M43 Musings

woof woof wrote:

I agree and I think that some need to look back realistically.

IF you are referring to me, I sometimes just look at my slides or book library and I can even pickup photography books from 70's and 80's shot with film just about birds. Many are captured in flight and many are as well in stationary positions.

IMO kit can indeed be a limiting factor and the kit we have now at least for 35mm and smaller formats (I have no idea about larger formats) is (again IMO) superior to anything that's gone before and to say that some were getting as good or better results decades ago needs to be qualified as if they were they were using aids such as the flash traps you mention.

Someone's needs to check what is written...

I find it very difficult to believe that technically better or even as good was possible decades ago with 35mm or smaller film or digital cameras of the day... and any aid or technique used in the past could be applied to shots taken today with technically more capable and less limiting kit. IMO of course

There were many great ones nature photographers doing amazing work. The wide audience didn't know about those at the times, as it was as popular as books of poetry. So you knew there were readers but not everyone was reading those.

But some people just don't get that at the time things were not so much different, as there were no such pixel peepers and dreamers that everything should look like slowest film on large format.

A great photograph is great photograph not rules by amount of grain or noise, and not even by slightly having motion blur or blown highlights etc.