The Dark Side of Digital

Daniel Lowe said:

Film nostalgia has little relevance to those of us that began our interest in the digital age.

Misplaced 'romanticism' is an interesting thing, especially when the implication is that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

The great thing about digital is that you can push the shutter button as often as you want without financial penalty (which is the only reason not to), to imply there is something wrong with using said button is absurd.

You are likely missing a great deal of 'keeper' shots by not using it.

Click to expand...

Pure conjecture. You don't think that contemplation of a scene produces its own set of keepers?

It is clear as day that you dont even consider the "cost" of firing off 600 or more shots a day.

--

http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/

alexisgreat said:

Got a question here that I hope someone can answer. Do compacts have some shutter actuation limit after which they fail? I know the DSLR are listed for a certain number, but have never seen a figure quoted for compacts. The HS20 has a combination electronic and mechanical shutter, I believe.

Click to expand...

Somebody on the board here does some really weird time lapse photography with an S100FS. He has fired off over 1 million shots with his camera and it is still going strong!

Silent Oracle said:

rattymouse said:

I think restraint, even if self imposed instead of imposed by film, helps one's photography. Time to think, time to ponder, time to contemplate, and be a part of the scene rather than outside of it. Methodical work, rather than spray-and-pray.

Click to expand...

Ratty, you said that so well. I totally agree. Great thread, too.
--

Click to expand...

Thanks!

rattymouse said:

Daniel Lowe said:

Film nostalgia has little relevance to those of us that began our interest in the digital age.

Misplaced 'romanticism' is an interesting thing, especially when the implication is that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

The great thing about digital is that you can push the shutter button as often as you want without financial penalty (which is the only reason not to), to imply there is something wrong with using said button is absurd.

You are likely missing a great deal of 'keeper' shots by not using it.

Click to expand...

Pure conjecture. You don't think that contemplation of a scene produces its own set of keepers?

It is clear as day that you dont even consider the "cost" of firing off 600 or more shots a day.

Click to expand...

There is no cost, only a very efficient way for the amateur understand and learn quicker than at any other time in the history of photography.

Not having to pay money (let alone change film) every few dozen shots is kinda liberating for obvious reasons.

And as you just pointed out, it is pretty hard to wear out the shutter on these digicams.

Daniel Lowe said:

rattymouse said:

Daniel Lowe said:

Film nostalgia has little relevance to those of us that began our interest in the digital age.

Misplaced 'romanticism' is an interesting thing, especially when the implication is that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

The great thing about digital is that you can push the shutter button as often as you want without financial penalty (which is the only reason not to), to imply there is something wrong with using said button is absurd.

You are likely missing a great deal of 'keeper' shots by not using it.

Click to expand...

Pure conjecture. You don't think that contemplation of a scene produces its own set of keepers?

It is clear as day that you dont even consider the "cost" of firing off 600 or more shots a day.

Click to expand...

There is no cost, only a very efficient way for the amateur understand and learn quicker than at any other time in the history of photography.

Not having to pay money (let alone change film) every few dozen shots is kinda liberating for obvious reasons.

And as you just pointed out, it is pretty hard to wear out the shutter on these digicams.

Click to expand...

I put cost in quotes because there are other costs besides monetary.

--

http://fujifilmimages.aminus3.com/

Daniel Lowe said:

. . .

It is clear as day that you dont even consider the "cost" of firing off 600 or more shots a day.

There is no cost, only a very efficient way for the amateur understand and learn quicker than at any other time in the history of photography.

Click to expand...

Learning is best aided by reviewing the photos while you're shooting them, using the EXIF data that the camera shows in the LCD. Viewing EXIF data later, while editing photos can also help understanding. But 600 photos in a day takes a looong time just to shoot. Reviewing them takes even longer, and most newbies that shoot that many photos will never spend much time poring over their images and image data. The quick review you're talking about that most newbie photographers do, is useful for culling photos and allowing you to retake messed up shots if you still can, but it's rarely used for learning except by the dedicated few, and they're the same ones that would put in the effort to learn even if they shot with film back in the prehistoric days before the concept of a little Daniel Lowe was even conceived.

rattymouse said:

I think restraint, even if self imposed instead of imposed by film, helps one's photography. Time to think, time to ponder, time to contemplate, and be a part of the scene rather than outside of it. Methodical work, rather than spray-and-pray.

Click to expand...

