You have to wonder How?

n3eg said:

Manbungo Skumbaum Chimwala said:

At the turn of the 19th century, the tallest man in the room might have been someone 5'10" tall. His stature have been celebrated as a "great" in his time, but today, thanks to advancements in technology, his height would not be a mark of distinction.

Analogously, the so-called "great" film photos of yesteryear are quite middling in comparison to the sheer multitude of great digital images. Those who think otherwise--and you seem to be one of them, sadly--are afflicted with nostalgia, a lamentable disease that lays waste to perceptual accuracy.

Click to expand...

Hey, I'm 5 foot 10, and I resent being accused of wallowing in mediocrity!

Click to expand...

n3eg said:

My question is: have home video skills improved since the days of film, 8/16mm home movies, and even shoulder boulder VHS luggycorders? You would think so since every camera has video now, but even the wide fixed lens smartphone video is shaky and not centered. I remember doing better in 1974 with Super 8 and no tripod as a 14 year old.

Click to expand...

n3eg said:

My question is: have home video skills improved since the days of film, 8/16mm home movies, and even shoulder boulder VHS luggycorders? You would think so since every camera has video now, but even the wide fixed lens smartphone video is shaky and not centered. I remember doing better in 1974 with Super 8 and no tripod as a 14 year old.

Click to expand...

Individuals aren't representative of populations. You have a few competing trends:

• At some point, such footage was only shot by people who really cared. In the days of film costing $$$, prior to VHS, odds are a typical shoot was better than a typical shoot today.
• On the other hand, once you hit a little later (perhaps VHS-abouts days), people shooting were rank amateurs with little practice. A cell phone shooter of 2016 is a much more practiced videographer, and does better, by virtue of doing it more

Hindsight makes things look great, but look at the YouTube of the eighties and nineties -- America's Funniest Home Videos. There was an extensive selection process to pick the best of the best, and even so, if you look at video quality, it was much worse than the 2016-era things I see friends shoot.

I was learning the craft 50 years ago and even then appreciating the advances of "modern" photography over the equipment and film the originals had to use -- because that was all that was available. I was filled with awe.

They thought it was terrific compared with what went before. You go with what you have got at any given time.

I too wonder at the mumpkins I see in the forums complaining about the capabilities of gear, pixel peeping to compare lenses and cameras using about six different processes to find the sharpest, etc.

But the thing that really gets me going, falling into helpless laughter all over the keyboard, is people seeking advice on different brands of camera strap. Is this one too narrow? How about this one, is it too wide? What about the belt to restrain it around the waist? Etc. To say nothing of talking about how classy it looks and whether it is the go for (a) street photography or (b) rock climbing.

I had a much higher "keeper" rate counting frames taken, back in the film days than I do now with digital. That's because every frame was costing me money and I had limited frames available anyway -- 12 per film on the 120 roll film cameras; 24 or 36 on the 35mm cameras. So I took one shot. If I felt the need to bracket, it would be one on the nose, one under and one over.

If I bracket today with my Lumix GX7, I take SEVEN shots, each a third of a stop different.

Taking action with film cameras, I would have several goes to catch the peak and hope for the best. Nowadays, I shoot a burst of five to eight shots and might do that half-a-dozen times to get the one (or two or three) keeper.

So I tend to take a lot more frames today but in reality, the burst is one shot, not half a dozen, and the seven frames for exposure compensation could be condensed to three, and really all one shot (as before with three frames).

So I say to the pointy finger nails worrying the pixel scab -- go out and take a picture of three. Modern cameras are quite capable of doing that even if that clown over there is letting the side down by having his GX7 slung around his neck on wide elastic he bought from the haberdashers for $2! (Good grief, a bad image for all photographers. LOL.)

Gandolphi said:

Most middle to high end cameras are capable of producing images which are, technically, better than film cameras. With a few exceptions.

Most modern lenses are superior, in almost every way, to lenses of a few decades ago. With a few exceptions.

Despite the superiority of the equipment, people are still unhappy with and critical of what they have.

You have to wonder how the old timers managed to take the great, unforgettable photographs they did.

Are there any great, unforgettable photographs taken these days?

Click to expand...

I'm not unhappy. I have been happy for a quarter century and the scanning dimension has invigorated my already obsessive attention to detail.

Thank goodness for exceptions. I could have spent the last decade paying thousands of thousands of dollars for one upgrade or new format after another.

And found myself unhappy.

Gandolphi said:

Despite the superiority of the equipment, people are still unhappy with and critical of what they have.

Click to expand...

If we were, in general, content with what we have, we would still be living in caves, use rocks to hunt and eat raw meat. Dissatisfaction is the prime pusher of progress.

Gandolphi said:

You have to wonder how the old timers managed to take the great, unforgettable photographs they did.

Click to expand...

99% of a great, unforgettable photograph involves being present, with a camera, at a great, unforgettable moment. Or having a great, unforgettable original idea that allows one to stage such a photograph.

Gandolphi said:

Are there any great, unforgettable photographs taken these days?

Click to expand...

In our days of a society that is jaded by intense media exposure and has 'seen it all', it takes a lot more to qualify for 'great and unforgettable'

I was going to ask you if you were related to the famous large format camera family,...then I realized you spelled your name a little differently,...Gandolfi


sorry

AnatomyFilms said:

I was going to ask you if you were related to the famous large format camera family,...then I realized you spelled your name a little differently,...Gandolfi

sorry

Click to expand...

Well spotted

guess I will be the spoon

Gandolphi said:

Most middle to high end cameras are capable of producing images which are, technically, better than film cameras. With a few exceptions.

Click to expand...

Film when used properly is still quite good. It is just MUCH harder

Gandolphi said:

Most modern lenses are superior, in almost every way, to lenses of a few decades ago. With a few exceptions.

