M8, affecting shooting style ?

[M'Ate]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Many who shoot DSLR's find their shooting patterns change a lot from their previous film style. I've found that myself and shoot twice as many images at a wedding than I would if it was film in the box.

 

Frequently, I do work for a PR client who wants six images on CD from which he might choose two for publication. I get little guidance on the content and he wants no repeats etc.

 

The last outing I shot a roll of film on my M and the job took less than an hour. This week, a similar job, but shot on a DSLR, took more than twice as long and produced 200+ RAW images.

 

Now I accept this is down to personal discipline, but it appears to be a common malady that affects others. I'm obviously influenced by what I'm shooting with and am most (too) frugal with film. With MF film, I would have little trouble getting the selection with a single roll.

 

 

So my question to those who have the M8 and a DSLR and a film M: how does it affect your shooting style? Do you scatter gun it like a DSLR, or shoot it like you would any other M ?

[bill]

FWIW, I think any camera affects your shooting style. I have said many times, and I don't think I'm the only one - that I can't shoot both rangefinder and SLR on the same day/outing. The techniques are too different, for me at least. Similarly, I think that it is different if you are using a small SLR or a big one, or an M or a compact. Digital is, I believe, less of a contributor to the equation than it is sometimes made out to be. My technique with my LC-1, for example, is different from both my M7 or any SLR, but that is because it handles like an M with a zoom lens like an SLR. It is those sorts of factor that make the difference, IMHO.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[wparsonsgisnet]

I may have begun to shoot more now that I am shooting digital -- largely because of the zero marginal cost -- but It's not a big change.

 

So, I conclude that I'm saving an enormous amount on film and processing costs.

[johnbuckley]

Two things come to mind in reply.

 

The first is I remember in the 1980s, after virtually all writers moved from typing to word processing, that books got longer, and readers bemoaned the absence of editors who would cut down these by now bloated tomes. The fact is that technology that makes it easier to produce creative work will, at least at first, take away an element of self-discipline. I am a dedicated film shooter who found his style changed with the D2 from the way I used my M7. Now that I have an M8, I adore the freedom of taking many more shots than I would before. But it does leave some bloat in the system... you shoot longer, and more shots... Even though you still end up with the relatively small number of excellent ones. Or at least I do.

 

The other thing is that while Bill is right about the absence of expense in producing digital shots, there still is a form of expense -- or maybe pollution? a byproduct? -- that comes from shooting too much, especially if one shoots RAW. I may not be paying money to produce slides, and then prints. But I have just bought a new iMac with 500 gigs of space, and with RAW files in C1 taking up so much of a footprint, there still is a cost!

[M'Ate]

Two things come to mind in reply.

 

I am a dedicated film shooter who found his style changed with the D2 from the way I used my M7. Now that I have an M8, I adore the freedom of taking many more shots than I would before.

 

John,

Exactly the M8 man, but I can't tell from what you write whether your M8 habits are the same as the Nikon D2, or not, and how prolific you have become.

[RaySwan]

It's a good observation to make. Kind of like rifle shooters. If you have an automatic firearm you spray the target hoping to get lucky. If you have a single shot you try harder to get it right the first time. I think it's human nature.

 

The danger in this is you can have a gem buried in a ton of junk images but it's like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack. I think you have to resist the urge to overshoot. I do allow myself the use of the "motor drive" now that there are no film/processing cost involved !!

[johnbuckley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Actually, I am shooting even more with the M8 than with my Digilux 2 (Panaleica)! Why? Well, there may be something about the manual focus and my not being sure I've got the best shot so I just keep trying. Or maybe because I'm now shooting with 2gig cards. Or just the sheer joy of using this camera!

[jaapv]

When I moved from film to digital some years ago I found that I could not shake the habit of decades of only pushing the shutter when wanting to take the shot, resulting in DSLR's with far fewer actuations on them than usual. Then I went back to film (because I missed my Leica M) and found I had changed a bit after all, using about 50% more film than before. Now back to M8 digital, I find I use it even more, up to double of what I used to shoot on film long ago. In my case, a slow progression.

[wparsonsgisnet]

... while Bill is right about the absence of expense in ... gigs of space, and with RAW files in C1 taking up so much of a footprint, there still is a cost!

 

John, as I was posting earlier, I had your point securely in the back of my mind.

 

Nevertheless, I have two other thots in this area. (1) I shoot more enthusiastically, now, and (2) I review shots before committing them to disk, now. In addition, I am also reviewing files with an eye to clean-up, on a regular basis.

 

I also do video work, which chews up disk space even more voraciously then digipix, so my disk farm is now about 2 terabytes, and I have a well-practiced set of backup procedures.

 

As a side benefit, I feel much more secure about the offsite backup disk of digipix than I do about the negs in my house that might burn down.

 

The other thing I prefer about digipix is the turnaround time. Not only are we all able to make sure we got the pic the first time, we can produce prints the same day. That fact alone makes the post production work pallatable.

 

I also enjoy the benefits of a web-based distribution system. I used to get prints for shows I shot, put the books out in the dressing room, and take orders. Then, I collected the specific negs, annoted the film strip to aid future replacement, put them all in neg sleeves with numbers of prints for the benefit of the lab, went to the lab, picked up from the lab, put the negs back, sorted the prints, and delivered them -- only at that point collecting money.

 

Now, I send jpegs to Ofoto, send an email to all the interested parties, and I'm done. Happy people order what they want from Ofoto, in the sizes and quantities they want, and it comes in the mail to them. I get lots of "Hey, nice job" from these people.

 

For a paying assignment, I use a similar technique -- uploading smaller files (or preparing CD's), thereby requiring prints to come from me. Being out of the distribution business is wonderful.

 

Regards,

[mitchell]

I think the instant feedback is a great learning tool. I take shots, and do experiments I would not otherwise try, and see instantly how it worked. I also work the shot, chimping and shooting until I get what I want.

 

Yes. There are advantages to taking just a few shots as well. I hope I have the disapline to do this as well at times. But, overall, for me it's a great advantage to shoot alot with immediate feedback.

 

Best,

 

Mitchell

[frc]

Pre-visualise first then shoot, it takes a picture to take a picture.

I tried it, shooting more than I would normally do, but, it resulted in an equivalent rise of shots and drop of percentage of hits. This on single shots.

Using birst only results in feeling i'm missing the moment. The only thing it is rewarding for is the scarce moment where you see something happening and you think it is actualy to late to take the shot.

Here I may give it a try on digital and point and shoot completely disregarding the settings on the cam, this turned out to be rewarding enough to make me decide to try to learn to do this on film in the same manner.

In this way I usualy end up with 40 to 80 shots max on a day. Having more images to me only seems to be a burden since there is so much more selecting to do. besides, when shooting people or moving objects there is only one chance to record a specific situation.

Static object give you more time to compose, there is no timing involved. Even here my first shot is usualy the best, it's seldom more shots are justified. I walk around see something than go back to the spot where it struck me, then investigate what it is I see and how I see it then compose and record.

Doing this again mostly results in recomposing to the exact same image or when doubting the composition taking a different angle of view hardly ever gives a more appealing perspective.

So, more shots on digital, no eventually not.