auto-focus cameras. Nowadays, I am forever discovering that the WB should be reset because I walked into shade, oops got to remove the compensation now too, what ISO am I using, is it on auto?, what? forgot to set back to single not continuous shutter, etc.

I still occasionally reach up to twist the aperture ring, how lame is that?

We gained a lot, but it means learning what all those user-friendly "universal" icons in the viewfinder mean. I spend so much time worrying about these things that I get many more out-of-horizon shots than I used to, mainly because I think I am not looking at the scene. If I had the camera in my hand every day, I am sure I would get better at managing all the variables, you just instinctively learn to. In the old days, you had other stuff to worry about, but I find myself mentally busier now at the time of picture-taking. New paradigm.
Logged
--
Robert

telyt

  • Guest
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #35 on: March 22, 2012, 11:33:58 am »

Because digital is so adaptable it's easy to overlook a setting or knock a switch from say AF to MF.

An AF/MF switch has nothing to do with digital.  Cameras had this switch long before digital.  Feature-itis is the problem, not the capture medium.

Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Added options, and the option of ignoring them
« Reply #36 on: March 22, 2012, 12:10:31 pm »

Nowadays, I am forever discovering that the WB should be reset because I walked into shade, ...
With so many of these new options, there are also simple options of ignoring them with a "good old days mode" if and when that is what you want. On the example of WB, the film approach was to choose a "WB setting" by choosing a film (a choice of two, daylight or tungsten), with not much more to be done unless you fiddle with color correction filters. With digital, you can likewise set a color temperature, turn off auto WB, and be back in the good old days ... with the difference that if you record raw or raw+JPEG, you have the option of changing your mind later.

About the only new feature that I have seen causing anything to be lost is one that predates digital: AF, where support for manual focus has been mostly lost both in lens design and in viewfinders. Even then, I see a technological fix:
- the much-maligned focus-by-wire, which allows variable speed so that slow focus ring movements give slow, fine focus adjustments
- zoomable electronic viewfinder images, preferably with zoomed view around the AF point but with the full view around the edges of the frame. This allows precise MF on an off-center point without repointing the camera, so a clear win over film cameras.
Logged

scooby70

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 489
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #37 on: March 22, 2012, 12:34:36 pm »

For all it's faults and allowing for the few instances when manual focus is better I thought that everyone had accepted that AF was in most situations faster and better than manual? I thought that this had been pretty much proved decades ago.

I'm sure that if camera makers cared to they could make even fly by wire systems much more manual friendly and more zone and infinity shooting friendly too but for most people most of the time I'm still of the opinion that AF is more accurate, quicker and more reliable.
Logged

telyt

  • Guest
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #38 on: March 22, 2012, 12:38:46 pm »

For all it's faults and allowing for the few instances when manual focus is better I thought that everyone had accepted that AF was in most situations faster and better than manual? I thought that this had been pretty much proved decades ago.

AF's acceptance is not universal.  There are many for whom "pretty good focus, at a limited number of points, really quick" isn't good enough.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17835
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Camera Fatigue
« Reply #39 on: March 22, 2012, 01:06:13 pm »

On the subject of easiness, digital is similar to English: many people speak it, few well.
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up