Life is much easier as a photographer....

[Jim DE]

I read some really intelligent comments from people way more educated on the workings of optics and sensors and software here and on some other sites. It is so far over my head I feel like a college freshman enrolling by accident into a graduate electronic engineering class. You guy's REALLY know this stuff!!!! That said I am thankful I guess that I am just a satisfied user/photographer because I would think if I could identify minute issues with a red channel or other involved deeply technical criteria or flaws in the capture of light I just might never be happy again with any camera.

The above is a tongue in cheek humorous comment but really some of you guy's are far and away more into the specifics of this technology than I will ever be or in fact ever want to be. Glad you guy's are out there to keep the manufacturers feet to the fire to produce better and better technology for idiots like me to use and enjoy

 

[Vivek]

I am looking for solutions. Here is a short list:

FW hack to include EFCS for the A7R.

A raw converter that will push the DR range to 21 stops, extract lost data from a lossy file at leisure.

Anyone want my money?

 

[Jim DE]

 

[mjr]

You are right, life is much easier and on a slightly serious note...

What concerns me, and people may dismiss this as a ridiculous comment, is the actual art and skill involved with being a photographer being diluted by the latest technology. I have a genuine fear that we are loosing such a big part of the process, the personal satisfaction, the practice and training, the work behind getting consistent good shots.

It has been shown that cameras like the A7r2 can recover huge amounts of data from poorly exposed shots, great, eye detect focus in continuous mode will give excellent sharp shots of a face within the frame, what is left for us to do? point it in the right general direction? There are enough pixels and recovery latitude that I am sure I could actually give my 9 year old niece the camera set up in af-c, eye tracking and on a fast shutter speed and stabilisation and tell her that as long as the face is in the viewfinder, fire away. I recon with the size of the files it's just a matter of cropping and rotating and there would be excellent shots.

Am I just being an old git by mourning the loss of the skill of a photographer? I celebrate new technology and all it brings but at the expense of the techniques we learn and the days, weeks and months we put in to becoming good photographers? What's wrong with learning to manually focus or get your exposure right at the time of the shot, it's like we are taking fix it in post to the extremes.

People obviously have an insatiable desire for more, better, bigger, faster but for the large majority of keen amateur photographers or those without clients, do you not enjoy the process and the working hard to learn your gear, improving your understanding of the process and getting better with practice? It's like cameras are moving so fast that it's no longer about what the photographer produces, it's just about the technology in the camera, you don't need to be a good photographer to get good shots anymore.

Anyway, it's just me voicing my opinion, it's not meant to be inflammatory, just observations based on a real concern for the craft.

Have a good weekend!

Mat

 

[Jim DE]

Mat, Sadly I say.... those things have been put on the back burner for quite awhile now. I occasionally mentor individuals that ask me and I can tell you that from the priorities and questions asked the basics that we cut our teeth on in the early 60's and worked to perfect our craft are not even a priority to them today. They have no idea what the actual size of the aperture is for a 200mm lens at f2 nor do they care.

What they want to learn is PP skills and just what buttons to push to capture a image they can later alter in post.

I would say it's a general mentality that advanced technology has caused ...... but they can and do create some excellent images knowing very little of the things we had to master in the early days to achieve a good image.

It is a change in photography we just have to accept. I feel fortunate I am still paid to do photography as opportunities in this career and shrinking and shrinking world wide. Guess eventually we will go the way of the lighthouse operators and the street lamplighters; as just another career lost to technological advancements.

 

[mesposito]

You are right, life is much easier and on a slightly serious note...

What concerns me, and people may dismiss this as a ridiculous comment, is the actual art and skill involved with being a photographer being diluted by the latest technology. I have a genuine fear that we are loosing such a big part of the process, the personal satisfaction, the practice and training, the work behind getting consistent good shots.

It has been shown that cameras like the A7r2 can recover huge amounts of data from poorly exposed shots, great, eye detect focus in continuous mode will give excellent sharp shots of a face within the frame, what is left for us to do? point it in the right general direction? There are enough pixels and recovery latitude that I am sure I could actually give my 9 year old niece the camera set up in af-c, eye tracking and on a fast shutter speed and stabilisation and tell her that as long as the face is in the viewfinder, fire away. I recon with the size of the files it's just a matter of cropping and rotating and there would be excellent shots.

...

Mat

I understand your concerns, but actually creating Art is not a group practice generally. It's up to you, and I mean that in the nicest way. If some live for the tech and not the Art, that's actually Ok. Why shouldn't they live for the part that interests them. That has no impact on me or my objectives. I do laugh at the "never enough" chat though, as if it were possible to make a camera that was everything to everyone. They want an 8x10 view camera that fits in their pocket, but they still want to wear skinny jeans. :^}

I'd like to believe that some percentage of photographers search for either a personal style of some kind, or at least they want some emotional response to their work. For me making prints is an important part of this, and it gets the focus off of the gear and onto the presentation. For varied reasons the print doesn't lie like the screen sometimes does.

