> Earl Dunbar [mailto:edunbar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote:
> Stephen: Your points are well taken. I am not trying to be a
> curmudgeon (it just happens!)... what I guess I am saying is
> that there are some psychological issues involved....
Earl, I'm going to put some words into your mouth here (I'm
starting by not quoting you in full context ;) ).
For me, you've highlighted something that is very relevant
to me whenever I see discussion in favour of digital or
film (or b&w and colour). A lot of the arguments about the
end product miss, for me, the fact that I have to get to the
end product first.
Firstly, I'm a gear-head and a tech-head. Working with computers
in the "digital darkroom" is an absolute joy.
I love digital - a C*n*n 300D is possibly in my near future -
and my working with digital during the taking photos has improved
my photos no end, and makes that part of the creative process
for some type of photography I do (for example, street/city
photography), another absolute joy. However, using my C*n*n E*S
50E with the 100-300 USM "consumer" lens is startingly
enjoyable while taking sports photos. The "lock" of focus
and the user-friendliness of adjustments made my experience
taking photos of the Touch Footy for the Gay Games last year
easy and fun (and with successful, for me, result).
However, some of my best and treasured photos have only come
from the OM1 and 50/1.4, and these are "still-lifes" from up
at the Hut, and those of my family at family-gatherings (I've
showed some of these in the past), taken on Kodak's Black &
White C41 film (these have both been what I've used for summer/
winter swaps, for instance.). No matter what I do digitally,
I have no interest in getting rid of this OM combination, as there
is a "psychological issue" involved with it that works for me
(I recommend a book called...ummm..."The Tao of Photography"
I think. I'm too lazy to go upstairs and check). It brings me
to a state of mind conducive to a particular type of photography
(which is why I can empathise when people say that large format
"slowing" them down improves photography).
I guess what I'm trying to say is that *for me* (the only one
that matters in my attempts to create photos), there are aspects
("psychological issues") to film, digital, 35mm, MF, colour,
b&w that all come into play at the taking stage and that are
perhaps necessarily "irrational" at that creative stage that
are difficult or impossible to include in any comparitive
"Review" except on a purely personal level only relevant to the
reviewer (which is, ultimately, me anyway). It's not the be-all
and end-all, but it is very significant.
...and, I *think* that's what you were saying, much more succinctly,
in a couple of words. :-) (if not, I apologise)
Cheers
Marc
Sydne, Oz
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|