Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Am I simply an old "fart?"
Page <<first <prev 9 of 18 next> last>>
Aug 7, 2017 13:13:49   #
Ednsb Loc: Santa Barbara
 
Always been taught to get the image in the camera right. That hasn’t changed but what has is those images that I just couldn’t get right I might be able to in PP plus there are lots more methods for creativity than what we had in film. I used to think have a multiple image in my film cameras was cool. And if we are old school (not old farts)it seems like the new breed of photographers just shoot a ton of pictures then post them after pp them to death. A good example was all those horrible HDR over blown images we saw for a while. Couldn’t do that in camera with film but the idea certainly is great in landscape if done in moderation. I think your comment about art versus photography is right one. I can admire or distain both. It all depends on the image and my interpretation.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 13:16:23   #
bylinecl
 
Well put and very sage advice.
As an author/journalist, who uses a camera only incidentally and is new to digital, let me offer an additional analogy.
Most writers work in sequential "drafts." We start with an idea or concept of what we want to say, and put it on paper, or screen. Next, we go into the "editorial darkroom" and begin the process of editing, re-writing, evaluating and refining our text until the images we want to convey in language are sharp, clear and euphonic.
Yes, sometimes "first thought is best thought" and yes, on occasion we get it spot-on right at the first tap of our fingers to the keys. Just as sometimes a photographer captures the scene/image-in-question perfectly with the first snap of the shutter, and the resulting exposure requiring little more than developing and printing.
But the ordinary experience is that the sequence of editing, rewriting and refining, equates roughly to the processes of producing a print in photography, either traditional or digital.
In the event you can buy or from the library get access to the massive Thames & Hudson "Magnum Contact Sheets" book take a look at how some of the 20th and early 21st century's great photojournalists worked and selected. Of course, most of this book reflects the use of film, and only in the last pages are the images digital, however, the validity of process remains.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 13:18:57   #
speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho
 
toxdoc42 wrote:
I was taught to attempt to have all of my photos complete in the camera and to use my darkroom skills in to make good prints, but to depend on those skills to fix things I couldn't control in the camera. My classes all stressed that, and even limited my ability to use cropping. With digital, it appears that very often the dependence is the opposite. The trend seems to be to enhance the photographic image in post shooting. Often that changes what the actual vision of a scene was. This does make photography more like painting, but makes me wonder about all of the courses I took in the past.
I was taught to attempt to have all of my photos c... (show quote)

Shooting in raw requires pp work, just as shooting with film requires developing it. How far one wants to go beyond that is entirely up to each individual. It sure is a heck of a lot easier today to put some artistic touches to ones photograph in pp, compared to what it has been in the past. That does not at all put the old teaching to question, to get as much as possible right in camera in the first place, it just adds more ease to the process of taking things to another level, and is in MHO very welcome!

Reply
 
 
Aug 7, 2017 13:19:22   #
lmTrying Loc: WV Northern Panhandle
 
RWR wrote:
No.


lol I know, I just like to throw in a little comic relief to break the intensity one in a while.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 13:30:52   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
boberic wrote:
All that "get it right in camera" had a lot to do with economics and the limitations of manual film cameras. You couldn't rack off 10shots/sec. So if you didn't get it right the first time, you didn't get it. You had ASA limitations (no sensor) it was what it was. Asa of 1 or 2,000 or more was unheard of. At an event, 50 or 100 thousand exposures was not possible, now it's routine at a world series. I can't even imagine the cost or time required to prosecess 100,000 images on contact sheets. It used to take me a 1/2 hour to do a 36 shot contact. I don't favor spray and pray, but I'll do 50 or 100 at the dog park, for maybe 2 really good ones. I switched to digital only 4 years ago. I was amazed at how liberating it was.Now I can do in 1 hour with PP what it took me all day to do in the dark room.
All that "get it right in camera" had a ... (show quote)


Or it had something to do with understanding, artistic vision, ability and discipline rather than blind luck.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 13:33:17   #
AlfredU Loc: Mooresville, NC
 
Peterff wrote:
Or it had something to do with understanding, artistic vision, ability and discipline rather than blind luck.

Good one! I agree.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 13:38:27   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
dsmeltz wrote:
Last year I had a severe sinus infection that took several rounds of different antibiotics to cure. It also took out my sense of smell.

The up shot is, not only do I not know if I am an old fart, I am not sure if I just farted.


There is an old joke about a guy that knew he had a GAS problem, but they were silent and didn't smell. He went to the doctor who gave him some pills and told him to come back in a week. The guy turned up at the doctor's office absolutely furious, saying: "These pills were terrible, I'm still farting the same amount, but now they're really loud!"

