Why spend all the money we do on this high-tech equipment and not take advantage of it's capabilities. I could have bought an old 1960's twin lens reflex for a lot less than my Nikon D7000. Then I'd HAVE to shoot manual...
Why spend all the money we do on this high-tech equipment and not take advantage of it's capabilities. I could have bought an old 1960's twin lens reflex for a lot less than my Nikon D7000. Then I'd HAVE to shoot manual...
AndyT wrote:
I had a specific photo in mind while at the beach. It was sunny, early afternoon, and I wanted more of a sunset photo. Not wanting to wait around several hours. I switched over to manual, intentionally underexposed several stops and got the photo shown below. The regular metering in the camera, whether aperture priority, shutter priorty, or programmed point and shoot, all wouldve given me a bright sunny afternoon with boats sitting in the water.
I hear you and I'm no stranger to that idea, just to let you feel understood. Here's a shot I got in August 1967 at about 3:30 in the afternoon. While it fools the eye for a second, the mind then takes over and it is apparent that it is an attempt to trick the eye since the sun is still high in the sky everyone will soon realize that it is, in reality, broad daylight. It works for a few seconds and forever makes an appealing scene. While that technique is nice to know, I don't think it is dependent on fully knowing and understanding how to shoot in manual. It's just one small facet of why. You certainly can do that trick without understanding manual but if you do understand manual you may be able to do it more convincingly. Thank you.
BHC
Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
gessman wrote:
You know, I denied earlier being upset about anything but I forgot about something that happened earlier on Saturday. All day long there were people making comments on this thread, talking about how their pictures were much better 'cause they shot in manual mode. Now, I've seen some pretty awesome images on UHH and I thought I'd like to see some of those images the were perceptibly better than maybe anything I've ever seen up to now. I wanted to know what a really, truly wonderful picture would look like. Do you have any idea what I found when I went to people's profiles to see their images? I found that almost none of the folks in here who were posting most and passing out all the advice about how to do it, had actually started a thread displaying any of their images.
First thing came to mind was why none of these folks had posted any of these superior images for us to see, you know, to sort of 'walk the walk' so to speak. I, for one, think it would be a good idea if we could see some of those great images that are superior because they were shot in manual. After all, a picture is worth a thousand words... Don't you think that if we're going to follow advice, we deserve to know where it may take us? I'd like to call on those who can 'walk the walk' to do so.
I'll tell you one thing, I sure wasn't impressed with a lot of what some of you were saying on this thread. I thought to myself, 'I sure would hate to not know anything about this stuff and be trying to learn with all this jumbled up mess that took place in this thread,' what with the experts arguing among themselves, etc...
You know, I denied earlier being upset about anyth... (
show quote)
In spite of what you may think of me, I truly am interested in seeing some your shots, not because I want to critize you, but because I never cease to learn from the people here. You and I may never be the best of friends, but based on what I've read, I'll bet you're one heck of a photographer.
roulitick wrote:
Why spend all the money we do on this high-tech equipment and not take advantage of it's capabilities. I could have bought an old 1960's twin lens reflex for a lot less than my Nikon D7000. Then I'd HAVE to shoot manual...
I hear you. I've got a collection of about 150 old cameras spanning dates from 1800s 'til today. I can go down in my basement and come up with way yonder more 'manual' than I want, spy cameras, 8mm, 16mm, 35mm, 2 1/4 Yashica Mat, Rolleiflex, 6x7's/6x9 Zeiss Ikon, Russian stuff, Calumet and Sinar 4x5's, 5x7 field cameras... My first 35mm was a Minolta Hi-Matic S, which I still have. I have Canon ftb, AE-1, AT-1, A-1, F-1, A2E, Nikon EM, F, F2, F4, etc. I have an Epson PC digital, and several other early ones. It doesn't stop. I love being able at age 75 to chase an elk herd and get a shot like the ones below, knowing I have aperture preferred and it's already set for DOF and everything else is going to be done for me so I don't have to fumble with buttons and miss the shot. I'm not talking creative or art here. I don't even understand that stuff.
I don't want manual and don't need manual. If I ever do again, I know where it is. It hasn't changed one little bit since I used it out of necessity. I'm not hung up back there with anything, cars, hairstyles, music, old re-run movies, nothing. My suggestion is that we take advantage of our modern conveniences, learning how to blend them with the best of the past and move on. I could have gotten the same elk shot in the 1960's, with a zoom lens, maybe even the '50's with my Argus C-3 with one shot but it's more fun now that I'm an old geezer and still doing it, with equipment that doesn't cause me to get unsafely close to unfriendly critters. I'm not boasting here folks but I just don't shoot stuff that I can safely do at my age with an all manual Leica and a 35mm f2, no offense to anyone. We each have to leave it up to the other person to use their camera as they choose and avoid being overly judgmental.
