Shedding the Film Mindset
Mar 21, 2015 13:47:12 #
Free or not free?
Digital:
Take the cost of equipment and divide it by the number of shutter count. You have your cost.
Silver:
Take the cost of equipment, the film cost, processing fee, printing 'previews' fee then you have your cost. Being way down in price scale, let say a 20 exposure film cost $2.00. the processing $2.00 and the previews 0.20 you have a cost of $8.00 so an average of .40 per preview, in addition to the average cost of equipment.
Digital price: Equipment /100,000
Silver price : Equipment /100,000 + (100,000/20)*8 so an added cost of $40,000.
So, yes, digital has a cost but so small it is negligible compared to running cost of using silver.
The question from the op is not about cost but about espousing a mentality that is less than desirable, just because it is 'free'. Considering that out of 100,000 shots only 1,000 are usable in the best of times (serial shooters) the real cost of EXPLOITABLE captures is high. OUCH!.
Yes, there are circumstances where burst mode is desirable. Yes exploring the 'outer limits' is also desirable but you all have to admit only a fringe of photographers are doing either or both.
My answer to the op is still the same:
Stay away from 'good enough' and 'serial shooters'. What was good before is still good now, even better because with the discipline you learned you can join the 'fringe' and experiment in a way that was not possible before.
Digital:
Take the cost of equipment and divide it by the number of shutter count. You have your cost.
Silver:
Take the cost of equipment, the film cost, processing fee, printing 'previews' fee then you have your cost. Being way down in price scale, let say a 20 exposure film cost $2.00. the processing $2.00 and the previews 0.20 you have a cost of $8.00 so an average of .40 per preview, in addition to the average cost of equipment.
Digital price: Equipment /100,000
Silver price : Equipment /100,000 + (100,000/20)*8 so an added cost of $40,000.
So, yes, digital has a cost but so small it is negligible compared to running cost of using silver.
The question from the op is not about cost but about espousing a mentality that is less than desirable, just because it is 'free'. Considering that out of 100,000 shots only 1,000 are usable in the best of times (serial shooters) the real cost of EXPLOITABLE captures is high. OUCH!.
Yes, there are circumstances where burst mode is desirable. Yes exploring the 'outer limits' is also desirable but you all have to admit only a fringe of photographers are doing either or both.
My answer to the op is still the same:
Stay away from 'good enough' and 'serial shooters'. What was good before is still good now, even better because with the discipline you learned you can join the 'fringe' and experiment in a way that was not possible before.
Mar 21, 2015 13:47:22 #
As was said earlier, DSLR should give you the freedom to experiment ways you likely wouldn't have using film. Don't loose your film mindset, just expand on it. It's a huge advantage some of us never had. :wink:
Mar 21, 2015 13:56:05 #
geezer7
Loc: Michigan
Thanks for all the responses. Part of my problem (if it is a problem!) is that I have too many hobbies and interests besides photography. I could definitely benefit from taking advantage of the burst feature of my camera especially for my grandkids' sports and BIF.
It seems that I am not completely alone in my sparse numbers of shutter activations but probably in the minority! The more I use the the D7100 the more adept I should become.
It seems that I am not completely alone in my sparse numbers of shutter activations but probably in the minority! The more I use the the D7100 the more adept I should become.
Mar 21, 2015 14:04:41 #
Also, there's the advantage of fine tuning (process) your photos the way you want them. Then again, this could be an issue if you don't have a lot of time. :|
Mar 21, 2015 16:04:17 #
RWR
Loc: La Mesa, CA
geezer7 wrote:
I have been shooting mostly digital since about 2010. I have used 35mm and medium format cameras since 1970. It has proven difficult for me to get away from the film mindset of being frugal with the number of images I take.
The solution is obvious - take more photos! But I am interested if others have had similar experiences?
For example, I bought my D7100 in late June 2014 and to date have only taken 500 photos.
The solution is obvious - take more photos! But I am interested if others have had similar experiences?
For example, I bought my D7100 in late June 2014 and to date have only taken 500 photos.
Sure is tough to break. Must have made at least a dozen exposures before I quit reaching for the advance lever.
Mar 21, 2015 16:17:19 #
Ive been know to walk around and around an object looking for the right angle, the right light, the right height etc etc.
Then take one maybe two pics. I learned this from my film days when I HATED buying more film and hated paying to have it developed. Lately Im beginning to see the advantage of taking shots from all directions and see what I get. Its actually helping my photography. I can now better understand the lighting and shadows etc. Im so over film , yeaaaaaa
Then take one maybe two pics. I learned this from my film days when I HATED buying more film and hated paying to have it developed. Lately Im beginning to see the advantage of taking shots from all directions and see what I get. Its actually helping my photography. I can now better understand the lighting and shadows etc. Im so over film , yeaaaaaa
Mar 21, 2015 16:58:42 #
perhaps its a 'why do I do photography' thing. I shoot landscapes and flora mainly. I could drive up, take a photo and go home with a 'gotcha' and work out what next. Or I could take the dog and walk around for an hour or two. Calm down from work and home life, breathe the fresh air and enjoy the sunshine. Find an interesting shot and think it through. THAT photo has as more pleasant memories than any rushed 'shoot it now or lose it forever' mind set. I print my photos and find wall space for them....My home isn't big enough for a 1000 images so they do rotate - which creates a talking point with our friends at least.
I knew a photographer than had 10 - 15 sd cards...That was his filing system ..he worked from the front to the back and reckoned that if he hadn't done anything with the pictures on 'that' card by the time he came to reuse it They hadn't been worth saving any longer. I am not quite that bad....
George
I knew a photographer than had 10 - 15 sd cards...That was his filing system ..he worked from the front to the back and reckoned that if he hadn't done anything with the pictures on 'that' card by the time he came to reuse it They hadn't been worth saving any longer. I am not quite that bad....
George
Mar 21, 2015 17:15:50 #
geezer7 wrote:
I have been shooting mostly digital since about 2010. I have used 35mm and medium format cameras since 1970. It has proven difficult for me to get away from the film mindset of being frugal with the number of images I take.
The solution is obvious - take more photos! But I am interested if others have had similar experiences?
For example, I bought my D7100 in late June 2014 and to date have only taken 500 photos.
The solution is obvious - take more photos! But I am interested if others have had similar experiences?
For example, I bought my D7100 in late June 2014 and to date have only taken 500 photos.
Maybe it is a "Deerhunter" kind of thing. I'd rather eat venison taken out by a clean shot than with a machine gun. Don't like having to spit the shot out of a roast pheasant either.
Stick to frugal, and sharpen your intellectual picture taking chops. Fishing with dynamite is sometimes frowned upon also!
It is a percentage of good shots game, not a number of shots game.
Mar 21, 2015 17:16:08 #
I don't think its a mind set that you want to completely shed. The care with composition and exposure that the cost of film and developing forced on you was a good thing. I still try to keep that mindset and use care in composing and determining exposure. Its better to go home with half a dozen good frames than 200 bad ones. Having said that I do shoot on high speed when shooting birds in flight (still not very good at it).
Mar 22, 2015 05:30:07 #
Don Fischer
Loc: Antelope, Ore
I just got rid of my first digital a d70, gave it to a niece. Got it around 2002 and had about 6000 shots on it. When I shoot, I try for several different shot's from different angles, did the same with film. But shooting action shot's I spray because I don't have a clue how to prefocus and time, much less on a running unpredictable animal. With film, I didn't do moving animals! Scratch that, my last film camera was an f5 Nikon and I did a burst shot of a cow crossing a creek, just one time. Boy could that camera burn a roll of film fast!
Mar 22, 2015 05:32:26 #
Rongnongno wrote:
Shedding it?
EMBRACE IT! Taking zillions of bad capture in order to maybe, possibly, eventually have one that could be interesting will never replace the know how you had.
Don't fall for the 'good enough' mentality of digital serial shooters.
EMBRACE IT! Taking zillions of bad capture in order to maybe, possibly, eventually have one that could be interesting will never replace the know how you had.
Don't fall for the 'good enough' mentality of digital serial shooters.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
Mar 22, 2015 05:45:31 #
geezer7 wrote:
I have been shooting mostly digital since about 2010. I have used 35mm and medium format cameras since 1970. It has proven difficult for me to get away from the film mindset of being frugal with the number of images I take.
The solution is obvious - take more photos! But I am interested if others have had similar experiences?
For example, I bought my D7100 in late June 2014 and to date have only taken 500 photos.
The solution is obvious - take more photos! But I am interested if others have had similar experiences?
For example, I bought my D7100 in late June 2014 and to date have only taken 500 photos.
Buy a D800 or Sony A7R - with 45mb files your film mindset will pay off. At least until you get bigger hard drives and memory cards.
But you are correct. Anyone who shot with film was not just being frugal (clients paid for the consumables), but also the time spent in reviewing images and creating proofs and marking up images for retouching.
I have seen wedding guys spray and pray all over the place and end up with 3000 images, which they show to the clients as proof that they did their jobs - and of course it has become a selling point - which if course is total BS, especially when you consider that many of the images are just repeats of the same shot. There is an art in taking fewer better images.
I worked with 35mm, 120/220 roll film, and 4x5 cut film. I started in 1967. I still shoot carefully and slowly and make every shot count, especially if I have the time to do so. When I do equestrian competitions, you only get one shot for each jump, and it has to be perfectly timed, when I shoot landscapes I will take a shot, move the camera, take another shot, move the camera, etc etc. When I shoot products - same thing - but I will probably adjust the lighting more than move the camera. Shooting birds in flight is maybe the only kind of shot that I will press the shutter button and hold it down until the camera's buffer fills.
Mar 22, 2015 05:48:08 #
many of us had the same problem back in the day. then it was taking 2 or 3 36 exposure rolls to a shooting session. 36 to 108 shots is still a lot for many of us. don't forget those half frame cameras.
Mar 22, 2015 05:58:04 #
geezer7 wrote:
I have been shooting mostly digital since about 2010. I have used 35mm and medium format cameras since 1970. It has proven difficult for me to get away from the film mindset of being frugal with the number of images I take.
The solution is obvious - take more photos! But I am interested if others have had similar experiences?
For example, I bought my D7100 in late June 2014 and to date have only taken 500 photos.
The solution is obvious - take more photos! But I am interested if others have had similar experiences?
For example, I bought my D7100 in late June 2014 and to date have only taken 500 photos.
Geezer, been there, done that. I think it's all in the mind-set. I think it depends on the subject and the results you see in your mind. As an example; the guy who went to photograph a parade, he can back and had taken one exposure; there were 120 floats in the parade. Bad Idea! Another example; I read many years ago that the great Look & Life photographers figured that all 36 exposures on the roll should be technically good; but they really expected an average of ONE really, "Oh Wow" photo on each 36 exp roll. I think we just cover the subject with enough exposures to express your vision and that might be one or many. When you have seen your subject in your strongest possible way, you're done. I shoot quite a few ones or twos or threes; then again if I've driven a few hours to get to the subject, the creative vision thing sometimes has jumped out of the car before I get there, then I shoot the hell out of the subject, drive home a few hours and THEN discover what I wanted to see. Keep shootin my friend, you're not alone.
Mar 22, 2015 06:08:50 #
Don Fischer
Loc: Antelope, Ore
Reading how many shot's people take today blow's my mind! I think I've read up to something like a thousand shot's! Unbelievable!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.