Posted by Terry Sohl on January 18, 2011 at 12:07 PM
An interesting read on "Slate.com" if you have time.
http://www.slate.com/id/2279659
One line sums the article up best for me -- "Pay more attention to your subject than to your camera".
The line has meaning to me on two levels. Especially as someone who is primarily into avian photography, I do think that knowing your subject is probably more important than knowing your camera. I don't think avian photography is particularly difficult, from a technical perspective. The most difficult aspect of avian photography for me is getting close enough to the subject, in a suitable setting. Knowing the bird, it's habits, and it's habitats to me is every bit as crucial as knowing every technical aspect of your camera.
On another level, I do find I enjoy my photography much more when I'm spending more time observing my subject, than I am actually photographing it. One thing I've never understood about the birding crowd are those for whom the checklist is seemingly more important than the subject itself. I'm baffled when a rare bird is reported, and some of the birders that come to see it leave moments after seeing the bird. They've mentally or physically checked it off their list, and that's all they came for.
Sure, I get a thrill when I digitally "capture" a species for the first time. Sure, I have my own "checklist" of species photographed. But that photography really doesn't hold much meaning for me if I simply capture the photo, and then immediately head off in search of other "prey". The photos I treasure the most are the ones that spark my memory of the moment, the time that I spent with the subject.
I'm just an amateur. My income doesn't depend on the shot itself, and I can certainly see that professional photographers would be more likely to spend less time with a subject once the photo is captured. But I do think the most successful photographers, amateur or professionals, are the ones who treasure the actual experience, as this article states.
I'm just an amateur. My income doesn't depend on the shot itself, and I can certainly see that professional photographers would be more likely to spend less time with a subject once the photo is captured.
Actually experience has taught me quite the opposite. Some of my very best shots come after I think I've already "caught" the shot. Simply watching the subject a while longer often results in more and better shots. Even if it doesn't result in better shots, I still have the pleasure of simply watching.
As a side note or elaboration, you get more time to watch (and you'll take better pictures, too) once you know the camera so intimately that you don't really have to think about it as you make the changes.
Edit- I've added one of my favorite bear shots for 2010, because it illustrates the point so well. I'd been photographing this guy for an hour when he got bored and took a nap. I stayed with him quite a while, just enjoying his presence, even though other "more interesting" bears were nearby. Finally he'd had enough nap and raised his head for a look around. Patience pays, whether in more and better shots or simple pleasure of being there.
Posted by Terry Sohl on January 18, 2011 at 1:09 PM
Amen Hank. When I first started, I DID spend less time for each subject, just because I knew there were so many other subjects (birds) that I hadn't photographed yet.
Now that I've gotten photos for so many species, I do find myself taking more time with a subject than I used to. And I think the photos are better as a result.
Posted by Jim DeWitt on January 18, 2011 at 2:15 PM
Terry and Hank make very good points.
Knowing a bird is a flycatcher, for example, you have a decent level of confidence that the bird will return to its perch and not fly off. Understanding the bird can absolutely help you get better photographs.
On my recent Antarctic trip, the expedition leader, Hannah Lawton, herself a photographer, had this advice for fellow photographers: "Don't start shooting at the first thing you see. Take a moment. Look around. Listen. Smell. Try to immerse yourself in where you are. Then think about how to capture what you are sensing." Excellent advice.
""Don't start shooting at the first thing you see. Take a moment. Look around. Listen. Smell. Try to immerse yourself in where you are. Then think about how to capture what you are sensing." Excellent advice. "
Excellent advice, indeed!
"Slow" and large format with a view camera are synonymous. That is one of the attributes of LF that I find very satisfying. I take my time to study a scene, and all the while, my senses are open to all of the good things going on around me.
Even though I am intimately familiar with my camera, there are critical steps in the shooting process that, when missed due to some distraction, will result in a piece of trash can liner.
--P
Posted by Kent Staubus on January 18, 2011 at 10:28 PM
When I get new photo gear, I play with it over and over until I learn it with my fingers. By that I mean I can pretty much run it without looking at it. When I was a beginner, I thought the most important thing was the camera. Now, I think it's the least important thing. The most important thing is learning how to see and use light. In some ways I think DSLR cameras are a step backwards. When I see others using them, they are constantly looking at them, playing with the LCD screen. Their attention is glued to that, not their surroundings. Not the Light. I've gone back to using older cameras quite a bit this year--a 1914 Kodak Special, 1937 Voigtlander Bessa, and I"ve just purchased an 1872 Derogy Petzval lens to use on my 4x5. These cameras are very simple and require very minimal attention from me. They don't seem to get in my way as much as my Nikon D300 does. I spend quite a bit of time looking a scene over, studying the Light. More and more, I come to understand that the subject is the Light. Only after I have a clear idea of what I want my photo to look like do I even pull out a camera.
I am sixteen and live in the UK. In response to when you mentioned birders flocking to see rare birds and leaving as soon as they have seen the bird, it is the same in the UK. Here, people like that are known as twitchers, and they wil travel the length and breadth of the country to add a new bird to their lists. Although some enjoy watching birds (some birdwatch every day), there are others for whom all that matters is to see as many as possible, not to enjoy the birds. However, there are also birdwatchers who just like to watch birds.
In reply to spending more time with one subject, although I try, my view is that unless it is the school holidays, I have one day's photography (if that) each week. If I spent that whole day waiting for something and it did not happen, I would go home with nothing, and feel that I had wasted that day. In the school holidays, I spend more time with a subject as I have more time, but during the school terms, I like to come back with something. I know that having nothing happen for a while is part of being a wildlife photographer, and it makes it all the better when something does happen, but that is just my view.And of course, when I spend longer, I end up with better shots, but I like being outdoors, watching and photographig what I see.
I do not agree when you say that professionals spend less time. Surely they would spend more time as they have more time, and so they could get better shots?
Oscar
Posted by Mel Ladewig on January 25, 2011 at 3:46 PM
Its interesting to see the "slow" movement percolating out so quickly into so many areas of culture. To my knowledge, it did initially start in food.
Like Preston, I enjoy LF specifically because of its slowness. There is no way you're going to setup, focus, shoot and move on in 30 seconds. Each shot takes about 10 minutes to setup the camera, compose, focus, take meter readings, position filters and finally shoot. You can't change composition quickly. You can't change lenses quickly. You've really got to be OK with taking time on each shot individually. And you better have a good idea of how you're going to compose, what lens you're going to use before you setup the whole kit, because you might not get a chance to change it while the light is good.
As a result, I've often spent alot more time enjoying the view and looking at the subject before taking out the camera. Its fine with me if I hike or drive all day and never shoot a sheet of film, and its OK if the light is good for me to do a dozen compositions in a day as I did last summer in Mohawk Lakes (actually my first time seriously using the camera up there after about 15 trips into the basin).
Discussion
8 replieshttp://www.slate.com/id/2279659
One line sums the article up best for me -- "Pay more attention to your subject than to your camera".
The line has meaning to me on two levels. Especially as someone who is primarily into avian photography, I do think that knowing your subject is probably more important than knowing your camera. I don't think avian photography is particularly difficult, from a technical perspective. The most difficult aspect of avian photography for me is getting close enough to the subject, in a suitable setting. Knowing the bird, it's habits, and it's habitats to me is every bit as crucial as knowing every technical aspect of your camera.
On another level, I do find I enjoy my photography much more when I'm spending more time observing my subject, than I am actually photographing it. One thing I've never understood about the birding crowd are those for whom the checklist is seemingly more important than the subject itself. I'm baffled when a rare bird is reported, and some of the birders that come to see it leave moments after seeing the bird. They've mentally or physically checked it off their list, and that's all they came for.
Sure, I get a thrill when I digitally "capture" a species for the first time. Sure, I have my own "checklist" of species photographed. But that photography really doesn't hold much meaning for me if I simply capture the photo, and then immediately head off in search of other "prey". The photos I treasure the most are the ones that spark my memory of the moment, the time that I spent with the subject.
I'm just an amateur. My income doesn't depend on the shot itself, and I can certainly see that professional photographers would be more likely to spend less time with a subject once the photo is captured. But I do think the most successful photographers, amateur or professionals, are the ones who treasure the actual experience, as this article states.
Actually experience has taught me quite the opposite. Some of my very best shots come after I think I've already "caught" the shot. Simply watching the subject a while longer often results in more and better shots. Even if it doesn't result in better shots, I still have the pleasure of simply watching.
As a side note or elaboration, you get more time to watch (and you'll take better pictures, too) once you know the camera so intimately that you don't really have to think about it as you make the changes.
Now that I've gotten photos for so many species, I do find myself taking more time with a subject than I used to. And I think the photos are better as a result.
Knowing a bird is a flycatcher, for example, you have a decent level of confidence that the bird will return to its perch and not fly off. Understanding the bird can absolutely help you get better photographs.
On my recent Antarctic trip, the expedition leader, Hannah Lawton, herself a photographer, had this advice for fellow photographers: "Don't start shooting at the first thing you see. Take a moment. Look around. Listen. Smell. Try to immerse yourself in where you are. Then think about how to capture what you are sensing." Excellent advice.
Excellent advice, indeed!
"Slow" and large format with a view camera are synonymous. That is one of the attributes of LF that I find very satisfying. I take my time to study a scene, and all the while, my senses are open to all of the good things going on around me.
Even though I am intimately familiar with my camera, there are critical steps in the shooting process that, when missed due to some distraction, will result in a piece of trash can liner.
--P
Kent in SD
I am sixteen and live in the UK. In response to when you mentioned birders flocking to see rare birds and leaving as soon as they have seen the bird, it is the same in the UK. Here, people like that are known as twitchers, and they wil travel the length and breadth of the country to add a new bird to their lists. Although some enjoy watching birds (some birdwatch every day), there are others for whom all that matters is to see as many as possible, not to enjoy the birds. However, there are also birdwatchers who just like to watch birds.
In reply to spending more time with one subject, although I try, my view is that unless it is the school holidays, I have one day's photography (if that) each week. If I spent that whole day waiting for something and it did not happen, I would go home with nothing, and feel that I had wasted that day. In the school holidays, I spend more time with a subject as I have more time, but during the school terms, I like to come back with something. I know that having nothing happen for a while is part of being a wildlife photographer, and it makes it all the better when something does happen, but that is just my view.And of course, when I spend longer, I end up with better shots, but I like being outdoors, watching and photographig what I see.
I do not agree when you say that professionals spend less time. Surely they would spend more time as they have more time, and so they could get better shots?
Oscar
Like Preston, I enjoy LF specifically because of its slowness. There is no way you're going to setup, focus, shoot and move on in 30 seconds. Each shot takes about 10 minutes to setup the camera, compose, focus, take meter readings, position filters and finally shoot. You can't change composition quickly. You can't change lenses quickly. You've really got to be OK with taking time on each shot individually. And you better have a good idea of how you're going to compose, what lens you're going to use before you setup the whole kit, because you might not get a chance to change it while the light is good.
As a result, I've often spent alot more time enjoying the view and looking at the subject before taking out the camera. Its fine with me if I hike or drive all day and never shoot a sheet of film, and its OK if the light is good for me to do a dozen compositions in a day as I did last summer in Mohawk Lakes (actually my first time seriously using the camera up there after about 15 trips into the basin).