I'm sure that if anyone is left reading this thread and they read this they'll better understand why I advocate using what I do to shoot what I shoot. It has to be taken into account that we all do not use our cameras for the same reasons so they cannot all be used in the same way and it's not very intelligent of us to try to condemn each other and argue about who's using their camera better by using certain modes. It's just not cool folks. You use your camera as you choose making art stuff and I'll use mine the way I want to shooting animals. Neither is superior to the other. You do what you need to do to get what you want to get and I'll do the same - no contest.
Jumping elk in Rocky Mountain National Park
A grazing elk in Estes Park, CO
A hunting fox in Roxborough State Park, CO
Semi-pro football team my son did coach, Mile Hi Grizzlies in Denver
Bill41 wrote:
gessman wrote:
You know, I denied earlier being upset about anything but I forgot about something that happened earlier on Saturday. All day long there were people making comments on this thread, talking about how their pictures were much better 'cause they shot in manual mode. Now, I've seen some pretty awesome images on UHH and I thought I'd like to see some of those images the were perceptibly better than maybe anything I've ever seen up to now. I wanted to know what a really, truly wonderful picture would look like. Do you have any idea what I found when I went to people's profiles to see their images? I found that almost none of the folks in here who were posting most and passing out all the advice about how to do it, had actually started a thread displaying any of their images.
First thing came to mind was why none of these folks had posted any of these superior images for us to see, you know, to sort of 'walk the walk' so to speak. I, for one, think it would be a good idea if we could see some of those great images that are superior because they were shot in manual. After all, a picture is worth a thousand words... Don't you think that if we're going to follow advice, we deserve to know where it may take us? I'd like to call on those who can 'walk the walk' to do so.
I'll tell you one thing, I sure wasn't impressed with a lot of what some of you were saying on this thread. I thought to myself, 'I sure would hate to not know anything about this stuff and be trying to learn with all this jumbled up mess that took place in this thread,' what with the experts arguing among themselves, etc...
You know, I denied earlier being upset about anyth... (
show quote)
In spite of what you may think of me, I truly am interested in seeing some your shots, not because I want to critize you, but because I never cease to learn from the people here. You and I may never be the best of friends, but based on what I've read, I'll bet you're one heck of a photographer.
quote=gessman You know, I denied earlier being up... (
show quote)
Well Bill, I have no preconceived notions about you and it would be utterly stupid of me to have developed any likes or dislikes about you given that I have not even met you. Everybody does start off with a 100 points with me and it stays that way unless I have reason to subtract points. I will admit that you're down to about 80 points already just since last night, but you've still got a long way to go. I was just hassling you last night. I may have had one too many glasses of wine at dinner. We'd probably get along fine. I'm a pretty laid back ol' guy who doesn't get excited about very much. As for my photography, it's sure open to criticism mainly because I'm not much of a perfectionist. If you can tell or make a good guess of what I meant to show you, I'm usually pretty happy. It's a thrill for me when I get a shot that's better than most of my other ones but what really pleases me is just to be able to be out doing it. If I knuckled down, I could probably do a lot better but I've never really liked knuckling down. I'm more of a skimmer with not enough time to spend in one spot.
sinatraman
Loc: Vero Beach Florida, Earth,alpha quaudrant
Hey gessman #69 on the grizzlies looks alot like ol william "the refrigerator" perry of the chicago bears!!
sinatraman wrote:
Hey gessman #69 on the grizzlies looks alot like ol william "the refrigerator" perry of the chicago bears!!
That's the first thing I thought of too.
Swamp Gator wrote:
sinatraman wrote:
Hey gessman #69 on the grizzlies looks alot like ol william "the refrigerator" perry of the chicago bears!!
That's the first thing I thought of too.
Refrigerator minus 6" plus 60#.
[quote=professorwheeze]
Wabbit wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
This may sound like a silly response, but... Why Not?
I wouldn't call it silly but I would certainly agree if you were to say that it doesn't seem to be a very useful response in light of the stated purpose of this thread. I was trying to enlist useful comments from experienced photographers for the benefit of those who are less experienced regarding why it is important for them to learn and know how to shoot in 'M' mode and when it is most appropriate to do so.