A sharp photo is not a good photo, it's just sharp.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I'm looking for a camera that can extract huge amounts of great ideas from my brain :lecture:

 

[PeterA]

I understand your concerns, but actually creating Art is not a group practice generally. It's up to you, and I mean that in the nicest way. If some live for the tech and not the Art, that's actually Ok. Why shouldn't they live for the part that interests them. That has no impact on me or my objectives. I do laugh at the "never enough" chat though, as if it were possible to make a camera that was everything to everyone. They want an 8x10 view camera that fits in their pocket, but they still want to wear skinny jeans. :^}

I'd like to believe that some percentage of photographers search for either a personal style of some kind, or at least they want some emotional response to their work. For me making prints is an important part of this, and it gets the focus off of the gear and onto the presentation. For varied reasons the print doesn't lie like the screen sometimes does.

A sharp photo is not a good photo, it's just sharp.

Nicely said.

I think that on line viewing and printed images are separate genres now. Heavily post processed imagery is a dominant commercial fad in fashion and editorial work. Clean authentic imagery ( meaning minimal observed post processing) is a very much favoured in collectible galleries. Whilst the typical enthusiast and their web site selling post card landscapes and such has a heavy handed high HDR saturation look that hurts my eyes. It s good to have a plethora of imagery out there to observe and look at. As in music though the handles can only get you so far as far...

also it is fun to go through all the filters that some of the canned 'artistic' programs deliver and then tick off the filter /treatment against the images one sees...a bit like catching cheats LOL

I've noticed that the type of image that I post for fun on the net is rarely the image I will print.

-Pete

 

[fotografz]

For most, it seems that putting "creativity" into words is a lot more difficult than writing about, or discussing, the technological aspects of photography. Especially, since the dominate aspect of photography has been technological change for at least the past decade.

I'm grateful to those who put all the time and effort into dissecting each new entry right down to the nano-particles and subatomic minutia. That way I have a hint when technology has gone too far for what I need to create a photograph.:thumbup:

Frankly, I find both aspects to be enjoyable … mastery of the tool, and then creatively putting it to use. However, I don't particularly like being force to spend an unbalanced amount of time mastering a tool only to start over with a new one in increasing shorter spans of time. So, now I don't.

- Marc

 

[rayyan]

Jorgen, there is such a camera. The FW is being tweaked before final release.

A few have been testing it in the field. Some are even using it for commercial and personal projects. Me included. The introduction of the Model was delayed because I insisted that it cater for those whose brain has a shortage of ideas.

We are getting superb results, even at a level beyond a single pixel.
We cannot publish any sample or real life photographs.
We are under a NDA.

Most of this work is in private collections.

You just have to take my word for it. It is a game changer. More of a brain changer of a camera.

No pre-orders yet. I shall keep you informed.

p.s it works wonderfully with all model of lenses. Without adapters too.

I'm looking for a camera that can extract huge amounts of great ideas from my brain :lecture:

 

[Viramati]

I'm totally with the OP. I am pretty good at the technical photography side to things but the electronics and it's jargon are somewhat above my head. A lovely day here in London so time to go and take Photographs

 

[jlm]

my regular world is packed with tool technology using some quite expensive, complex and huge computerized machinery.
it is a welcome relief to jaunt a bit with photography, a field in which i try to minimize the tech to the point where i would rather stumble around than master yet another Asian menu system.

as far as the automatic aids in modern cameras, i have yet to use anything but the most basic controls, feigning ignorance on my part. auto focus is certainly useful, but that is because the olde eyes need some help.

subject matter and composition make the shot

 

[MikalWGrass]

The more I read about the technical aspects of the new cameras, the more I want to shoot my Leica M6 and black and white film (which I did last night at swim practice), and my kids underwater with a Nikonos. I pushed the envelope this week when I was out of town, and bought 2 rolls of 200 speed Fuji color film and 2 rolls of 400 speed Agfa black and white film.

Seriously, the gearheads, GAS pain sufferers and those who have equipment ADHD, and lack of impulse control, are necessary for those us who just want to sit back and watch. Even more important, they force the camera companies to listen to the consumers who will actually use the cameras. Yes, almost anyone can now take a passable photo, but what they (the anyone) cannot do, and what the new cameras cannot do, is read light correctly. Reading light correctly takes a long time; even with photoshop and various other tools, a muddy photo cannot be made clear. Learning to time a sports photo takes practice and an understanding of the nuances of the sport. The latest equipment can't help if the person won't practice and just goes out and bangs on the thing.

Nevertheless, it is fun to imagine the reactions of those who unboxed their new Sony and the new lenses. Guess Christmas, Chanukah, Kwanza (please help me out here so I don't forget anyone) came early this year, which is a good thing.

 

[pegelli]

I think it's very hard to generalize.
On this website (and others) I've seen very nice images being created with brand spanking new gear as well as with old gear. I've also seen more snapshot type shots with both kinds.
I think both are OK as long as the people shooting are having fun and are seeing the technical aspects of (old and/or new) cameras as a means to an end and not an end in itself.