speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Clapperboard

swamp shutter This is a common point of contention. People saying there should be (virtually) no post manipulation. Of course to me it does not seem sensible to have tools available but deciding to not use them just for the sake of not using them.
Please remember also that it's not all one sided. Digital sensors have a usable exposure range of six and a half stops. Film has a usable exposure range of ten stops. That means digital starts with a massive disadvantage so please don't regard the digital tools as totally unfair. A lot of post adjustment is just to even the balance of the disadvantage of digital.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

We've all heard that "a picture is worth a thousand words." But it doesn't say that a picture is true in any sense. Photography with film begins by a photographer having a personal perspective. You mention composition. That includes choosing what is inside the image and what gets ignored. But it continues with all the choices of contrast papers, dodging and burning and cropping. Photography has never been the pure and simple adventure we all fantasize.

One of my favorite images is of the Campanile of Pisa. (Often called the "Leaning Tower") When I shot that, there were 40-50 tourists in the frame along with six touristy signs ("Keep off the grass" etc.). There were three trash cans. There was a building behind it with more people. With the help of Affinity Photo, I was able to get rid of the tourists, signs, flags and extraneous detritus and bring back the glory of the Campanile; in other words the original.

I'll buy that result many times over.

(BTW. I tried doing this with Photoshop and after three hours, was so frustrated I gave up. I hadn't really learned Affinity yet, but had it on trial. I decided to try it. An hour later, I had the image done perfectly.)

charles tabb Loc: Richmond VA.

To each his own.

Hank Radt

Hang in there 3dees. I'm a couple years younger and while not a coder nor a computer scientist, have managed to find my way around computers through a lot trial and error. I've found that the biggest block for folks born in the pre-digital age is conceptual - we know how to use pen & paper, file cabinets, typewriters, send mail and take pics - heck, when I was young any one with a Polaroid could take a pic and have it appear pretty much instantaneously. Now we have computers and digital cameras that do all these things for us, but when you boil it down, things are pretty much the same - it's just that the tools and even the language is different (my dad taught me how to drill with a hand drill and saw with cross-cuts and rip saws - now we have power tools). Can't help you much with Photoshop since I use Capture One, but I can relate to the first time I opened it up - all I could see was a screen with a whole bunch of options and pull-downs and commands and no idea whatsoever how they worked. So I did two things: first, I played around a lot, seeing what I could do to an image; then I started focusing on one particular aspect at a time - for this, I'd pick a topic, then go to the C1 help pages, do an internet search to find out what others were doing and then, if I still couldn't figure it out, ask a question to the C1 support team. For me, right now, it is like solving a puzzle or doing a crossword - I know the answer is there, I just have to find it.

Stick with it.

pego99

Nothing. It evolved.

charles tabb Loc: Richmond VA.

No, Photoshop & etc. got so good that a person can go too far if they want to. and create things that couldn't exist.
I've seen it go that far to many times.

TheDman Loc: USA

You think it was a black and white scene?

TheDman Loc: USA

Clapperboard

Richard Taylor me too!!!

Really love that humour.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

NOTHING has happened to photography. It is still the art, craft, and science of "writing with light". It still follows the same principles of physics, and favors following and breaking the same "rules" of composition, lighting, color, contrast, line, form...

Technology changes as time moves on. But the general principles of communicating with images are well established. Digital technology just makes everything easier, more precise, more subtle, more versatile.

I grew up with film cameras in my hands. I own 18 of them. I worked in a pro lab in many roles over the years. In the film/optical lab, my role was production systems manager. My last two roles were digital products manager, where I guided the transition from film and optical technology to digital technology, and training program developer, where I created the training materials needed to get our photographers and customers into the 21st century.

So my perspective is that of an industry veteran... I watched millions and millions of dollars worth of film processors, optical printers, enlargers, and long roll 35mm, 46mm, and 70mm portrait cameras as they were picked up by recyclers. I watched millions of dollars worth of film scanners, mini-labs, computers, and digital cameras replace them. Then I trained hundreds of folks to use all the new toys.