Perhaps you would care to list some of the major reasons you can think of for "Why Not" bearing in mind that many if not most of the inexperienced among us here do not know how or why.
quote=Bill41 This may sound like a silly response... (
show quote)
My previous answer to your earlier response was written in haste and with regret that I had not fulfilled your expectations as to the proper content of a response. So, in answer to your remarks, please allow me to expand on my original response of "Why Not?".....
1. Why Not? Well, it's my camera, my lens, my card and I'll use them any way I damn well please.
2. Why Not? I also started taking photographs long before cameras incorporated built-in exposure meters, and I find it wise to not let myself forget the "old ways," for the same reason that I find it wise to get periodic practice with a manual transmission; you'll never know when you need it.
3. Why Not? Meters can be fooled by various lighting situations. It's comforting to know that I don't need to consult the manual or take a dozen experimental photographs instead of merely opening or closing my aperture a stop or two or resetting my shutter speed. Adjust my ISO? Where in pre-meter days did you ever consider that (unless you intended to push or pull the whole roll of film)?
4. Why Not? Because I deliberately like to incorporate variables into my photographs, just as I did when I wanted a "thin" negative to highlight certain atmospheric conditions or achieve special effects.
5. Why Not? Because IT IS FUN!
I still use Auto, AP, SP, yes, and even Program if it suits me. But I often use Manual just because I want to, and given the parameters of this forum and the "rules" of photography, that's all the reason I need and that's all that's really any of your business.
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 This may sound like a... (
show quote)
Why Bill, I wish you'd tell me how you really feel. LOL.
quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote=Bill41 This ma... (
show quote)
As I recall, you asked. Is there something wrong with my taking the time to answer your question? If you really didn't want a response, why did you ask for one?
Wabbit, you and Daffy may be right!
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote... (
show quote)
Well Bill, I just didn't expect you to act so immature. You sounded like you were about 6 years old. "Nanana boo boo. It's my beeswax and none of yours." I haven't heard that kind of stuff since grade school. Geez man. I've often thought we could be friends. Guess not. That sure disappoints me.
quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=... (
show quote)
Hey Doc ..... get a tight grip ..... prepare yourself to be disappointed a second time
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote... (
show quote)
Hey Rabbit why don't you try to be civil. The initial question by Gessman was an intelligent one. After all there are so many at this forum who KNOW EVERYTHING like you might. However, for the[ hundred of new photographers without the level of intelligence you have or skill level, are hearing "Shoot in MANUAL". For them, the initial question and the answers are appropriate.
There were indeed some appropriate responses. However, I find that you and some others were DESPEKABLE WABBIT. I am sure that many new UHH members are dismayed and will divert to other sources (other foroums). Pat yourself on your back but please CRAWL INTO YOUR BUNNY HOLE and do it out-of-sight.
You will probably have fun with my comments but guess what wabbit. I will not be looking to weading your wesponses!
Now, please have yourself a wunerful day! The anger management class begins on next Monday. 1245 members would like you to enroll in the class.
Bye. Bye.[/quote]
Hey Doc ..... the initial question was poorly written ..... so you're the spokesman for a group .... ha,ha,ha,ha ..... Shhhhhhhh! I'm about to defy you .....
[quote=Wabbit]
professorwheeze wrote:
Wabbit wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
This may sound like a silly response, but... Why Not?
I wouldn't call it silly but I would certainly agree if you were to say that it doesn't seem to be a very useful response in light of the stated purpose of this thread. I was trying to enlist useful comments from experienced photographers for the benefit of those who are less experienced regarding why it is important for them to learn and know how to shoot in 'M' mode and when it is most appropriate to do so.
Perhaps you would care to list some of the major reasons you can think of for "Why Not" bearing in mind that many if not most of the inexperienced among us here do not know how or why.
quote=Bill41 This may sound like a silly response... (
show quote)
My previous answer to your earlier response was written in haste and with regret that I had not fulfilled your expectations as to the proper content of a response. So, in answer to your remarks, please allow me to expand on my original response of "Why Not?".....
1. Why Not? Well, it's my camera, my lens, my card and I'll use them any way I damn well please.
2. Why Not? I also started taking photographs long before cameras incorporated built-in exposure meters, and I find it wise to not let myself forget the "old ways," for the same reason that I find it wise to get periodic practice with a manual transmission; you'll never know when you need it.
3. Why Not? Meters can be fooled by various lighting situations. It's comforting to know that I don't need to consult the manual or take a dozen experimental photographs instead of merely opening or closing my aperture a stop or two or resetting my shutter speed. Adjust my ISO? Where in pre-meter days did you ever consider that (unless you intended to push or pull the whole roll of film)?
4. Why Not? Because I deliberately like to incorporate variables into my photographs, just as I did when I wanted a "thin" negative to highlight certain atmospheric conditions or achieve special effects.
5. Why Not? Because IT IS FUN!
I still use Auto, AP, SP, yes, and even Program if it suits me. But I often use Manual just because I want to, and given the parameters of this forum and the "rules" of photography, that's all the reason I need and that's all that's really any of your business.
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 This may sound like a... (
show quote)
Why Bill, I wish you'd tell me how you really feel. LOL.
quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote=Bill41 This ma... (
show quote)
As I recall, you asked. Is there something wrong with my taking the time to answer your question? If you really didn't want a response, why did you ask for one?
Wabbit, you and Daffy may be right!
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote... (
show quote)
Well Bill, I just didn't expect you to act so immature. You sounded like you were about 6 years old. "Nanana boo boo. It's my beeswax and none of yours." I haven't heard that kind of stuff since grade school. Geez man. I've often thought we could be friends. Guess not. That sure disappoints me.
quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=... (
show quote)
Hey Doc ..... get a tight grip ..... prepare yourself to be disappointed a second time
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote... (
show quote)
Hey Rabbit why don't you try to be civil. The initial question by Gessman was an intelligent one. After all there are so many at this forum who KNOW EVERYTHING like you might. However, for the[ hundred of new photographers without the level of intelligence you have or skill level, are hearing "Shoot in MANUAL". For them, the initial question and the answers are appropriate.
There were indeed some appropriate responses. However, I find that you and some others were DESPEKABLE WABBIT. I am sure that many new UHH members are dismayed and will divert to other sources (other foroums). Pat yourself on your back but please CRAWL INTO YOUR BUNNY HOLE and do it out-of-sight.
You will probably have fun with my comments but guess what wabbit. I will not be looking to weading your wesponses!
Now, please have yourself a wunerful day! The anger management class begins on next Monday. 1245 members would like you to enroll in the class.
Bye. Bye.[/quote]
Hey Doc ..... the initial question was poorly written ..... so you're the spokesman for a group .... ha,ha,ha,ha ..... Shhhhhhhh! I'm about to defy you .....
quote=Wabbit quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=... (
show quote)
Please stop with the Looney Tunes already. It's annoying and so is the grade school behavior. How about posting some decent photos and not cartoons that someone else did? Thanks
C'mon Wabbit wends a bit of wevity to an otherwise wasckaly subject.
PNagy
Loc: Missouri City, Texas
[quote=Wabbit]
professorwheeze wrote:
Wabbit wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
gessman wrote:
Bill41 wrote:
This may sound like a silly response, but... Why Not?
I wouldn't call it silly but I would certainly agree if you were to say that it doesn't seem to be a very useful response in light of the stated purpose of this thread. I was trying to enlist useful comments from experienced photographers for the benefit of those who are less experienced regarding why it is important for them to learn and know how to shoot in 'M' mode and when it is most appropriate to do so.
Perhaps you would care to list some of the major reasons you can think of for "Why Not" bearing in mind that many if not most of the inexperienced among us here do not know how or why.
quote=Bill41 This may sound like a silly response... (
show quote)
My previous answer to your earlier response was written in haste and with regret that I had not fulfilled your expectations as to the proper content of a response. So, in answer to your remarks, please allow me to expand on my original response of "Why Not?".....
1. Why Not? Well, it's my camera, my lens, my card and I'll use them any way I damn well please.
2. Why Not? I also started taking photographs long before cameras incorporated built-in exposure meters, and I find it wise to not let myself forget the "old ways," for the same reason that I find it wise to get periodic practice with a manual transmission; you'll never know when you need it.
3. Why Not? Meters can be fooled by various lighting situations. It's comforting to know that I don't need to consult the manual or take a dozen experimental photographs instead of merely opening or closing my aperture a stop or two or resetting my shutter speed. Adjust my ISO? Where in pre-meter days did you ever consider that (unless you intended to push or pull the whole roll of film)?
4. Why Not? Because I deliberately like to incorporate variables into my photographs, just as I did when I wanted a "thin" negative to highlight certain atmospheric conditions or achieve special effects.
5. Why Not? Because IT IS FUN!
I still use Auto, AP, SP, yes, and even Program if it suits me. But I often use Manual just because I want to, and given the parameters of this forum and the "rules" of photography, that's all the reason I need and that's all that's really any of your business.
