webfoot

Yes well said, you've put it all in perspective!

achammar Loc: Idaho

This is off topic, but this is already in the works... Google glasses. A lot of privacy concerns over this one. No sign of camera or recorder. Just glasses that record. You may not ever know you were being recorded...

http://www.google.com/glass/start/what-it-does/

Last image at the bottom is a video you can watch...

Hoosier in GA Loc: Milledgeville, GA

I have a friend that bought a Canpon dslr for himself. He has been taking pictures on Auto since December. Now, this fella has a very good eye for composition, but Auto limits him on focus points,etc. He is now talking about investing in a 300mm zoom..he has an 18-200mm kit lens I believe. I told him to learn to use what he has before he invests in another lens. Kinda made him mad when I told him he takes nice pictures on Auto, but he should learn to use his camera on m-a-s ...then he could get good photographs!

Canonuser Loc: UK and South Africa

Do not despair folks.
I use Photodex Producer to make photographic presentations. Twice recently I have made presentations containing a selection of photographs several people in a group, including myself have taken. It is a great way, by means of one DVD to give each member of the group a lasting memory of an event or trip.
To fit the imaged to a 16x9 screen I have to change the aspect ratio of most images and in doing so often recompose them.
Guess whose images form the main part of the finished programme?Despite all the advantages of modern equipment, I find I have to ditch at least 60% of images taken by the others for a whole range of reasons from camera shake, impossible to use composition, out of focus images even with fully automatic settings, and a whole host of other reasons that mean the images don't reach my aesthetic or technical critique.
It could be embarrassing that the finished programmed contain about 80% of my pictures, but as many shots taken by all are from a similar position, no one has yet noticed and all think they are good photographers or my enhancement of their images in photoshop has improved the quality.
No, there is no substitute for good equipment in the hands of a good photographer and I have no doubt there never will be.

chicknamedal Loc: Mobile, AL, USA

So true. I work as an insurance risk inspector and, as such, am expected to snap fairly decent photos of homes and other properties. For this job, I use a Sony Cyber Shot G point and shoot. I switch between auto and landscape mode, depending on the property. Because I am moving at a fast, steady pace, I simply point and snap, point and snap.

Now, because I also have a serious interest in learning actual photography, I put some effort into taking snaps which are clear and in focus. I also spend a little time tweaking those which need it (for instance, just about all from yesterday when I was standing in the pouring rain, clipboard, umbrella, measuring wheel, pen, and camera in hand, attempting to just hurry up and get finished before I had to swim home...meh. My truck interior is still damp feeling, although not really damp). I use either Photoshop CS4, CS5, or Photoshop Elements 9, depending on which computer I am using at the time. I'm considered a rare bird for this, as most inspectors just snap and go and post without ensuring the subject matter is actually visible (which explains the recent memo regarding poor photo quality). Anyhoo, I snap snaps all day long.

Then I got my DSLR, my "fun" camera with which I plan to learn all I possibly can. I have a looooong way to go; I've read the manual, I've read articles, I've listened to lectures, and so on. I have a seriously difficult time understanding the jargon and what it actually means, for some reason, which is really, really irritating, but I will get through it and someday it will all click and then I'll have a major "Ooooohhhhhh!!!" moment and wonder why the heck it took me so long to understand such a simple concept. Sigh. Story of my life.

But here's the thing: it has been really really hard to shake the 'snap-and-go' mentality that is necessary for work. I want to grab the "fun" camera and point and shoot, which in my opinion is the exact opposite of why I wanted the DSLR in the first place. I have to really concentrate and slow down to get just the right shot and remember things like, "is that going to be a really ugly background?" or "do I really want this to be this bright?" and so on. I'm artsy enough to be able to visualize a composition and am going to learn to be able to achieve that with my camera. And it will NOT be achievable by selecting auto and randomly snapping away.

Alternatively, I now find myself slowing down at work and wanting to take just the right image. SIGH. And lately the hawks and eagles have been taunting me by swooping low over the properties I am on as if they know I am busy and don't have time to switch cameras. My work production has taken a hit because of things like this.

I was surprised at how difficult it is to switch from snap mode to I-want-a-great-photo mode. The first is pure freedom--move around, see something interesting, snap. The second is planning or at least thinking it through before taking the image. I am now officially a stalker...of birds and beasties and family and friends. Patience, thankfully, can be learned. Because achieving a great photo is going to take time.

Sorry for the ramble. I'm sure I had a point in there somewhere...:roll: :)

BigD Loc: The LEFT Coast

I'm not dwelling on anything, I'm replying to the content of this thread. The OP made a topic about the need to learn proper photographic technique not being important any longer because of the new automatic modes of these modern cameras according to a TV ad selling a new camera. My reply illustrated a time where those super duper modes for me were absolutely useless and knowing what I was doing made it possible to obtain a good image. I also said that I did try automatic modes just in case it figured out something I was missing. A closed minded guy that try's all available options huh? How is that dwelling? is sticking to a subject dwelling? Or is it more appropriate to swerve off topic and start analyzing all that reply? I am very aware of what these new cameras can and cannot do and I am not dwelling on it I am merely "discussing" it. You see that is the reason why people read a forum about photography to hear differing opinions and points of view from a large cross section of like minded people engaged in the same activity. If they don't want to participate in a particular discussion they can simply move on. :roll:

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I've spent much of the last 24-hours editing and post processing 1000+ images from a week of shooting in five US states using 2 cameras and 8+ lenses. Both cameras (Nikon D3100 and Canon 7D) had auto ISO capped at 3200. We were shooting pre dawn through post midnight. I mention all this to say the noise from the newer Nikon in the same conditions / same ISO is much more controlled. The vendors continue to push the technology envelope forward...and that's a good thing.