Every now and then, I see this question, "What happened to photography?" pop up in forums. I understand that digital technology must be quite a shock to someone who learned to use a Rolleiflex or Nikon F and process B&W prints in a darkroom, but never really learned to use computers when that revolution happened in the late '70s through the late '90s. Many of my peers resemble that description. I watched many folks my age (62) +/- 10 years leave the industry because they could not type, could not understand computers, and were too frightened to learn. So sad...

Yes, digital photography requires a lot of expensive capital equipment... cameras, lenses, different lighting... computers, monitors, monitor calibrators, software... inkjet photo printers or online lab software... and TRAINING. However, once you're set up, there are few expenses associated with each additional image, and that provides enormous advantages!

Last weekend, my son, Trevor, was in a play at Western Carolina University. "The Strange Undoing of Prudencia Hart" is set in a Scottish pub. The audience is part of the cast! So I sat right where the most intense action took place, put my GH4 on silent electronic shutter mode, and (at the urging of the director) photographed most of the action. I recorded 367 raw images, processed 297 of them to usable JPEGs (in Lightroom) and liked about 90 of them.

I was able to get the sort of images I would NEVER have been able to capture with film. Here is one that I made hand-held, of a character illuminated by just a FLASHLIGHT:

The rest of the time, I was able to record images with the natural special effects of the stage lighting, such as the scene from hell, where my son (playing Nick, really Satan) is trying to wrestle the protagonist away from her suitor, who rescues her soul.

The grab shot of the demon in mask with a lecherous Satan lusting after her was taken during the second or so that she leaned back onto the bar table in front of me. She certainly didn't pause to pose.

The "fight scene" struggle of Colin and Prudencia resisting my devilish son's grasp (shown above it) was a photo I had never hoped to come away with.

Frankly, I cannot imagine using a noisy film SLR or a noisy dSLR in a dark theater environment. The GH4 did exactly what I asked it to. It was completely silent, unobtrusive, and the cast are thrilled to have photos for their resume portfolios.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Your top level question "What happened to photography?" is philosophical and has no single or precise answer. It could be answered by the statement: "Nothing, everything, and every point in between and beyond."

One could argue that nothing but tools and techniques have changed since the 16th century or before: http://www.essentialvermeer.com/camera_obscura/co_one.html#.Wc_JqNFrxhE

Digital is just another step on the journey...

Motorbones Loc: Fair Oaks, CA

I believe that digital makes people better photographers, not less a photographer. First... the notion of what medium is being used is ridiculous. Are oil painters more of of being real artists than those who use acrylic or water color. Imagine where people who create with spray paint (known to some as graffiti artists) rank in that group!!! Having the capability to shoot in burst or just plain more rapidly helps to assure they'll get that a million dollar shot in a series of shots. I was also under the impression that taking pictures was the only requirement of being a photographer. I hear the same chit chat when people argue what is a real biker for those who love to ride motorcycles, except that in that culture it can get really serious when making that distinction...

Bill_de Loc: US

I don't believe you!


I think the pun was intended. Aside from that, I agree.

--

PH CIB

I can understand what You are saying,,,,used to shoot Pentax 6x7 Medium Format,,,,when You are paying for Film You are much more careful about your photographs,,,,but I love Digital,,,,took a rented Nikon D500 and lenses to shoot birds in flight and shot over 2000 photos in a few hours one afternoon,,,,could you imagine what that would have cost in film,,,,I think Digital has opened up the Joy of Photography to a lot more People,,,,are they Real Photographers Yes I think anyone with a Camera having Fun is a Real Photographer,,,,are they Professional Photographers,,,,probably very few of them make any money off their photography but on a positive note we sure spend a lot of money,,,,maybe not on film and processing but on gear and trips and getting outdoors and having fun !!!