A simple reply to one of my threads made me realize I'm not a Photographer

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the comments - much appreciated.

Gordon, I’m curious about why you think I’ll enjoy the Q3 43 so much.  Thoughts?

These things made me smile in my photography life: taking my first shot on a Hasselblad camera and feeling the visceral impact of the camera responding; trying to figure out how to compose a picture in a square camera frame; seeing the upside down images through a waist high viewer filled with light; helping develop black/white film and seeing an image appear out of nowhere; trying to understand how to see the world from the perspective of a rangefinder; feeling the precision of that same camera in action along with the smoothness of the lens movement; the anticipation of seeing what my image looks like and waiting for the lab to develop and print my first black/white shots; watching a professional photographer shoot my wedding using dodging/burning/overlays/vignette and wonderful composition; taking my first shots on a gigital camera and having my thumb with nowhere to go when I tried to advance a film lever.

Things that started me with a smile, but became tedious: the ease and immediate feedback of digital cameras only to then spend countless hours learning about photoshop/lightroom and never being satisfied with the result; buying gear based upon great reviews and then finding that the gear in real world use was far different; moving away from DX sensors because “everyone” said full frame was better only to find that big heavy gear isn’t easy to bring everywhere; getting overly influenced by specs instead of ease of use; the ability to adjust digital cameras using hundreds of menu choice only to find that mastering these choices creates frustration and a feeling of never feeling that I got everything right; buying more gear that I needed “just in case” I needed it later; finding out that batteries don’t last as long as I thought and running out of power before I finished shooting what I wanted to capture; wondering why the pixel race continues to expand taxing my processing skills and wondering “how am I supposed to view a 40MP image in full native resolution on any screen or monitor, especially when screens can’t display such large native files; wondering why my 3x2 format camera image doesn’t have a corresponding 9x12 or 12x16 photographic paper equivalent size to let me print it as I composed it without cropping something out of the image.

Edited October 8, 2024 by lencap

[BillCB]

Many years go I thought of myself as a "photographer", shooting anything that took my fancy - or some things that perhaps didn't. I took a lot of mundane pictures of very little value. Then I had an epiphany.

I came across a book by Andreas Feininger, the Life Magazine photographer, called the "Color  Photo Book". (I still have it, 50 years later.) In it he makes the point that to be a good photographer you must have a connection with your subject. You must like and feel an involvement with what you shoot. For example, don't take shots of dogs if you really don't like them. Don't shoot buildings if you're not really interested in architecture.  And so on. So I sat back and evaluated - what was it I really loved or felt a connection to?

Having been an avid birdwatcher and with a father who was a  botanist, I realized my photographic calling was with nature. I studied nature photography and forgot about all the other stuff I used to shoot. My work improved dramatically and so did my personal satisfaction. (Not to say I don't take family snapshots and that sort of thing too - but my main thrust is landscapes and wildlife.)

All this is to say, Lencap, choose your subject/calling first and then get the gear appropriate for that work. Going from one system to another, worrying about GAS, or the right camera/lens etc., will be subjugated to "What do I need to photograph what I love?".

I sincerely hope this might be helpful to you!

[GFW2-SCUSA]

Lenscap,

What you wrote resonated deeply with me. You say you are an old guy, me too, if 78 is old (depends on the day). I have too much equipment because I don't get rid of the old when I buy the new. I love the feel, sense, essence of beautifully made things. I'm loved my Hasselblad because it was a work of art. Likewise my older Leicas. The new ones not so much. My M10 R and the Leica lenses come close. But all the cameras and lenses I have don't get used much. I like to fondle them, but getting out and making pictures just isn't what it once was. So, I understand something of what you are experiencing, I think.  GAS is an issue, but not a huge one - I have all I need and more. From this thread of many helpful thoughts I have gleened: 1. get a printer and use it. 2. develop a project and focus on that 3. Don't buy anything more - sell what I don't use/love.  To which I might add stop reading so much on the Leica forum even though it is a wonderful place to wile away hours. It causes me to think more about gear and less about making images. 

Are you a photographer? I suspect so, but only you can answer that truthfully, and does it really matter? If you enjoy making pictures do so and forget the label. Perhaps we are looking to get the joy back that has become burried beneath the rubble of good advertising of the latest and greatest. For what ever reason I hope you rediscover the basic joy of making photographs with whatever piece of equipment you have in hand. 

Best wishes, George

[LanceR]

I came across this video that Fil Nenna did about a year ago.  It helped me orient myself to better understand what I wanted from photography.

While I am intrigued by the technical and equipment side of photography, there is something more I want to achieve when I press the shutter than just capturing a snapshot.

I also found it interesting that these types of questions have been asked for over a century.

I had never heard the term "camerist" before this video.