So the doctor responded: "Excellent. Now we've done something about your hearing, let's see what we can do about your sense of smell!"

Reply
 
 
Aug 7, 2017 13:50:00   #
Kuzano
 
Peterff wrote:
There is an old joke about a guy that knew he had a GAS problem, but they were silent and didn't smell. He went to the doctor who gave him some pills and told him to come back in a week. The guy turned up at the doctor's office absolutely furious, saying: "These pills were terrible, I'm still farting the same amount, but now they're really loud!"

So the doctor responded: "Excellent. Now we've done something about your hearing, let's see what we can do about your sense of smell!"
There is an old joke about a guy that knew he had ... (show quote)


You reminded me of the old saying about arrogant people (not you of course)......

"You know Bob... He thinks his S__t doesn't stink. Unfortunately, his farts give him away!"

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 13:52:25   #
Kuzano
 
weedhook wrote:
The basic problem is that even when we get it right in camera, neither film nor digital sensors see the same way our eyes see, and sometimes post processing can more faithfully reproduce what our eyes actually saw. Plus, let's face it. Sometimes it's fun to make the picture better than what our eyes actually saw.


And that process is a lie. I also doubt seriously that the time between what our eyes saw and what we think we saw when we are post processing can hardly render a correct image (what the eyes saw at capture).

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 13:54:41   #
Marionsho Loc: Kansas
 
Kuzano wrote:
And that process is a lie. I also doubt seriously that the time between what our eyes saw and what we think we saw when we are post processing can hardly render a correct image (what the eyes saw at capture).


Well, we've all got a photographic memory.
Some of us have better film than others.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 13:55:27   #
seniormomentnw Loc: Seattle
 
Wow, this drew a bunch of responses!
I think most photographers see their work as art, and art can be made many, many ways. I have always been more of an in-the-camera guy, but I can see the art in post processing, so I am starting to learn Lightroom and Photoshop. Why be so dogmatic? There is plenty of room for everyone's art here.

Reply
 
 
Aug 7, 2017 13:56:41   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
Kuzano wrote:
And that process is a lie. I also doubt seriously that the time between what our eyes saw and what we think we saw when we are post processing can hardly render a correct image (what the eyes saw at capture).


Actually that process is a path through which the artist seeks to express and communicate the truth.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 14:02:40   #
wesm Loc: Los Altos CA
 
ballsafire wrote:
Please don't refer to yourself as an "old fart." This is such a degrading disrespect for old age -- a time of self respect. Unfortunately I've been seeing this trend of self degradation too much lately and it certainly gives me the willies. The word "fart" is much stronger than the word "poot." Please just STOP this nonsense!! Any substitute such as "missing shigles," or "hole in the roof" would be in better taste. Forgive me if I have offended thee, and if I have, Kiss my royal ass!
Please don't refer to yourself as an "old far... (show quote)


I was with you until the last sentence, which diminished your credibility and impact. To be constructive, I offer the alternatives "curmudgeon" of "misogynist".

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 14:03:26   #
Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
Art is supposed to stimulate conversation.
senoirmomentnw wrote:
Wow, this drew a bunch of responses!
I think most photographers see their work as art, and art can be made many, many ways. I have always been more of an in-the-camera guy, but I can see the art in post processing, so I am starting to learn Lightroom and Photoshop. Why be so dogmatic? There is plenty of room for everyone's art here.

Reply
Aug 7, 2017 14:05:02   #
pnuemonalultramicro
 
Here's another viewpoint on digital. This 84 year old became interested in photography BECAUSE of the move to digital. I owned a 35mm back in the 60's but could not get caught up in all the apertures, f-stops, etc. and stuck with the simple Kodaks.

However, with digital I can get a massive improvement in results by having a decent bridge camera (Fujifilm HS-50-EXR) and "leave the driving to them). I realize I speak as a heretic by not wanting to learn all these fine and wonderful things but really guys the desire is just not there.

So let's hear it for the "old farts" who are content to live with good quality snapshots and leave the art of photography to those like my friend who does a fantastic job shooting many subjects/scenes per day utilizing his knowledge and talent for picking the right subject while using the right equipment in the right manner. Y'all are great photographers and I appreciate the effort to achieve great results with great equipment but as many of you may not want to learn all there is to know about prizefighting, pro wrestling, hunting, fishing, etc. there are some of us who just want to learn enough to get by. Thanx, folks!

ps: There may be questions as to why I am even on this forum. Well, I feel a need to learn a bit more than just how to look through the viewfinder and press a button so I came to the experts. I have learned a lot by just reading your comments and believe I can still learn a lot more.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 9 of 18 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.