Modern / traditional / children.

Lensmeister · Jun 26, 2005

Ok I hope this doesn't get too many people too angry, as I want to gauge people opinion as to their feeling on this subject.

With the advent of the super-duper cameras we have on the market now do people think that the traditional methods are lost on the youth of today or the 'art' of photogrpahy.

Let me explain a bit more.

Yesterday I bought a Canon EOS 500 Quartz Date back for my son (aged 7) to borrow (See the post called what a bargin). Now this camera has Autofocus, auto exposure, all the Canon pic modes. Now had I had my old Centon DF300 returned (Manual focus, etc.) I would have given that to him.

Then he'd have learned about the f-stops, the shutter speeds etc. But the Canon is so much easier for me to show him things as I would show him me using the EOS 10 etc. I intend to show him shutter speeds et al.

But with the newer all singing all dancing digital cameras will they loose that excitment for the prints turning up, when they can easily look at a pic and delete it and move on.

Will these newer digital cameras make kids lose the 'art of photography'?

Artemis · Jun 26, 2005

Yes....I guess...but the pics will never be that good as the old ones....like cartier bresson!

I KNOW SOMEONE OLD WHO DID PHOTOGRAPHY! Photographer teacher eat your heart out...

KevinR · Jun 26, 2005

Well yes and no. I let my 5yr old daughter mess around with our Canon S30. She has a very keen eye with composition, and with the immediate play back, she gets to see that. It only encourages her to take more. But she also gets to see me in the darkroom. She gets that side of it too. I figure I will wait till she gets older to start her on the technical aspects of photography. Right now, she is just enjoying the idea of taking pictures without the worries of technical limitations.

EmergentFungus · Jun 26, 2005

I'll agree with that. All the other kids at my school think the best cameras are the tiniest digital ones with catchy names. They all use them on full auto despite the custom settings and they simply love digital zoom as it allows them to save that precious energy walking closer to the subject. Main attraction to digital seems to be the ease of use and the ability to email pictures.

I myself have a Powershot S50 which I've been using for a while. In the last couple of weeks I dug out my (late) dad's Canon Elan SLR so I could experiment with it. Loving every moment with it.

It's a dieing art, but one which I aim to learn about.

mentos_007 · Jun 26, 2005

I am afraid that there would be much less beautifull pictures, simply because people will stop thinking before taking a picture. Sometimes we have a very short moment to take a photograph and we won't be able to retake it. Then we realize that we used auto mode which overexposed or spoiled the whole photograph. With film cameras, all manual - like old but good Zenit - people spent more time thinking before pressing the button and the pictures were better, it was visible that photographer put an effort to take it.
A few days back I met my 9 yr old cousin who has never played with film camera - he is "fully" digital. He has a talent to photography, he sees things a bit diferently than other people, and he is really good at basic composition and so on... but... when I showed him my Zenit... he asked me where's the ON/OFF button...
A week ago I heard a guy complaining that his son takes pictures with DSLR on manual mode becuase it took him to long to set all the settings and the "models" (his eldery aunt) got bored waiting...
But on the other hand... there are kidds really interested in photography, and there are courses where using digitals or auto cams is not allowed. There are a few kids interested in darkroom and so on... I hope that will never die.

ksmattfish · Jun 26, 2005

Photography as art was weakened upon the introduction of film. It was killed when roll film came along, and buried with 35mm film and an econo-lab on every corner.

Real photographers only use large format view cameras and hand coated glass plates.

I'm just kidding of course.

With every new increase in technology there has always been a worry that somehow it will destroy photography as art. It hasn't happened yet.

danalec99 · Jun 26, 2005

There have always been point and shooters and the new 'advanced' cameras will generate even more of them. But I do not see how it can kill the medium. If your son is seriously bitten by the bug, no motor driven turbo charged automation in this world will stop him from experimenting with aperture and shutter speed.

tempra · Jun 26, 2005

Look at it this way, anyone can take a photograph, but photographs that are remembered, acclaimed and hung in peoples toilets are the good ones, and in general these are thought through and taken with a purpose - although some of the best ones in my opinion are of the moment, but then the photographer is there in order to capture that moment whatever it may be.

Not all people with a camera take an interest in photography, they see it as a means of recording what they did and who was there and thats that. People who want to take it to the next level will experiment with apertures and ISO and shutter speed etc. so I don't think it'll be lost at all, it wasn't lost when the fixed lens compacts came out which are effectively the same as the cheap digitals that are out nowadays.

ksmattfish · Jun 26, 2005

I think there is plenty of evidence that some, possibly many famous photographers didn't know much about the technical side of photography.