 

 

[MarkP]

10 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

but buy the A3+ because you'll regret not getting a slightly larger one pretty soon.

Gordon

So true

[Dr. G]

18 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

I guess I am allowed to react…

GAS is a nice thing, but it doesn’t really improve your photography. Knowing what you want to photograph does.

When I bought my first Leica three years ago (a Q), I was not sure what I wanted. Now, many cameras later, I know what I want, and I selected the gear based on that. Since then, I honestly don’t really care about other lenses or bodies, as what I have is good enough.

Ofcourse sometimes GAS comes up, hasselblad looks great etc, but then I look what I want to photograph and what I need for that.

Personally, I don’t like photographing with an iphone. That why I will buy the new Q. But that’s me.

Find what gives you joy, and act on that. If it’s gas, so be it (if you can afford it). But I think you need to make up what is your photographic topic.

I agree... mostly.  Cameras are tools and lenses are specialized tools.  Some of these tools allow you to achieve your vision better than others.  

A while back I had part of my catalog critiqued and the one thing that kept coming up was that I should shoot wider to show more of the whole scene.  As great as that advice is, it's just not the way I like to shoot.  In fact, 90% of my catalog is between 35-70mm, with the majority being around 50mm.  

When you say "...it doesn’t really improve your photography. Knowing what you want to photograph does," I think knowing "how" you want to photograph things also plays into the equation.

...as does how you want your photos to look.  I love high contrast black and white imagery.  One of the advantages of having an APO lens is that you can get an almost hyper-real look to black and white images.  So far, the Q3 43 has given me more enjoyment than my previous Q cameras - all of which I've bought and sold after realizing that 28mm is not for me.

So all of these things need to be considered - but it honing in on your preferences only comes from taking lots of photos.   

 

[pickerdd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i don't post here often because there are so many folks on this forum with amazing suggestions, but if you don't mind i'll add my 2 cents.

At some point we all have GAS, a love for the equipment. We buy things because of a great review or a friend recommended it then once the honeymoon is over we need that "fix" again, the cycle repeats. This happens with all sorts of things, photography, guitars, golf, car stuff... whatever.

My personal story is I used M-cameras for years, loved the look and feel, but wasn't able to get the clarity and focus i wanted. My first was an M7 with a 35mm lux and i loved that camera. I added a visoflex to my M10 and magic! I was able to focus properly - i have an astigmatism which makes using a rangefinder difficult at best... i loved that camera (the M10), but using it was a pill... i sold it, bought an SL2 and once i learned how to setup the EVF, it was freaking magic! I could focus with m-lenses!! Once i was able to fine tune the work flow of the camera (I freaking love the workflow on my SL2!!) the camera effectively disappeared. When i used the M10, I loved the photos, but using it was a chore. My "good photo" count went up significantly  with the SL2. I sold almost all of my lenses, kept my 50mm lux M and i have a 35mm and a 75mm SL APO lenses and i couldn't be happier, although i would like to have the 50mm APO SL lens in the future...

The lesson I learned was find a camera that is flexible and fits your particular needs. It doesn't matter whether it is an M or SL or Q3 or whatever. Find something you want to use then stick with it. Ignore the crap that you have to upgrade this or that. Leica cameras as designed to last years, especially M cameras and lenses, but the SL's and Q's are doing pretty darn good in that department too. Stick with one camera unless you are a pro and need multiple. Get to know your camera and lens. I would also suggest as others have, use a 35 or 50mm lens and put the other lenses away and learn that one combination. When i travel the 35mm APO is on my SL2, when I'm home my 75mm APO is on the SL2. and I use an iphone 15 for every day photos, which can be pretty darn good.  Use what you have, learn what you have, love what you have. Like the song said "Love the one you are with"!

That's what i learned...

[Herr Barnack]

20 hours ago, lykaman said:

I suppose the OP might think about getting rid of all his/her camera equipment except 1camera/1lens. Thereafter stick strictly to zero Posts on any forum. Do some actual photography, we all have some photographic capabilities… 😉

Sell everything, take the money out back and burn it.  The end is near.

Edited October 8, 2024 by Herr Barnack

[charlesphoto99]

IMO, in this day and age, if one never prints, or never has the intention to (even if it's say the 25 absolute best images out of 50K), then it's all just an exercise in gear infatuation. The latest, greatest smartphone is all you really need. Sure, the Leica's 'feel good' in the hand, but that's not really the point (or hassle) of using a standalone camera. 

Also, it takes years to become comfortable with a camera. That's why one sees true, I know nothing else, photographers using M bodies and lenses for decades, whether staying with film or transitioning from film to digital. To really make a camera sing, it has to become almost like an extension of your body. Skipping around systems every six months just isn't going to accomplish that. I know, I've tried, out of curiosity, and every time it's straight back to the M for me. 

Edited October 8, 2024 by charlesphoto99

[LocalHero1953]

54 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

IMO, in this day and age, if one never prints, or never has the intention to (even if it's say the 25 absolute best images out of 50K), then it's all just an exercise in gear infatuation. The latest, greatest smartphone is all you really need. Sure, the Leica's 'feel good' in the hand, but that's not really the point (or hassle) of using a standalone camera. 

That's the view that sees a good photograph as an exercise in producing the best print image quality. Nothing wrong with that. But there's another approach to photography that is all about content: what it shows, how it shows it and the story it tells. Printing can be helpful as a way of distributing the content, but so can online use (and photobooks, zines and other print publications, including news media).

I print occasionally to put on the wall, and I have printed and bound my own photobooks, but printing is certainly not the be all and end all of photography for everyone, nor does it have to be. I take a lot of photographs; most of them see their greatest use online, placed there mainly by others e.g. theatre publicity. I spent half a day last week with one of the finer college choirs in this city; they have a website and blog that calls for a change of images every week. They will use the 4-500 shots I sent them over the next year - but never as prints. You can see my stuff on my website, but please don't tell me I'm infatuated with gear!

I also see many, many photographers posting here whose work I admire; I don't see their prints, and I doubt that the impact of their images would be altered by seeing them as a print. For that matter, I saw much of Cartier-Bresson's work online before I ever saw it in print at his foundation in Paris - where I, used to A3+ prints, found the small size of much of his original prints surprisingly disappointing. In his case, the print added nothing other than as a historical artefact.

[Markey]

Back in the seventies I printed.

Never enjoyed that part of the process though and never looked at the prints .

Certainly wouldn`t hang them on the wall. Paintings but not prints.

Come the nineties I had select frames printed by Ilford.

I much preferred their (hybrid) process than anything I could come up with.

All prints from that time were dutifully housed in lovely AA clamshell boxes .

I never look at them but they remain as a backup.

Twenty years later and most of my output is done for others so the internet became my main (only) external expression and still is.

[charlesphoto99]

56 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

That's the view that sees a good photograph as an exercise in producing the best print image quality. Nothing wrong with that. But there's another approach to photography that is all about content: what it shows, how it shows it and the story it tells. Printing can be helpful as a way of distributing the content, but so can online use (and photobooks, zines and other print publications, including news media).

I print occasionally to put on the wall, and I have printed and bound my own photobooks, but printing is certainly not the be all and end all of photography for everyone, nor does it have to be. I take a lot of photographs; most of them see their greatest use online, placed there mainly by others e.g. theatre publicity. I spent half a day last week with one of the finer college choirs in this city; they have a website and blog that calls for a change of images every week. They will use the 4-500 shots I sent them over the next year - but never as prints. You can see my stuff on my website, but please don't tell me I'm infatuated with gear!

I also see many, many photographers posting here whose work I admire; I don't see their prints, and I doubt that the impact of their images would be altered by seeing them as a print. For that matter, I saw much of Cartier-Bresson's work online before I ever saw it in print at his foundation in Paris - where I, used to A3+ prints, found the small size of much of his original prints surprisingly disappointing. In his case, the print added nothing other than as a historical artefact.

Okay, I was replying with a hefty dose of hyperbole. Of course the end all is not always a print. That's the case for me as a pro these days -more often than not what I shoot ends up online or offset print elsewhere. The only prints I make are of my archival film images (mostly) or personal fine art work. But, knowing how to print and manipulate the image to that considered endpoint (even if it doesn't became an actuality) is a great skill to have that can be translated into one's final vision even if one only displays their work online. To be a photographer is more than just buying the most expensive camera one can and then relying solely on what comes SOOC (straight out of the camera). It's a great starting point (and Leica has made that point to final image much closer than ever before) but it's also really the same as shooting a phone shot, just with differing hardware. 

[david strachan]

9 hours ago, MarkP said:

So true

Ditto, ditto.

 

I only print a half dozen large prints (A3+) each year  but take thousands of images.

I print for my own satisfaction, but the many positive comments certainly adds to my photography.

Good luck finding your path.  Perhaps no need for being so tough on yourself.

 

.

[Tailwagger]

 

21 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

But, knowing how to print and manipulate the image to that considered endpoint (even if it doesn't became an actuality) is a great skill to have that can be translated into one's final vision even if one only displays their work online.

Agreed.  It's not the act of printing per se, but rather the benefits reaped by cultivating the skills necessary to do so.  

[FlashGordonPhotography]

5 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said:

IMO, in this day and age, if one never prints, or never has the intention to (even if it's say the 25 absolute best images out of 50K), then it's all just an exercise in gear infatuation. The latest, greatest smartphone is all you really need. Sure, the Leica's 'feel good' in the hand, but that's not really the point (or hassle) of using a standalone camera. 