JerseyPhotoGuy Loc: Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807

My sentiments exactly. Shouldn't we all (i.e., those of us who love photography) celebrate the fact that technology in the form of the digital camera (whether point and shoot or DSLR) has made photography (whether snapshots or so-called "artistic"images) easier and, therefore, more popular; which will result in more technological advances in cameras, make photography easier yet, and become still more popular -ad infinitum.Our goal should be to encourage everyone to become a "photographer" in one form or another . The more people engaged in the creative process the better. What's wrong with that? What appears to have been overlooked in this discussion is the definition of "photography" - the "art or process of producing images of objects..."This discussion has engendered a lot of value judgements whether a person using a P&S or a DSLR on auto can ever produce artistic or even good images. Of course they can.A person with a device that "produces images" is a Photographer. How the image is produced is irrelevant if the image produced pleases the photographer. Ninety-nine per cent of us calling ourselves " Photographers" produce images only to please ourselves. The other one per- cent produce images for sale and, therefore, must please others. I do value the judgement of other photographers in the interest of becoming a better photographer; but in the end it's my judgement that matters most. Even if the image is technically deficient; if I like the image for whatever reason I keep it. I'm realistic enough about my own photographic abilities to know that only very rarely will I ever produce an image that is both technically and artistically perfect ; even though I try to do so with every single shot-whether using the auto mode, one of the scene or so-called "creative"modes ,or full manual. Whatever it takes. These modes are only the means to produce an image that pleases me and the people for whom I take photographs i. e., family and friends. The primary reason I love photography is to capture a moment in time (whether of a person, scene, or event), that is meaningful to me (because the person or event is important to me personally or the scene is beautiful), and that will evoke a pleasant memory when I look at the image in the future. My only disagreement with the sentiments expressed above is that you can "enjoy BOTH the process and the pictures",just let go of your ego and pride about both.

riverlass Loc: northern California

8-) Much ado about progress. Thanks for the honesty.

BigD Loc: The LEFT Coast

I get that some feel threatened by technology and feel that it is closing the gap between them and "the masses". I for one do not believe that at all. I feel absolutely comfortable shooting in any mode that a modern DSLR has available. I have spent a lifetime learning this stuff so "for me" its a non issue. I think some of you are missing what the OP was saying. It was about an ad to sell a camera that flat out said you don't have to know a darn thing because this marvel is better than you. Of course I am paraphrasing but that was the jest. I think we all get that it was a guy trying to sell a product and they tend to say what people want to hear. Since this is a PHOTOGRAPHY forum one would assume that people hear know or at the very least have an idea that that thinking is completely absurd. Yes technology is awesome and I love it. Yes the new cameras can AND DO take some amazing images on automatic modes. But the real issue is simply that they are not capable of solving all photographic situations and that is why we discuss them. We are being realistic and "discussing" their limitations as well as their uses and all the ground in between. I would suggest that that is honest debate not ego at play. Again this is the reason for a photography forum isnt it? I would not really dig a forum where a person posts something and every reply is "agree" or "disagree" would you?

wlgoode Loc: Globe, AZ

Also know it is a losing battle.

I've told people before that the best way to learn photography is to learn to draw first. It ain't in the camera, it's in the artist. It's all about composition.

gemac Loc: Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada

Just having immediate feedback on success of shot is great for learning. Today's software is about a quarter of photography
(like Helicon Focus, ptgui and many view /edit programs)one quarter camera , lenses, tripods etc., one quarter photographer's skill and the last quarter , the real leveller is the subject. An instamatic at the scene of the crime is worth way more than 3 nikons at home in a drawer.

Carl 383 Loc: Southampton UK

I too learned the craft of F stops, aperture and speed, the subtle differences of film etc and like you am a little miffed at how easy it is to take a decent picture on "auto" however a decent picture is not a "great" picture and the times when bringing your knowledge into play will result in many more of your photographs being in the latter catergory.
Can a camera set to "auto" instruct you in composition, give you an eye for a picture, tell you when to zoom in or pull back, when to over or under expose in order to "lift" the picture?
I often get comments on the quality of my pictures from friends and family precisely because they have been brought up on "auto"
Yes "auto" will give an average exposure, resulting in an average picture but as you know yourself, you do not want to settle for average, that is why your years of learning the craft has resulted in taking photos which are pleasing to you and cause others to offer favourable comments, your time was not wasted. You are a photographer.

c8group Loc: Florida, NY

The most important thing I learned in art school was to see. Learn to notice everything. The big things, the small things, the texture of things. Take the time to look and study your surroundings.

This will help with photography too.

Carl 383 Loc: Southampton UK

Learning to see helps in life too, makes our experiences just that little richer.