Photographers Stuck in the Past

[cgipson1]

I suppose that the starchy gluey part of oatmeal is colloidal, but oatmeal itself isn't evenly distributed.

Milk on the other hand....

Ok.. I can put milk in your oatmeal.. or even Cream if you prefer, Oh Master! but only raw, unprocessed sugar for you... nothing but the best!

[Ads]

[unpopular]

let me run into the ally and pick up the milk. use whatever sugar you want; you'll be eating the oatmeal.

[cgipson1]

let me run into the ally and pick up the milk. use whatever sugar you want; you'll be eating the oatmeal.

I sense a coup de'tat coming...

[unpopular]

Hey man. I liked the Gypsy Style girl, too, but that's just uncalled for!

[skieur]

If a photographer gets the job done well I don't think it matters how far in the past they choose to live.

It's just when they assume I am interested in how authentically vintage or w/e they are that I have an issue. (Hint: I usually don't care)

This all seems like its geared towards going fast, fast, fast. That's not always necessarily the point.

I also think that saying these are "fatal" is a little dramatic.

Well, it depends on what the job is. Amateurs shooting scenery have all the time in the world and so do those shooting posed shots. Pros shooting sports, action, public relations, journalistic style, etc. need to "get the shot" as it happens. By the time you would take to do manual settings, personal adjustments etc., the potential shot would be long gone. Companies and businesses are looking for natural shots with perfect timing that are effective, well composed, and fit their needs. This can only be accomplished if you use the latest, most relevant features on your camera, and that extremely rarely or never, means black and white, selective colour, 35mm film, etc.

skieur

[unpopular]

How did they ever do it?

Photographers – It’s Not About The Process – Really! « Photofocus

[Derrel]

How did they ever do it?

Photographers – It’s Not About The Process – Really! « Photofocus

The funny thing about that picture is that when he made it Neil was a young "newbie", and all the old,experienced, "expert shooters" got so-called "better" shooting positions, and can be seen in the BACKGROUND of HIS shot--all located on the "wrong side" of the action. I read an interview with years ago, where he described the very negative way in which the shot came to be. When he made the shot, he was young and not very well regarded, nor very experienced. He kind of drew the "short" end of the stick, so to speak, at that fight. In a word, he got lucky. NOBODY really wanted to BE where he was...that's why he was the only one that got that shot. I find it ironic that the guy who wrote the blog tried to use the photo as a "photo to teach from", as he puts in, when the photo was the result of a young shooter being shunned, and getting lucky. The shot was based not on luck,m or skill, or experience, but instead on instead on deliberate malfeasance gone awry.

[Iron Flatline]

Think how awesome you would all be if you spent as much time thinking about the creative choices as the technical ones... Keep shooting. It matters more than all that other stuff.

[gryphonslair99]

If a photographer gets the job done well I don't think it matters how far in the past they choose to live.

It's just when they assume I am interested in how authentically vintage or w/e they are that I have an issue. (Hint: I usually don't care)

This all seems like its geared towards going fast, fast, fast. That's not always necessarily the point.

I also think that saying these are "fatal" is a little dramatic.

Well, it depends on what the job is. Amateurs shooting scenery have all the time in the world and so do those shooting posed shots. Pros shooting sports, action, public relations, journalistic style, etc. need to "get the shot" as it happens. By the time you would take to do manual settings, personal adjustments etc., the potential shot would be long gone. Companies and businesses are looking for natural shots with perfect timing that are effective, well composed, and fit their needs. This can only be accomplished if you use the latest, most relevant features on your camera, and that extremely rarely or never, means black and white, selective colour, 35mm film, etc.

skieur

And to think, I have been shooting sports for 30+ years, Mostly in manual and I have been doing it wrong all this time. I guess that knowing my gear front to back, back to front, left, right, sideways, and inside out and being able to make changes on the fly with out ever having to look at the gear, as well as knowing my craft, the players, the action, rules of the game is all wrong. I should let the modern camera do it all for me. NOT!!!

[Derrel]

Sung to the tune of "Rawhide"

Trolling, trolling, trolling,
Keep them poster's troll-iiiin!
Post then hide!

Trollin', trollin', trollin',
Keep that nonsense comin',
Post 'em up, Head on out,
Watch that nonsense fly'in

and it goes on...For younger people who
do not know the Rawhide theme song, here
is a link to it on YouTube.
<em>

[cgipson1]

If a photographer gets the job done well I don't think it matters how far in the past they choose to live.

It's just when they assume I am interested in how authentically vintage or w/e they are that I have an issue. (Hint: I usually don't care)

This all seems like its geared towards going fast, fast, fast. That's not always necessarily the point.

I also think that saying these are "fatal" is a little dramatic.

Well, it depends on what the job is. Amateurs shooting scenery have all the time in the world and so do those shooting posed shots. Pros shooting sports, action, public relations, journalistic style, etc. need to "get the shot" as it happens. By the time you would take to do manual settings, personal adjustments etc., the potential shot would be long gone. Companies and businesses are looking for natural shots with perfect timing that are effective, well composed, and fit their needs. This can only be accomplished if you use the latest, most relevant features on your camera, and that extremely rarely or never, means black and white, selective colour, 35mm film, etc.

skieur

And to think, I have been shooting sports for 30+ years, Mostly in manual and I have been doing it wrong all this time. I guess that knowing my gear front to back, back to front, left, right, sideways, and inside out and being able to make changes on the fly with out ever having to look at the gear, as well as knowing my craft, the players, the action, rules of the game is all wrong. I should let the modern camera do it all for me. NOT!!!

Yep! I guess we are just a bunch of old losers without a clue! I think I will start using auto exclusively... after all, it works for the FB MWACS and for Skieeur! Right?

[manaheim]

If a photographer gets the job done well I don't think it matters how far in the past they choose to live.

It's just when they assume I am interested in how authentically vintage or w/e they are that I have an issue. (Hint: I usually don't care)

This all seems like its geared towards going fast, fast, fast. That's not always necessarily the point.

I also think that saying these are "fatal" is a little dramatic.

Well, it depends on what the job is. Amateurs shooting scenery have all the time in the world and so do those shooting posed shots. Pros shooting sports, action, public relations, journalistic style, etc. need to "get the shot" as it happens. By the time you would take to do manual settings, personal adjustments etc., the potential shot would be long gone. Companies and businesses are looking for natural shots with perfect timing that are effective, well composed, and fit their needs. This can only be accomplished if you use the latest, most relevant features on your camera, and that extremely rarely or never, means black and white, selective colour, 35mm film, etc.

skieur

And to think, I have been shooting sports for 30+ years, Mostly in manual and I have been doing it wrong all this time. I guess that knowing my gear front to back, back to front, left, right, sideways, and inside out and being able to make changes on the fly with out ever having to look at the gear, as well as knowing my craft, the players, the action, rules of the game is all wrong. I should let the modern camera do it all for me. NOT!!!

God I wish I could do that.

Seriously.

People who haven't "grown up" with these clutches are sooooooooooooooooooo much better to handle their camera than I am. I mean I would be ok with all-manual if I was in a situation where I had time to compose and think through my shots and stuff... but with sports? HA! That would be a train wreck.

I bow to your greater skills.

Seriously.

[gryphonslair99]

One of the easiest things to do shooting sport manually is GET THERE EARLY and check out the venue. A 1:00 p.m. football game isn't going to change lighting that much over the course of the game, unless you have either 1.weather issues. or 2. shadow issues. With either you generally make a quick ISO or shutter speed adjustment. Indoor venues, get there early, carry a light meter, and meter the court. Rarely do I ever have to make much in the way of adjustments at an indoor venue.

My second body is usually set to Aperture Value for a quick grab and shoot, but it to has been pre set to the conditions so I am making minor adjustments on the fly. Also, next time you watch say a football game take a look at the guys with bigger glass particularly their lens hoots. I have cheat sheets taped to the outside of the lens hoods for my 70-200, 200 f2.0, 300 f2.8 and 400 f2.8 with the shooting conditions of various venues I commonly shoot at. This too makes it quick and easy to be in the right range most of the time. For indoor venues I have a pocket notebook with notes for each venue, again with the general shooting settings for their lighting conditions.

[mjhoward]

I have cheat sheets taped to the outside of the lens hoods for my 70-200, 200 f2.0, 300 f2.8 and 400 f2.8 with the shooting conditions of various venues I commonly shoot at. This too makes it quick and easy to be in the right range most of the time. For indoor venues I have a pocket notebook with notes for each venue, again with the general shooting settings for their lighting conditions.

But it's soooo much easier to let the camera try and read your mind and incorrectly guess what your trying to meter for, resulting in a poorly exposed photo!

[unpopular]

Back when i was going to school, and we had to walk up hill both ways in the snow ... you know, 1998 ... you were required to have only "a 35mm camera capable of manual focus, manual exposure and a 50mm lens". The teacher required that you use manual exposure.

Truly understanding manual photography, not just lining up triangles with zeros, makes a photographer more proficient in auto modes. You have to understand what the camera is doing, and more important, why, before you have any hope of controlling any automatic exposure system.

I seldom use auto exposure, because I like dynamically and arbitrarily adjusting both aperture and shutter in any given situation. But at the same time it's not like AE is some big mystery to me either.

Multisegment AF OTOH...