I shoot fewer shots with digital than I did with film, simply because I can immediately review. If I have the shot I want, I can walk away. A large percent of film exposures were simply insurance. Shooting chromes, I made sure I had both density for projection and for reproduction from any angle I shot. And I shot from every angle. After processing I culled without mercy, so the editor or art director would see only the strongest, but still have a wide selection from which to choose.

Now, I am finally able to leave the art directors and editors behind for the most part and finally can enjoy making photographs for my own and my closest friends' gratification. I do print, but mostly photo-essays go on my web-site and the rest go on Facebook. I still cull down to the best.

I do still pick my shots when on location. I don't have the patience to find the gem in a hundred all-but-identical shots. Storage is dirt cheap, but my remaining time is not and when the heart stops, there will be no more. I shoot all I need to shoot, but no more.

I was a big fan of motorized film cameras, not because I could shoot a spray and look for the picture later, but because I did not need to move the camera from my eye to advance the film. I did a lot of sports at all levels, and timing is everything. A split second too early or too late, was nothing but another boring exposure to cull. No camera shoots fast enough to ensure that precise moment has actually been captured.

Covering an event like the Daytona 500, when the inevitable big pileup occurred, both eyes were open and each shot was being picked as the current shot was being exposed. People complain about batteries running out in 300 shots—we were stuck with rolls of film with 36 exposures. It took least a minute to rewind and reload, ready to shoot again. If the big wreck began when you were on #35, there would be an awkward conversation with the photo chief in the very near future.

--
larry!
http://www.larry-bolch.com/

Billx08 said:

Daniel Lowe said:

. . .

It is clear as day that you dont even consider the "cost" of firing off 600 or more shots a day.

There is no cost, only a very efficient way for the amateur understand and learn quicker than at any other time in the history of photography.

Click to expand...

Learning is best aided by reviewing the photos while you're shooting them, using the EXIF data that the camera shows in the LCD. Viewing EXIF data later, while editing photos can also help understanding.

Click to expand...

Or simply looking at the picture, I don't need EXIF data to tell me what I am looking at.

Billx08 said:

But 600 photos in a day takes a looong time just to shoot.

Click to expand...

Then the beginner will be enjoying themselves for a loooooong time.

Billx08 said:

Reviewing them takes even longer, and most newbies that shoot that many photos will never spend much time poring over their images and image data.

Click to expand...

Nonsense.

Billx08 said:

The quick review you're talking about that most newbie photographers do, is useful for culling photos and allowing you to retake messed up shots if you still can, but it's rarely used for learning except by the dedicated few,

Click to expand...

You really are trying hard to find a point of contention, 10/10 for effort.

Billx08 said:

and they're the same ones that would put in the effort to learn even if they shot with film back in the prehistoric days before the concept of a little Daniel Lowe was even conceived.

Click to expand...

There's the Bill we all know and ........

Interesting subject Ratty.

I tend to vary the amount based primarily on subject and location. As I travel all over the countryside on a daily basis, it can be hard to get back at some point for a re-shoot.

Therefore I tend to reel off a lot of shots at various focal lengths and angles and even film simulation.

Many a time it may involve moving parts, be they plant animal or insect so burst mode is used frequently. Not hard to rattle off 600 shots in a day, as I do frequently.

I always review as I shoot and weed out obvious duds then review at home for a more extensive prune. I try to target 40 keepers when shooting wildlife scenes.

Just by way of illustration we were having lunch by a bridge in some forgotten little valley about 100kms from the nearest major city. I wandered out onto the bridge with sandwich in hand to admire the small river below. Staring back at me were two brown trout!!

Wandering across to look over the other side was, a small pool, with you guessed, another six trout.

I only had the s5700 with me today so it wasnt much good at getting the shot, didnt have a flyrod with me either, so no fish either

Moral of the story... never leave the HS20 at home, perfect photo op and no decent camera
--
Love dat Fuji
http://akiwiretrospective.blogspot.com/
Fuji HS20EXR
Fuji HS10,
Pentax K1000, Pentax sf7, Pentax zx-50

I still do some film mostly 35mm though.

I think it's down to self restraint for example I can't see the point of taking 500 shots of a landscape scene, but obvious a sports match you'd want to take a decent number even then you can time things too.

Film can be restrictive but I see that as a good thing. I think most of us did fire and forget with digital when we first started with it. Now I'm a lot less trigger happy in most cases.

There is something to be said for film knowing you only have 36 or 24 shots and knowing you have to pay to get them developed as well as the cost of the film (which is small IMO) that does make you take more time and put more effort in.