How has your approach to photography changed over the years?

[imported_peter_m]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is rater a interesting discussion, Michael your information is very much appreciated.

I do have a question for you, determine your film speed I guess this would also mean for the printed image, how dose it stand up on scanning? Seams like when scanning you end up if you scan grayscale with only one of the channels and then end up matching it up to the print. Just guessing here since I haven't gotten to the print stage yet, got to find some time and set up a darkroom, got all the bits and pieces all is left is a bit of remodeling.

Peter

[alun]

This is interesting. I suppose my photographic experience of the past four or five years has been this: be methodical. Although shooting film since the 60s and 70s, what I lacked before was method -- the basic lessons. I shoot only two cameras (M6 & M7). I shoot primarily two lenses (35mm and 28mm; less frequently a 50mm). In autumn and winter I shoot 800 ASA colour film; the rest of the year 400 ASA colour film. I have this developed and scanned at a pro lab, always as 18Mb files.

 

I have found (hardly surprising, but it took a while to sink in!) that reducing the variables means I learn more about what cameras, films and lenses are likely to do in a given situation; I can begin to anticipate; I can focus on the picture rather than the equipment; and I can better exercise my judgement about why some pictures work and others don't.

 

All of that will sound jaw-droppingly obvious to most on this forum, but it's surprising how effective the old lessons are.

 

Apart from that (or perhaps, more accurately, included as part of that) has been building confidence -- confidence in the equipment and my ability to make it do what I want it to (at least some of the time), confidence in editing and selecting (the biggest and best advance, in my view) and confidence in actually photographing (especally on the street and publicly).

 

None of these are earth-shattering conclusions, but as a *method* for self-improvement I now know that this approach can be shown to work -- and I also understand more clearly why it has taken me some years to reach this point.

[Michael Hiles]

Peter,

 

The film speed test determines the ASA that delivers a density of 0.1 over blank film when the exposure is 4 stops less than the exposure indicated by the meter. Meters tell you how to set the camera for Zone V (middle grey). 4 stops less is Zone 1, the darkest shadows with a little detail in the negative. The goal is to eliminate guesswork. When I drive from Montreal to New York I consult my map – I could just start driving south, but I risk ending up in Philadelphia.

 

In my experience (others may disagree) this produces easily scan-able negatives. It also produces negatives that are easily printable – because when you expose more-or-less correctly, there is something there to scan or print. You will almost certainly have detail in both the shadows and the highlights. That is the whole point.

 

Honestly, about channels when scanning I know nothing. When I scan B&W negatives I set the Output to Greyscale and check the histogram to assure that I am getting everything the negative has to offer. Then after, I may play with levels, contrast, brightness, a little burning or dodging etc,. I set the Input either to Colour Negative (for XP2 – this allows me to use ICE) or Monochrome Negative for silver-based film. I never make B&W pictures from colour film, so I cannot usefully comment. Others do – very successfully.

 

There are three books I can recommend. Ansel Adams – The Negative and The Print. A few details are out of date since some materials have been discontinued. But the techniques are completely up to date. Also Fred Picker’s Zone VI Workshop. This is a quite simple reduction of what Ansel teaches, and Fred’s advice and technique works. Both authors concentrate on telling you how to organize yourself and reduce or eliminate guessing and blind luck with no need for rumour and old time religion.

[enboe]

The threads on technical approach, selection of image capture and display media, and equipment is all quite nice and I cannot add anything enlightening. So...

 

I have seen the way I interact with a subject change significantly over the past thirty nine years. I started taking pictures of inanimate objects from a distance. A number of years and cameras later, I was taking pictures of people from a distance. I flirted a little with mid-range interaction with subjects in my mid twenties, but it wasn't until my 30's that I started to take pictures of people, animals, and objects at truly conversational distances. It has been a rewarding journey, as I have been enriched by the relations I have built with my subjects.

 

The most important message has already been conveyed by others - enjoy the hobby.

 

Eric

[imported_peter_m]

Thank you Michael,

I think I grasped the rudiments of the zone system, just haven't started the real printing yet. I do get the details in highlights and shadows so I can't be doing all that bad, but so far only had digital results that depends on software. The real test will be printing in the darkroom .... that will be the next adventure.

Thank you for taking the time for explaining.

Peter

[alun]

Eric --

 

"Conversational distances" -- I very much like that description.

 

[...] people, animals, and objects at truly conversational distances [...]

[DTD]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Started taking photos when I was about 8 or 9 – my dad was interested and showed my how to print black and white in a darkroom he built. Used his Praktica SLR. Lost interest aged about 14 or 15. Picked it up again at 21 when my dad gave me his Olympus OM2. Lost interest again, got interested in DTP on the Mac.

 

About 10 years ago, I had a couple of old negs scanned and got right back into photography. Because I was used to using Photoshop etc. for graphics, I didn't find there was a big learning curve moving away from film and found it much easier to get good results and more importantly, to be able to submit them to magazines and galleries etc.

 

However I always fancied a Leica and (with a bit of encouragement from Andy Barton) got one 2 or 3 years ago – it gets a bit of use, but is a long way from being a main camera, although I went to New Brighton today and took some photos.

 

The biggest change for me, was deciding to work on long-term series of photographs rather than single pictures and that I much preferred shoes to cameras.