A thought provoking video

All modern digital cameras have an excess of features. It means that much the same model will serve many different purposes. It must be a problem for people with a large factory, full of very expensive equipment and a highly skilled workforce needing regular wages. The pressure of Moore’s Law does mean that all kinds of features can be incorporated that were unthinkable a few years ago. Auto exposure and focus hardly arouse any comment at all. I’d expect digital ND grads soon. It would be a simple enough extension of exposure-stacking.
It can’t be long before AI takes over the business of selecting subjects and optimising composition. I’m pretty sure it could be done now. Military drones already select their own target and fire at will. A few years ago I read a report of a Japanese research team who had done the proof-of-principle work on AI composition.

Back in the Real World of film and craft, we need to remember that we all begin with the equipment we can afford. Eventually, we discover that our faithful Angulon doesn’t serve our needs and upgrade to a Super-Angulon. Advancing years may mean we can no longer manage the heavy old camera that served us so well. We may begin to make only contact prints. …and so on.
So, although I do agree with the main thrust of this video, I have caveats.
This is about cameras for actual use. Collecting cameras for their beauty and historical interest is another matter.
 
I agree - I have a leica rangefinder kit, a Canon rangefinder kit, medium format Mamiya C330 and RB67 kits, and a full Nikon F4 system - before you even get to my large format: currently a MPP 5x4, Two Thornton Pickard half plates, a Kodak Specialist half plate - and a 13x18 travel camera! These are a collection because many of them played a part in my past working life - or were objects of desire when I had much less disposable income.
I do however limit what I use on a day to day basis
 
I shoot film in medium- and large format the majority of the time with all the kit associated with them.

Now and again, I strip myself down to either a 35mm film camera or a DSLR, with a single lens and just shoot. Shooting with a 20mm f/2.8 Nikkor AIs on a digital body really knocks the creative cobwebs out of the attic. Since it isn't an autofocus/autoexposure friendly thing, it also forces me back to technical basics.
 
Last edited:
If I am going out for a walk with my Nikon D810, I'll often set it to aperture priority, autofocus and a reasonably high ISO.

On the other hand, I will also take the same camera with a view to making an image instead of taking some. I set it to all manual mode or, sometimes I will set the focus to back-button mode, so I have to at least think about what I'm focusing on, even if my eyes can't do it manually.

The key thing for me is to try and use my digital as if it were an LF - ignoring the most part of the auto-gubbins and sometime even using my handheld spotmeter. Taking time is so important and I think that so many people are subject to the subconscious "instantness" of digital.

Then there's the issue of whether to use filters in front of the lens. Why not? After all, it makes for less work in post-processing.

But, for me, first and foremost, it comes down to taking time before pressing the shutter. If I can capture a digital shot that doesn't need any post-processing, it feels a lot more like LF to me. Using the camera as a simple box, with a hole at the front something to record the image at the back.
 
Joanna Carter said:
But, for me, first and foremost, it comes down to taking time before pressing the shutter. If I can capture a digital shot that doesn't need any post-processing, it feels a lot more like LF to me. Using the camera as a simple box, with a hole at the front something to record the image at the back.
Click to expand...

Shooting LF helps hones one's skills, both technically and also the aesthetics of composition (always a personal choice). I think in terms of the length of time before you press the shutter, that's also a skill you acquire, mentally scanning for possible images, instinctively setting up in the right position and knowing which lens you'll use.

We all have different ways of working, in my case it's very quickly, on a trip to Dartmoor just before the Pandemic Barry Wilkinson, (a member here), commented to others how quickly I'd set up and made my image. I should add Barry's comment was also about the speed of setting my camera & tripod up, compared to others, but I instinctively fine tune as I set up.

However, there's probably something simplifying how I work, my images are largely project based, that gives me a focus (no pun intended) on what I'm after, although I do push boundaries. Random shots are often the spark for potential or new projects/series.

There is another side to working fast, there are times you have to. I shot for a newspaper in the early 1970 and on demonstrations you had to work fast. Around then, I began shooting Rock bands live, as well as some theatre work, essentially working with the same people for decades, management later no longer full time musicians. When I first shot LF hand held, it was slow, useless. Then I realised how I had to work, and it's fast, even with slight movements, it's how do you take control.

Ian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top