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 This may sound like a... (
show quote)
Why Bill, I wish you'd tell me how you really feel. LOL.
quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote=Bill41 This ma... (
show quote)
As I recall, you asked. Is there something wrong with my taking the time to answer your question? If you really didn't want a response, why did you ask for one?
Wabbit, you and Daffy may be right!
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote... (
show quote)
Well Bill, I just didn't expect you to act so immature. You sounded like you were about 6 years old. "Nanana boo boo. It's my beeswax and none of yours." I haven't heard that kind of stuff since grade school. Geez man. I've often thought we could be friends. Guess not. That sure disappoints me.
quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=... (
show quote)
Hey Doc ..... get a tight grip ..... prepare yourself to be disappointed a second time
quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=gessman quote... (
show quote)
Hey Rabbit why don't you try to be civil. The initial question by Gessman was an intelligent one. After all there are so many at this forum who KNOW EVERYTHING like you might. However, for the[ hundred of new photographers without the level of intelligence you have or skill level, are hearing "Shoot in MANUAL". For them, the initial question and the answers are appropriate.
There were indeed some appropriate responses. However, I find that you and some others were DESPEKABLE WABBIT. I am sure that many new UHH members are dismayed and will divert to other sources (other foroums). Pat yourself on your back but please CRAWL INTO YOUR BUNNY HOLE and do it out-of-sight.
You will probably have fun with my comments but guess what wabbit. I will not be looking to weading your wesponses!
Now, please have yourself a wunerful day! The anger management class begins on next Monday. 1245 members would like you to enroll in the class.
Bye. Bye.[/quote]
Hey Doc ..... the initial question was poorly written ..... so you're the spokesman for a group .... ha,ha,ha,ha ..... Shhhhhhhh! I'm about to defy you .....
quote=Wabbit quote=gessman quote=Bill41 quote=... (
show quote)
I think we have already seen the invention that outsmarted the Wabbit, and more than once.
gessman wrote:
I'm sure that if anyone is left reading this thread and they read this they'll better understand why I advocate using what I do to shoot what I shoot. It has to be taken into account that we all do not use our cameras for the same reasons so they cannot all be used in the same way and it's not very intelligent of us to try to condemn each other and argue about who's using their camera better by using certain modes. It's just not cool folks. You use your camera as you choose making art stuff and I'll use mine the way I want to shooting animals. Neither is superior to the other. You do what you need to do to get what you want to get and I'll do the same - no contest.
br br br I'm sure that if anyone is left readin... (
show quote)
I am still reading but you could have guessed that. I enjoy learning from you so I have been watching from the beginning.
I know you like examples and so I set up the camera and shot using 3 different modes so that the difference (for my camera anyway) could be seen between the auto and manual modes.
After your comment here, I almost decided not to post my results but I am going to anyway. I just shot with what was on the camera. I will admit that manual took me 2 tries to get right so if the cat woke up, I would have missed it. No flash (cannot wake the cat) was used.
If you feel I messed up, please do tell and I will set it up again.
Aperture Priority: f2, 1/3 sec, ISO 100
Full Auto no flash: f1.8, 1/8 sec, ISO 400
Manual: f1.8, 1/10 sec ISO 100
WildBill wrote:
gessman wrote:
I'm sure that if anyone is left reading this thread and they read this they'll better understand why I advocate using what I do to shoot what I shoot. It has to be taken into account that we all do not use our cameras for the same reasons so they cannot all be used in the same way and it's not very intelligent of us to try to condemn each other and argue about who's using their camera better by using certain modes. It's just not cool folks. You use your camera as you choose making art stuff and I'll use mine the way I want to shooting animals. Neither is superior to the other. You do what you need to do to get what you want to get and I'll do the same - no contest.
br br br I'm sure that if anyone is left readin... (
show quote)
I am still reading but you could have guessed that. I enjoy learning from you so I have been watching from the beginning.
I know you like examples and so I set up the camera and shot using 3 different modes so that the difference (for my camera anyway) could be seen between the auto and manual modes.
After your comment here, I almost decided not to post my results but I am going to anyway. I just shot with what was on the camera. I will admit that manual took me 2 tries to get right so if the cat woke up, I would have missed it. No flash (cannot wake the cat) was used.
If you feel I messed up, please do tell and I will set it up again.
quote=gessman br br br I'm sure that if anyone... (
show quote)
Personally, I like the center one the best where you used 400 ISO. I think it shows the most detail :P
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
