Why shoot wide-open?

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, adan said:

I've been thinking about these questions for three days now, and I see some basic conceptual problems.

1. What is a "Great" or world-famous picture?

2. How does one know if a picture was made "at maximum aperture?" Without knowing the lens and aperture used?

3. Should pictures shot wide-open that would not exist at all otherwise (poor lighting) count the same as pictures shot wide-open for some visual effect?

Firstly I'm sorry to read that you have spent three days considering the question, Andy (unless of course you have derived some enjoyment the process!), because, as the 'half-title' of the thread states, I started it / in the spirit of "Just curious and for a bit of fun".

As such perhaps you are slightly overthinking the matter a tad? This is not to say that I don't appreciate all the deep thought and effort which has been put into the question by everyone - on the contrary; I have been slightly taken aback and delighted by the number of very thoughtful and well-reasoned responses which have been posted and for which I thank everyone concerned - but the question as posted in the OP was, I thought, quite simple and straightforward. It seems that I was mistaken!

In response to your questions as posed;

1. I'm very happy to allow a HUGE amount of leeway regarding what constitutes 'Great' (as well as 'World Famous') and have addressed this matter in the thread a few times already. Obviously there are any number of considerations which can be brought to bear in this regard. I know what I understand to be covered by the terms and I would hope and expect others here to have their own views on the matter.

2. This is one of the points at the core of my original question and one which I thought I had clarified when, in post #5, I typed;

"I'm just interested to know whether there were/are world-famous snappers who have proclaimed their adherence to a 'Shoot Wide-Open' ethos in comparison to the 'Shoot Fully Stopped-Down' approach of Group f64.".

To this question it appears - so far - there is no clear answer. No-one has yet been able to say;

"There is a group of photographers calling themselves 'The Wide-Open Bunch' who will only ever use their lenses at max. ap. and whose images can be seen at www.thewideopenbunch.co.iceland."

Perhaps now is the time for so-minded snappers to start such a group?

3. Yes. Assuming they are either 'Great' and/or 'World-Famous' (see response 1)............

In summation; I have found it fascinating to read the responses by everyone. During the various routes and side-tracks taken we have covered - almost literally - the whole history of Photography from Nicéphore Niépce to the present day. I'm not sure that there can be much to add to this topic. When I started the thread I didn't expect there to be much to say on the matter and I certainly didn't expect it to go to five pages in length. As stated earlier; I have thoroughly enjoyed reading all the responses posted, discussions undertaken and checking-out the various links which have taken me places previously unknown to me; I have learned a great deal. I hope that some of the members might also have derived some pleasure in reading the musings of our fellow forumites.

It may be time to call this thread 'Closed' but, of course, if anyone wishes to add to the present content I'm sure it will be enjoyed by us all.

Thank-you, everyone, for your efforts; they are greatly appreciated!

Philip.

Edited January 17, 2023 by pippy

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[FrozenInTime]

For completeness, I will throw in that all Minox 8x11 camera photographs are taken at full aperture ( 15mm f/3.5 for most ).

There may not be many great photographs, or photographers, but there are will some infamous document copies and surreptitiously taken historical images out there.

e.g. http://www.submin.com/8x11/collection/minox/articles/images/times_92.jpg Chamberlain addressing parliament by Brabazon 

[01maciel]

I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I would like to say that shooting with a wide and open aperture is the only real domain of photography that is not yet occupied by smartphones or other simple devices. I like to take a landscape picture with my smartphone. The photos are not bad and hardly distinguishable from those I took with my Leica or the S1R. But I discover my surroundings on my photo tours, on the other hand, almost exclusively with an open aperture.

[4r36]

5 hours ago, 01maciel said:

I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I would like to say that shooting with a wide and open aperture is the only real domain of photography that is not yet occupied by smartphones or other simple devices. I like to take a landscape picture with my smartphone. The photos are not bad and hardly distinguishable from those I took with my Leica or the S1R. But I discover my surroundings on my photo tours, on the other hand, almost exclusively with an open aperture.

It's not my intention to open any diatribe, so let me put it this way: I wonder whether the same holds if the landscape picture is taken (stopped down) with analog cameras. I feel the members of f/64 would answer in the negative...

[pippy]

7 hours ago, 01maciel said:

...I discover my surroundings on my photo tours, on the other hand, almost exclusively with an open aperture...

FWIW I would like to say a big THANKS! to you for the images which you post in the various threads around the Forum. There are a great many which I have very much enjoyed viewing. Please do carry on the good work which you, yourself, so clearly enjoy as it brings your own distinct personal viewpoint into the general arena of lens-usage.

Again; thanks for your input here.

Philip.

[NigelG]

Echoing (maybe) @01maciel the only photos I take that my wife says "wow!" over are those taken at max aperture with a 50 Lux ASPH.  

They don't look like a computational "depth of field" iPhone "portrait" image even on a small screen (yet!) and maybe that's a good thing?

I had a Noctilux f0.95 (twice - black then silver) and also an f1.0 version (coded and adjusted for digital) but realised that I was taking shots just for the bokeh...

The problem with the 50 Lux ASPH is the "Ninja star" bokeh balls when lightly stopping-down so for me it's a wide-open or f5.6 and up lens.

I have found wide open of the 50 Lux hits a sweet-spot for me in terms of shallow but "just-enough-depth-of-field" for general use/portraits so I have a black and a sliver chrome version (I sold the BC version I also had 'cos of the fiddly hood/filter issue though it was a lovely lens in use) and also a nice balance of character/vignetting/acuity that suits my preference. 

I use a chrome 50 Summicron (LTM Japan edition) as an alternative when I'm travelling or shooting landscape etc. with none of the aperture shape issues.

The only other lens I use wide-open every single time I take a shot is obviously the Contax 16mm f8 M-conversion (but that's only because I don't use the centre-spot filter and it has no diaphragm anyway...)

Edited January 17, 2023 by NigelG

[Erato]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A must-have SK-II series lotion against aging issues? Or a fabulous Channel °5? Or it is just a Viagra?

Edited January 18, 2023 by Erato

[hepcat]

On 1/17/2023 at 1:54 AM, adan said:

I've been thinking about these questions for three days now, and I see some basic conceptual problems.

1. What is a "Great" or world-famous picture?

2. How does one know if a picture was made "at maximum aperture?" Without knowing the lens and aperture used?

3. Should pictures shot wide-open that would not exist at all otherwise (poor lighting) count the same as pictures shot wide-open for some visual effect?

What lens, which aperture, was that wide-open?

1.  "Great" is a one-opportunity photo...  it can be because of timing, location, or preparation.  For example,  Bob Jackson's photo of Lee Harvey Oswald being shot by Jack Ruby is a "Great" photo.  The one taken milliseconds earlier by Jack Beers of the same scene has been delegated to the dust bin.  Had Jackson not been there, Beers would have won a Pulitzer.  As it was, no one knows his name.  Timing is everything.   Edward Weston's "Pepper #30" is a great photo because of the preparation it took to obtain the image. 

2.  You don't know even what camera, lens, or film/sensor made any particular photo.  In the final analysis, that's why all of the technical comparisons of lenses, cameras, films, and sensors are discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.  I like the way my Leitz R lenses render, but you can't tell me what lens/camera combo any of my images were made with, much less what aperture, shutter speed, or ISO was used.  

3.  Once again, there's no way to determine which is which by looking at an image.  

Your questions, when answered, invalidate many of the arguments that have raged in the world of photography ever since magazines decided they needed to "test" cameras and lenses, sometime starting in the late '40s or early '50s.   MDF charts are great for engineers to use as an objective measure of how a lens is designed.  They're a nearly useless indicator of real-world performance; yet books have been written using them and discussions fly ad nauseam around them in all corners of the Internets.

I have yet to find anyone who can definitively determine lens, aperture, film, ISO, shutter speed, or camera just from viewing a print.