Diane Arbus is a big favorite of mine. The more I learn about her, and view her work that isn't her top 10 most famous pics, the more I realize that I know a lot more about the technical side of photography than she ever did. I recently saw the Diane Arbus show "Family Album". It was sort of crushing and inspiring at the same time to be able to see these prints and contact sheets. Some were fabulous, others were uninspired, with crappy lighting and printing. Much of the show had fixer damage. I watched a video there that was narrated by someone else, but in Diane Arbus' words. She talked about how what was important to her was interacting with her subjects, and that she neglected the technical side.

Ansel Adams, now there's a technical guy!

lazarus219 · Jun 27, 2005

I think there will always be snapshooters and photographers, the line is just becoming less defined because people have access to the photographers 'tools',
most people with an advanced point and shoot will never touch manual, unless just out of testing, and they will not understand the setting to change them.

I dont think digital will bring through a bunch of new wannabe (bad word for it) photographers, but people may decide it seems like a good thing and learn more about it, which leaves them being like everyone else here,

i think there will always be a distinction between photog and the people that just take pictures

DaphneOracle · Jun 27, 2005

mentos_007 said:
I am afraid that there would be much less beautifull pictures, simply because people will stop thinking before taking a picture.

I think you hit it on the head Mentos. Point and shoot is just that. When one slows a bit to think of all the possible combinations of f-stops / shutter speeds etc. he cannot help but put more into the final product.

I confess that I did a good bit of film shooting before going to digital. I became lazy and allowed myself satisfaction with poorer quality photos. I've now returned to film for any serious work but still keep the digital around for quickies.

Nryant

ajmall · Jun 27, 2005

Photography in my mind will always be an art form and the advance of technology and tradition should be more embraced than feared and somewhat "slated". Digital photography has and will create incredible opportunities for the amateur and pro alike. I have met so many people who have said they will "never go digital" and months later they've got a DSLR never looked back.

In terms of "excitement" of prints turning up, the same excitement i think exists when uploading a digital photo or printing it at home and being able to easily share it with the world on a critique or forum gallery.

The essence of photography remains the same - it's just a matter of how much effort the photographer puts into it

Lensmeister · Jun 27, 2005

Thanks guys .... this was informative ... He looked at me last night and asked when the photos would be back .... I told him that if he was good they'd be back on Tuesday .......

His face almost sunk but he rallied with ok Dad I'll be good

He then asked could he have a EOS 350D .. for his birthday .... I almost dropped off me chair ... I haven't even got one ......................... YET !

&Denekamp · Jun 28, 2005

I don't know if you wanna hear more stories and visions, but here's mine anyway

My first real encouter with photography was only a few short months ago.. My dad had told my many stories about his life as an amature photographer when I was young, and now I finaly picked up this artform (and he is very happy that i did, i believe

)

how it all started: I have been kiting for a very long time. powerkiting, trick, teamflying, etc etc. and I went to a lot of kiting festivals and one day I decided that it might be fun to write a report on one of those festivals, so i did. Then i figured photo's would add to the story, so i asked if i could lend his cam. I liked taking pictures so much that I shot the full 36 on the film in about 2 hours..

Now, 2 months later I try to take all my pictures manualy, using my dads old pentax MX (and a somewhat newer Olympus, which ist as manual as I'd like it to be..). And I am reading loads of books on photography. I try to learn as much about film, settings, dof, light, shadows, colour, etc etc as I can. This forum also helps a lot!

Now, me and my dad are thinking about buying a Pentax *ist DSLR. very exited about that

but I think shooting on film has the advantage that you think about your photo more before you release the shutter. cause every shot you take costs you money. you need to buy film, and you need the film to developed.. so I believe it forces you to take better thought out pictures to begin with..

Anyway, my conclusion is that if one is realy intersted in photography, one day he/she 'll start to explore manual camera's, study famous photographers, learn about composition and so on.. So I'd say, don't worry about the art of photograply being lost and all.. It will live on! forever

I mean, look at the number of members this board had..

thebeginning · Jun 28, 2005

i say give him a manual film camera. Might want to wait till he's a little older though for him to understand and remember all of the settings and terms, and what things do (he might could do it now). I guess i'm just like that though, since that's what i have :lol: