ianman Posted January 10, 2020 Share #41 Posted January 10, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) 8 hours ago, PeterGA said: as suggested by a few nuff nuffs in the thread already 8 hours ago, PeterGA said: ... and finally please don't put words in my mouth re categorising people in this forum 🤔 😁 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 10, 2020 Posted January 10, 2020 Hi ianman, Take a look here Does AF make you lazy?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
PeterGA Posted January 10, 2020 Share #42 Posted January 10, 2020 @pippy - - I agree that there is a huge difference between making photographs for paid work with all that goes with it - and making photographs for oneself. Makes a lot of sense to want to go about things differently for all sorts of reasons - but I think that "choosing a different way" is the creative act - I know a couple of blokes who do mainly product photography and that is a all tediously manual ( as you are no doubt aware) - they love autofocus /available light no rules shooting for their personal work though ... I'm not saying a choice to shoot fully manual is a bad choice - all I'm saying is that choosing to shoot in P mode (lets say) is just as valid a choice - and just as capable of delivering excellent photographic results.... nice piece of 'oldkit' there 👍 Pete 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 10, 2020 Share #43 Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 13 minutes ago, PeterGA said: I'm not saying a choice to shoot fully manual is a bad choice - all I'm saying is that choosing to shoot in P mode (lets say) is just as valid a choice - and just as capable of delivering excellent photographic results.... nice piece of 'oldkit' there 👍 Pete Yes; I understood your meaning and am in complete agreement with it, Pete. No arguments from here whatsoever. After all; shooting in P mode is hardly different from the approach of some of my 'street-shooter' friends who set their camera to 1/125 @ f8 (or whatever the Weston advises), putting their 28mm to 3.5m and leaving it there for the duration. In fact P would probably give better results. And the images would probably be in sharper focus to boot....... The Sinar? Poor old thing sits, forlornly, in its case under the stairs. Hasn't been used since the switch to digital in 2007. Yes; I was a late-adopter...... Philip. Edited January 10, 2020 by pippy 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterGA Posted January 10, 2020 Share #44 Posted January 10, 2020 11 minutes ago, pippy said: Yes; I understood your meaning and am in complete agreement with it, Pete. No arguments from here whatsoever. After all; shooting in P mode is hardly different from the approach of some of my 'street-shooter' friends who set their camera to 1/125 @ f8 (or whatever the Weston advises), putting their 28mm to 3.5m and leaving it there for the duration. In fact P would probably give better results. And the images would probably be in sharper focus to boot....... The Sinar? Poor old thing sits, forlornly, in its case under the stairs. Hasn't been used since the switch to digital in 2007. Yes; I was a late-adopter...... Philip. the Sinar is now 'art'.... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 10, 2020 Share #45 Posted January 10, 2020 11 minutes ago, Artin said: I wonder how many photographers out there can expose a picture correctly without a light meter ? Cmon, that skill can't be completely lost. You make an eyeball estimate if outdoors of how many stops away you are from "sunny sixteen" and check your arithmetic with the little piece of paper that came in the box of film. I've sent two kids off to summer "film courses" with an M2 and Tri-X, after calibrating their eyes with a Ricoh GR-D and that piece of paper. They did OK. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 10, 2020 Share #46 Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Artin said: I wonder how many photographers out there can expose a picture correctly without a light meter ? Good question. Perhaps more than we might guess? I suppose it would depend on their background / introduction to photography / training / experience in shooting. For us old farts it's probably easy as many of us grew up with fully manual gear so became very familiar with what exposure would typically be set on a bright, sunny day using, say, ISO 100 film as we did it so often. For the 'Millenials' it might be quite a different situation. Having said that I do know quite a number of kids in their young-to-mid-teens who are far more interested in going back to using mechanical analogue cameras purely for the fun of doing 'Real Photography' than using digi-point'n'shoot compacts. My own daughter (who is now a 15-y-o) started taking weekend photography classes a couple of years ago and asked for a mechanical camera for her Xmas that year. I picked up half-a-dozen (don't ask!) old Nikkormats from the 'net (FTn & FT2) and assorted lenses, gave her the pick of the bunch and she's absolutely loving it! I was also surprised and impressed by the structure of the lessons she is attending; they really did go right back to basics - including things like using printing-out-paper, cyanotypes and photograms, and receiving a full involvement in all aspects of the analogue process. After our first Daddy-Daughter Shooting Day (I used my old Nikon F / Standard Prism) I thought, looking at the contact sheets of the five rolls, that one of her rolls was mine. Either she's better than she had any right to be or I'm worse than I should be...🤔...I've also just given the (13-y-o) son of a friend one of the other Nikkormats because his parents mentioned that he, too, was wanting to learn "..the proper way to take photographs.." and he is absolutely over the moon with the whole experience. Perhaps the future is brighter than might be imagined?! Philip. Edited January 10, 2020 by pippy 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted January 10, 2020 Share #47 Posted January 10, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) 10 hours ago, PeterGA said: I think you've missed the point of my post - which is an utter rejection of the notion that somehow 'manual' focusing helps make better images - as suggested by a few nuff nuffs in the thread already - no one was talking about Tech camera shooting or camera systems which dont have the amenity of autofocus etc etc etc.. Improving one's results is not a function of the physical act of focusing. It has to do with learning (and not subsequently forgetting) the arsenal of techniques necessary to shoot MF successfully across a range of situations where had one been shooting with AF such things wouldn't have been given the slightest consideration. MF schools many of us in the notion of pre-focusing to choosing a spot for a subject to cross, that we can take advantage of the fact that metering can be decoupled from the point of focus, that we can estimate distances, triangulate from ground to eye-level, use DoF to provide a window of time for a successful capture, etc, etc. No one decries AF as an anathema. The point is that all too often when something is being automatically taken care of, many ignore (or never even learn of) those aspects that system is now responsible for. Program modes, anyone? JPGs? The definition of lazy, per M-W, is 'being disinclined to activity or exertion.' When one becomes reliant on such automation to make things easier to accomplish, particularly across the board and under all circumstance, one has, by definition, become lazy. And laziness only maximizes a result by accident. Thought and interaction, despite the added effort and occasional frustration, typically yield a better final result. Perhaps for those who have earned a living for decades, many of these lessons are so deeply burned in that no technology will ever wash them away. But for those with fewer repetitions under their belt, ceding control by unerringly relying on the camera to make the decision, then turning around and blaming it for one's failure is, in my view, counterproductive. The good news about the SL2 AF is that it is not so infallible that one is fully prepared under all circumstances to rely on it anyway. The bad news is that the MF experience, at least with the new 'crons, isn't anything special. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted January 10, 2020 Share #48 Posted January 10, 2020 1 hour ago, Artin said: I wonder how many photographers out there can expose a picture correctly without a light meter ? Every single one... when armed with an EVF. 😃 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted January 10, 2020 Share #49 Posted January 10, 2020 2 hours ago, Artin said: I wonder how many photographers out there can expose a picture correctly without a light meter ? Lomography built an entire company out of selling plastic cameras without light meters, so more than you think? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow Posted January 10, 2020 Share #50 Posted January 10, 2020 Sunny 16 :) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 10, 2020 Share #51 Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 55 minutes ago, Simone_DF said: Lomography built an entire company out of selling plastic cameras without light meters, so more than you think? It is with a certain nostalgic fondness that I remember, as a small child, having three choices of aperture on my first (and it WAS plastic) camera; Sunny, Cloudy-bright and Cloudy - all denoted by their appropriate symbol. Perhaps for an upcoming Limited Edition Model Leica could go even more '60s-Retro and adopt this approach?...... Philip. Edited January 10, 2020 by pippy 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterGA Posted January 11, 2020 Share #52 Posted January 11, 2020 10 hours ago, Tailwagger said: Improving one's results is not a function of the physical act of focusing. It has to do with learning (and not subsequently forgetting) the arsenal of techniques necessary to shoot MF successfully across a range of situations where had one been shooting with AF such things wouldn't have been given the slightest consideration. MF schools many of us in the notion of pre-focusing to choosing a spot for a subject to cross, that we can take advantage of the fact that metering can be decoupled from the point of focus, that we can estimate distances, triangulate from ground to eye-level, use DoF to provide a window of time for a successful capture, etc, etc. No one decries AF as an anathema. The point is that all too often when something is being automatically taken care of, many ignore (or never even learn of) those aspects that system is now responsible for. Program modes, anyone? JPGs? The definition of lazy, per M-W, is 'being disinclined to activity or exertion.' When one becomes reliant on such automation to make things easier to accomplish, particularly across the board and under all circumstance, one has, by definition, become lazy. And laziness only maximizes a result by accident. Thought and interaction, despite the added effort and occasional frustration, typically yield a better final result. Perhaps for those who have earned a living for decades, many of these lessons are so deeply burned in that no technology will ever wash them away. But for those with fewer repetitions under their belt, ceding control by unerringly relying on the camera to make the decision, then turning around and blaming it for one's failure is, in my view, counterproductive. The good news about the SL2 AF is that it is not so infallible that one is fully prepared under all circumstances to rely on it anyway. The bad news is that the MF experience, at least with the new 'crons, isn't anything special. YesI too agree that one can't make consistently really good work unless they understand both the craft/skill/knowledge and art of photography. No matter how proficient one becomes in the requisite skills though - the actual production of good work is something that (inevitably) remains the challenge for those who care. If we leave aside lofty ambition - I think that any technologies that ease the journey - inevitably encourage and foster greater interest - which is a good start. Those who have a genuine passion for the art - soon tire of the 'limitations' that the easy way offers. Ultimately there is no escaping the fact that one needs to exercise more rather than less control over the capture medium and no amount of post production dicking around with PS/LR can substitute for it. But I am of the view that encouraging people to actually have an interest that grows is a good thing and so I believe that 'enabling technologies' are a good thing. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted January 11, 2020 Share #53 Posted January 11, 2020 (edited) On 1/9/2020 at 8:45 PM, Artin said: That is just a boat load of B S , do not generalize everyone in here as weekend warriors with deep pockets taking pictures of cats and landscapes. What you think you are achieving today with fancy 350 AF point Camera, some of us were working with complete manual focus and mechanical cameras making a good living and keeping our clients satisfied and breathless. I have done fashion and lifestyle with Hassy cm500 and RZ 67s , formula 1 , and Pro Hockey, and Basketball with Canon FD , Annual reports , automotive advertising and Catalogues with Sinar , Built up a multi million dollar agency in 15 years and there was not a single Auto Focus Lens in that line up. Auto focus makes things Easy. Put everything auto and click 10 frames a second you are bound to gat a decent shot. My sons wedding photographer ( a so called pro ) did not even know what the ring on my Leica m lens was with the decimal numbers on them . Dude did not even know what an aperture ring was. Does anyone remember prefocusing the focus point in sports photography anymore by anticipating the movements of your subject. When started out I remember coating my own glass plates, processing them in a little tent by a stream with only my burro Bessie for company. We were men and that was real photography none of that easy stuff you kids have today. Seriously ........ In a word NO! AF does not make one lazy. This is the 21st century, AF is simply technological advancement...like digital photography. Or using a computer and PS rather than the antique silver gelatin process. That said I am better photographer for knowing how to use my cameras and for previsualization. And a bit of Art history knowledge doesn't hurt either. Embrace the technology it's a good thing! And don't worry guys, great photography is still hard .....very hard, even with AF 😉 Edited January 11, 2020 by ECohen 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 11, 2020 Share #54 Posted January 11, 2020 (edited) 25 minutes ago, ECohen said: That said I am better photographer for knowing how to use my cameras and for previsualization. And a bit of Art history knowledge doesn't hurt either. Then of course you’re aware that Ansel called it visualization, thinking the term pre-visualization (used by Minor White) redundant. Jeff Edited January 11, 2020 by Jeff S 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 11, 2020 Share #55 Posted January 11, 2020 If anything makes you lazy it’s the zoom lenses, not AF, not auto WB, not Auto ISO, and not Aperture mode ... IMO. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 11, 2020 Share #56 Posted January 11, 2020 This thread has grown as long as it has because there is no common understanding of what 'a better photographer' actually is. Some use the term as simply one who knows how to take a correctly exposed image, focused on the bit it was intended to be focused on. I see this as all 'technique', and a means to an end, which is a better photograph - a photograph that someone actually wants to look at and find interesting*. A better photographer (IMO of course) is someone who has the eye to see that image and make the camera capture it. The technology that helps you to do that, and the skills you learn to manage the technology, are all grist to the mill - without them, the photography would be crap, but with them you have only just got to first base - the photography hereafter can still be crap. FWIW I use AF almost all the time, either in face recognition mode, because it's more accurate than focus and recompose, or spot AF, which requires as much thought as MF - and is also more accurate than focus and recompose. I use MF or back button AF for macro, to avoid losing the focus at shutter press. I almost never use focus magnification or focus peaking because I find them too slow and distracting. In other words, I use whatever focus techniques are to hand which help me get the photo I want. I also want technology that gets out of the way, which Leica excels at, allowing me to concentrate on what I'm looking at, not on camera controls. Is that making me lazy? I don't think so. *This even applies to product photography 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 11, 2020 Share #57 Posted January 11, 2020 25 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said: ......I see this as all 'technique', and a means to an end, which is a better photograph - a photograph that someone actually wants to look at and find interesting*.......*This even applies to product photography...... This is why I still enjoy shooting Studio Still-life; trying to make something which might, in reality, be quite ordinary look really good. I'm also fortunate that my main clients generally have wonderful and beautiful artifacts for me to shoot in the first place. I enjoy my work! I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post links but if anyone is curious as to how I earn my bread-and-butter then let me know... Philip. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 11, 2020 Share #58 Posted January 11, 2020 7 minutes ago, pippy said: This is why I still enjoy shooting Studio Still-life; trying to make something which might, in reality, be quite ordinary look really good. I'm also fortunate that my main clients generally have wonderful and beautiful artifacts for me to shoot in the first place. I enjoy my work! I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post links but if anyone is curious as to how I earn my bread-and-butter then let me know... Philip. I'd like to see it! Why not add a link to your signature, as many of us do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted January 11, 2020 Share #59 Posted January 11, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, Jeff S said: Then of course you’re aware that Ansel called it visualization, thinking the term pre-visualization (used by Minor White) redundant. Jeff OK I get it now: The term previsualization has been attributed to Minor White who divided visualization into previsualization, referring to visualization while studying the subject; and postvisualization, referring to remembering the visualized image at printing time. Still AF is simply a tool .......Art school was 50 years ago ...Give this old guy a break ...please 😉 Edited January 11, 2020 by ECohen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted January 11, 2020 Share #60 Posted January 11, 2020 I’m lazy and I find manual focusing on the M to be less of a chore than using AF on the SL2. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now