Ian Manners wrote:
> I notice the art of initial capture is giving way to the computer enhanced
> and corrected photo a lot more laterly.
>
> I still prefer to set the lighting/atmosphere up and capture that visualised
> image on film with no editing.
>
> Such as what I did with this TOPE image :-
>
> <http://www.tope.nl/tope_show_entry.php?event=32&pic=8>
>
> I find it more interesting and enjoyable to spend the same or similiar amount
> of time to create the scene that I want to capture, that to spend the time
> afterwards altering an image on a computer.
>
It seems you may have spent a lot more time than I did, in these cases.
"Several underexposed shots (ok, took about 20) of varing degrees to
capture the right balance of warmth, dynamic range, and grain. Very much
experimenting." Also, more money, I'd guess.
This was a casual shot wandering the grounds after breakfast. It only
took a few seconds to see, frame and shoot. If I amortize the cost of
the 5D over the shots I've taken, it's under $0.40 per shot, and
dropping - and the sunlight was free.
> I'm not saying there is anything wrong with altering an image digitally to
> get the image you want to see, just pointing out how it is becoming the norm,
> either in camera or post editing.
>
Nor do I think there's anything wrong with your preferred way of
working. Especially when doing it as a hobby, we should do it the way we
enjoy. I hav little to say about any trend in other folks images.I
simply do what I do 'cause that's what I do. It may change, or not.
Your approach isn't really suitable for me for several reasons.
- I prefer natural light outdoors and existing light indoors.
- The vast majority of my photography is outdoors. Even if I want to
take the time for careful setup and multiple versions, natural factors
like changing light, moving subjects, weather, tides and so on often
mean that what attracted my eye in the first place is gone before I can
set up a tripod and so on. I did a whole series of close-up shots on the
beach, that I have high hopes for. We went as the tide was low, and I
was shooting as it came in. Subjects were literally disappearing under
the water. :-)
This light only lasted for moments. I took another shot or two with the
DSLR and a couple with the OM-4, but only this one, the first right as I
saw the light, really worked for me.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/MPhotos/Calif/NorthCoast/SunsetBodega.htm>
This shot was pure reflex, no time to do more than aim and press the
button. <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/FilmvsDigi/FvD03.htm>
- I'm mostly a moving shooter, both by nature and because I mostly shoot
socially, in that at least Carol is with me. She is very patient and
also helpful in that she uses her eyes to catch subjects I would miss.
Nonetheless, I'm just not in front of one subject for long. Not right or
wrong, just the way I am comfortable.
- I've found, to my delight, that many things I can't do with camera,
lens, lighting, etc., can still be accomplished after the shot. This has
lowered my frustration level, by allowing me to take many shots I'd have
simply skipped before.
- And a simple matter of taste. I prefer to keep walking and looking
when I'm out photographing. I also rather enjoy working on images in the
digital darkroom. When I need to do lots of them, it can be a drag, but
bringing out what seems to me to be the best in my favorites is a joy.
> Though I will admit I spent a lot more time making up my little LED lighting
> units for the shot above at least I have more tools to use in the future.
Yeah, I just wouldn't do that. I may adjust an existing light a bit, but
that's about it. I tend to see a subject, visualize what an image of it
might look like and take the shot. I do use a tripod sometimes for
interior stills. I seldom think up a still life composition in my head.
Even when I do some arranging, it's usually kicked off by a visual. This
shot is simply what was in a corner of the living room one day and
caught my eye. In retrospect, I might have moved the dangling cord and
the corner of the pillow. But you know, I like it, probably simply
because I find the arrangement of objects pleasing and the light just as
it was when I saw it.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/A650/StillL.htm>
Similarly, I was sitting reading,when I noticed the light on these
objects sitting on a desk. I just grabbed the camera and took their
picture. Within a few minutes,the light was different and not as much to
my liking.
<http://galleries.moosemystic.net/MooseFoto/index.php?gallery=Home/Light090322&image=_MG_5467-68ii.jpg>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