Also, it takes years to become comfortable with a camera. That's why one sees true, I know nothing else, photographers using M bodies and lenses for decades, whether staying with film or transitioning from film to digital. To really make a camera sing, it has to become almost like an extension of your body. Skipping around systems every six months just isn't going to accomplish that. I know, I've tried, out of curiosity, and every time it's straight back to the M for me. 

Before I disagree with you, I ask, what's wrong with gear infatuation? Leica's are beautiful. Of course there's a bit of camera lust going on. And it's not unhealthy. Rather the opposite. Sure, they're tools but even carpenters will choose better and more beautiful tools over just utilitarian ones. The choice of tools can inspire us to do more and better work.

Now to disagree with you.

The choice of camera and especially the choice of lens does influence the content not just the output. I'm not sure an iPhone is the ideal choice on safari, unless you want to get really close to that lion. Astro requires gear that's relatively specialised. So does some sports. An M will influence the way you shoot and the lenses you'll choose differently to a SL3.

Secondly and most importantly, photography is supposed to be fun. Now I'm not saying shooting with an iPhone can't be fun but a Q3-43 is more fun. When you have a piece of kit that speaks to you, you're more likely to take it out and use it. It's not about the output, really. It's about the process. It's likely 6 people will scan past you photo on IG anyway so you may as well shoot for yourself. And that means the process plays a bigger part than the end result. For me, phone phots are throw away moments and a real camera is for keepers. I'm not talking about the picture but the importance of what's in front of me.

Finally there are flitters and fixies. Some do need time to settle into a camera. I don't. Maybe it's 35 years of shooting various systems but I switch most days. On my current trip I have 4 different systems with me. SL3, Q3 (and Q3-43), X2D and drones. All with a place. All with a purpose. All gear I enjoy using immensely. I've always been able to move systems seamlessly. Many photographers can.

Gordon

[Anbaric]

19 hours ago, BillCB said:

I came across a book by Andreas Feininger, the Life Magazine photographer, called the "Color  Photo Book". (I still have it, 50 years later.) In it he makes the point that to be a good photographer you must have a connection with your subject. You must like and feel an involvement with what you shoot. For example, don't take shots of dogs if you really don't like them. Don't shoot buildings if you're not really interested in architecture.  And so on. So I sat back and evaluated - what was it I really loved or felt a connection to?

Feininger had a lot of perceptive things to say about photography. From The Complete Photographer:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[LocalHero1953]

7 minutes ago, Anbaric said:

Feininger had a lot of perceptive things to say about photography. From The Complete Photographer:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

It's interesting that he uses "he"/"him" in his analysis. Although this may be partly from the time he was writing, in my experience (and I know I'm attributing a common personality trait to half the world's population 🙄) women are more likely than men to be more interested in the what they are photographing and less interested in the equipment. 

If you dig into my profile, you will see that I edit a journal on 'contemporary photography'; for want of a better definition, that is considered to be photography 'about' something, not 'of' something. Another way: it's not pretty pictures, it's what the pictures say. After a number of years researching photographers to invite to contribute to the journal, I'd estimate a slight majority are women. 

[charlesphoto99]

4 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Secondly and most importantly, photography is supposed to be fun.

Yes, post work has always been considered no fun. But it can be, in the self rewards dept. if nothing else. And there is such a thing as too much gear, or shyness about gear (the I might scratch my precious special edition black paint Leica, so may as well just use my iPhone crowd). Which is what I think the O.P. was getting at. Of course we're all different (and better collecting cameras than say, guns, in my book) but sometimes an embarrassment of riches doesn't always make one wealthy. Just overwhelmed thinking maybe the next thing will do for you what the last didn't (it won't). 

[dkCambridgeshire]

On 10/7/2024 at 7:12 PM, lencap said:

Greetings

Do I go back to the M body, even with cataracts and declining vision, with little ability to have confidence that I can actually capture focus and frame the image correctly?  (Truth be told the M platform gave me the most engaging feeling of them all).

If not considered already: Please seek professional ophthalmic advice ref remedying your cataracts. And ref GAS : Consider the fact that Bert Hardy produced iconic images using a simple Box Brownie.

At the end of the day, it's the photographer and his / her, 'seeing eye(s)' which composes the image. Several friends' photography and 'seeing' significantly improved following their cataract surgeries. 

BW, dunk 

Edited October 9, 2024 by dkCambridgeshire

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LanceR]

20 hours ago, pickerdd said:

bought an SL2 and once i learned how to setup the EVF, it was freaking magic! I could focus with m-lenses!

@pickerdd I am curious what EVF settings you found so helpful for shooting M lenses with your SL camera.  Do you mind sharing?