Click to expand...

pretty much

Gandolphi said:

Despite the superiority of the equipment, people are still unhappy with and critical of what they have.

Click to expand...

because you measure against the tools of your contemporaries rather than what WAS done. Much as anything. Name it. Computers, televisions, cars, phones, toys, golf equipment, guns, professional athletes, and on and on and on........

Sure some people can say that was good enough so I need nothing else. The continued pursuit of improvement is going to drive the human race much further than an acceptance of what exists.......until we relase the zombies.......

Gandolphi said:

You have to wonder how the old timers managed to take the great, unforgettable photographs they did.

Click to expand...

what are we talking about here????? forget iconic photos. Most of those are about capturing a moment or perception of an event. Not technical perfection. Unless you are into photography most humans exposure to iconic photos consists of media and advertising

Gandolphi said:

Are there any great, unforgettable photographs taken these days?

Click to expand...

YES SOOOOOOOO MANY that being a professional photogragher does not carry the same weight it once did

It also takes time for a photo to be considered "iconic". We have had widespread use of digital for what 10-15 years? Plenty of great photos. The one of Usain bolt smiling as he dusted others at the olympics was BEAUTIFUL. Technically two. I doubt that anyone would have been as brave with film...... That image was shared around the world and instantly famous. The bad thing about that.......15 minutes later some other image was broadcast around the world and instantly famous.....

Just for fun. How many iconic videos are there from say before 1950????

Gandolphi said:

Are there any great, unforgettable photographs taken these days?

Click to expand...

The unforgettability and greatness of a photo depends heavily on presentation.

No, there are no great, unforgettable photos posted on our Instagram feeds or Facebook galleries. The very medium makes them forgettable.

Most great photos from the past are unforgettable because they were published in Nat Geo, or Time, or presented in galleries as the work of masters.

Presentation matters.

Acrill said:

Gandolphi said:

Are there any great, unforgettable photographs taken these days?

Click to expand...

The unforgettability and greatness of a photo depends heavily on presentation.

No, there are no great, unforgettable photos posted on our Instagram feeds or Facebook galleries. The very medium makes them forgettable.

Most great photos from the past are unforgettable because they were published in Nat Geo, or Time, or presented in galleries as the work of masters.

Presentation matters.

Click to expand...

Come on, the photo of my great nephew starting school today is very memorable and it will be hard to forget this day because of the photo.

Just because your social media does not have unforgettable photos does not mean that's the case for other people.

A photo does not need to be unforgettable to every person on the planet to be unforgettable to some.

hotdog321 said:

Gandolphi said:

Most middle to high end cameras are capable of producing images which are, technically, better than film cameras. With a few exceptions.

Most modern lenses are superior, in almost every way, to lenses of a few decades ago. With a few exceptions.

Despite the superiority of the equipment, people are still unhappy with and critical of what they have.

You have to wonder how the old timers managed to take the great, unforgettable photographs they did.

Are there any great, unforgettable photographs taken these days?

Click to expand...

I'm an old timer, sorta, but as a newspaper photographer we used to miss a lot more shots than we do these days. It is normal to come back from an assignment with shots that would be award winners decades ago. Today's standards are much, much higher and the deadlines much, much tighter.

For instance, if we miss a couple of key shots during a football game these days we grumble and curse our bad luck. But back a couple of decades ago we would be lucky to come back from a game with 2-3 really good shots. Now we routinely pick and choose from a couple of dozen good shots during a normal game.







--
photojournalist
http://craighartley.zenfolio.com/

Click to expand...

Even though my post is close to being "Off Topic" but I have noticed that almost every posted Photo that you have provided (for a long time) are not only excellent but appear that "Mr Clean" was there only a short Minute before you clicked the Shutter. There seems to NOT be even one speck of grass stain or showing for signs of dirt, etc.

How do you do that.... Also, this is perfectly in line with the topic in the OP

"You have to wonder How ? the players uniforms seem to always be perfectly spotless.

--
Vernon...

Astroturf?

[No message]

tcg550 said:

Just because your social media does not have unforgettable photos does not mean that's the case for other people.

A photo does not need to be unforgettable to every person on the planet to be unforgettable to some.

Click to expand...

Thats fine, but it isn't what the original poster is talking about at all.

Acrill said:

tcg550 said:

Just because your social media does not have unforgettable photos does not mean that's the case for other people.

A photo does not need to be unforgettable to every person on the planet to be unforgettable to some.

Click to expand...

Thats fine, but it isn't what the original poster is talking about at all.

Click to expand...

Which is why I was responding to you and not the original poster.

Because "pixel peeping" didn't exist.

Gandolphi said:

Despite the superiority of the equipment, people are still unhappy with and critical of what they have.

Click to expand...

Not all of us

Gandolphi said:

You have to wonder how the old timers managed to take the great, unforgettable photographs they did.

Click to expand...

Lots of practice. They learned how to manually focus quickly; how to set exposures in advance; what to expect from their film, etc.

Polaroid. With medium and large format, you could proof the image.

Gandolphi said:

Are there any great, unforgettable photographs taken these days?

Click to expand...

Sure, all the time.

The thing is, it's rarely the technology that makes an image stick (or not). We're at a point where we are inundated with images, after decades of photographers breaking new ground. We are often inured to the effects of a great image, because so many are thrown at us on a daily basis.

In the old days you got motion blur, grain, lack of sharpness--but the excuse was they have "feeling." A feeling no doubt enhanced by the lack of technical quality.

Whatever. Now you have it all. Better in every single way to those who have the objectivity to see--including raw creativity.

Sorry. I grew up in the film era, built my own custom darkroom with innovative custom electronics, but even dear old Ansel is looking dated.

And in those good old days a photographer could be happy with one great photo a year. Landscape photographers a few more.