The history of purists

Started Sep 11, 2008 | Discussions
Photovalve Regular Member • Posts: 457
The history of purists

A response to those who think that video mode in a DSLR is potent of the end of civilisation. With tongue in cheek

35 mm - you'll never get a decent picture on that (c. 1930)
Bayonet lenses - if you need to work that fast you're not concentrating
Zoom lenses - no fast apertures and you should use your feet anyway!
TTL Metering - can't do incident with that
Auto Modes - for beginners only
Programme Modes - for people who can't be bothered to learn photography
Autofocus - a gimmick and now I need new lenses!
Digital - it will never outresolve film (even I thought that!)
Video in a DSLR - not in a serious camera surely!

All of these things represent progress and after a while become standard. Personally I hope it does have a video mode, because if I get one I will definitely use it, as it will allow me to be creative in a different way.

Also, more features means broader appeal which means mroe sales which means cheaper cameras. That benefits everyone.

Aosh Regular Member • Posts: 357
love it! (nt)

I love it!

Tom Meeks Senior Member • Posts: 2,942
Ya gotta love it!

It's same old song and dance that comes with progress... some drag their feet kicking and screaming and some run with it and soar.

 Tom Meeks's gear list:Tom Meeks's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 400D Canon EOS 450D Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +1 more
Camera Dog Senior Member • Posts: 1,851
you forgot one

Print Button: who needs it? I download, process, and then print.

Bill MacBeth Senior Member • Posts: 1,631
Re: The history of purists

Photovalve wrote:

...
Video in a DSLR - not in a serious camera surely!
...

Interesting historical post. Good job.

I think the sports and nature photographers will like HD video in the same camera. It's a natural extension into their domains.

-- hide signature --

Regards, Bill

Rocco Galatioto Contributing Member • Posts: 568
You forgot another..

Medium format is dead. Well digital medium format is here and better than ever.

I believe that for many applications, digital medium format is the only way to go.

You can cram just so many photo sites on a full frame DSLR; then quality suffers.
--
Rocco Galatioto

Jamie H. Senior Member • Posts: 2,793
My phone is an MP3 player and a camera, and a calculator...

And an address book, and a stopwatch, and an email client, and you get the point. That doesnt mean I use those features a whole lot or that I dont still own an MP3 player or a point and shoot camera. Try and stuff too many features into a single device and it just becomes unwieldy. Video cameras demand a whole different set of tools and adjustments than still cameras do. I predict that due to limits in ergonomics and human-computer interaction, the usefulness of video in a still image camera will be very limited. That doesnt mean some companies wont try to produce a 'swiss army knife' device of digital imaging.

I think the naysayers at this point are the people primarily spooked by the idea that their hobby and trade is going to fall by the wayside when high res video gets into high gear. I can understand that fear, but I believe it is largely unfounded for a number of reasons.

Photovalve wrote:

A response to those who think that video mode in a DSLR is potent of
the end of civilisation. With tongue in cheek

35 mm - you'll never get a decent picture on that (c. 1930)
Bayonet lenses - if you need to work that fast you're not concentrating
Zoom lenses - no fast apertures and you should use your feet anyway!
TTL Metering - can't do incident with that
Auto Modes - for beginners only
Programme Modes - for people who can't be bothered to learn photography
Autofocus - a gimmick and now I need new lenses!
Digital - it will never outresolve film (even I thought that!)
Video in a DSLR - not in a serious camera surely!

All of these things represent progress and after a while become
standard. Personally I hope it does have a video mode, because if I
get one I will definitely use it, as it will allow me to be creative
in a different way.

Also, more features means broader appeal which means mroe sales which
means cheaper cameras. That benefits everyone.

-- hide signature --

Amateurs worry about sharpness
Professionals worry about sales
Photographers worry about light

http://archive.jmhphoto.net

Spencer Regular Member • Posts: 365
Re: The history of purists

Photovalve wrote:

Auto Modes - for beginners only
Programme Modes - for people who can't be bothered to learn photography

I disagree with those two statements.

Auto Mode is for beginners. I don't know any professional or advanced amateur who shoots in auto.

While some pro's shoot aperture or shutter priority under certain circumstances the majority shoot manual.

Why let the camera decide your settings?

 Spencer's gear list:Spencer's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 20D Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II +7 more
J A K Forum Pro • Posts: 15,833
I think you meant "I agree", not "I disagree". (NT)

Other than your opening sentence I "agree" with your comments.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

jphotoarts New Member • Posts: 7
Re: I think you meant "I agree", not "I disagree". (NT)

Well we should look back before the 1930's. From the time the first photo was taken in 1834(?) Photography it self struggled to be thought of more than a documentary tool and a neat parlor trick. Why? Because folks (purist) thought that only painting was the true art form. It is odd that the camera obscura was one of the main tools used by the master painters.

As stated, there are those that come kicking and screaming.....

Jason

Mr EG Regular Member • Posts: 354
What is your point?

I have seen people get excellent and bad results with any of the features mentioned below. Some people will object to change on the basis of questionable necessity (in their mind anyway) of these features.

I think it will be more accurate to say that

- A purist will try to get the best image as they envisage it by using whatever tools are necessary and available.

- On the other hand a person who object to change and advance in technology will do so on the basis of face value i.e in their mind having more features doesn’t necessary make them a better photographer . This opinion is entirely subjective and can be argued over indefinitely. To play devils’ advocate for a minute one can say that some of the best photographer of the past century have used tools that would be considered primitive by today’s standard and were still able to produce a masterpieces unrivaled even with today’s tools (e.g. Ansell Adams comes to mind). In other words the photographer’s skill plays a much larger role in their ability to produce excellent work compared with having a camera with more features.

Photovalve wrote:

A response to those who think that video mode in a DSLR is potent of
the end of civilisation. With tongue in cheek

35 mm - you'll never get a decent picture on that (c. 1930)
Bayonet lenses - if you need to work that fast you're not concentrating
Zoom lenses - no fast apertures and you should use your feet anyway!
TTL Metering - can't do incident with that
Auto Modes - for beginners only
Programme Modes - for people who can't be bothered to learn photography
Autofocus - a gimmick and now I need new lenses!
Digital - it will never outresolve film (even I thought that!)
Video in a DSLR - not in a serious camera surely!

All of these things represent progress and after a while become
standard. Personally I hope it does have a video mode, because if I
get one I will definitely use it, as it will allow me to be creative
in a different way.

Also, more features means broader appeal which means mroe sales which
means cheaper cameras. That benefits everyone.

simon65 Contributing Member • Posts: 726
It's a toy, used once, then left in the closet

Your post is a classic example of a straw man fallacy. You support movie modes and it would be rather convenient for you if everyone who didn't had also opposed all progress in SLRs over the last 70 years, from 35 mm to autofocus.
So convenient that you attribute this opposition to them regardless.

It's nonsense.

Most people welcomed the changes you list. Personally I still don't use program modes, but if you do I respect that.

But what have movie modes got to do with enhancing the photographic process?

Nothing. You may as well add in-built calculators, mobile phones, and iPods to a list of (potential) progress for DSLRs.

And if you think movie making will allow you to be "creative in a different way" what pray have you been doing all these years? There's never been anything holding people back in this field. Video is not new, the first compact movie cameras appeared in the 1930s alongside the 35 mm camera film you mention.

Movie modes also popped up in compact cameras some time ago. I still don't know anyone who chooses a compact on this criteria, and in fact most appear blissfully unaware and unconcerned whether their camera has this function or not. I suspect after the initial excitement has died down it will be the same with the movie mode toy in DSLRs.

Photovalve wrote:

A response to those who think that video mode in a DSLR is potent of
the end of civilisation. With tongue in cheek

35 mm - you'll never get a decent picture on that (c. 1930)
Bayonet lenses - if you need to work that fast you're not concentrating
Zoom lenses - no fast apertures and you should use your feet anyway!
TTL Metering - can't do incident with that
Auto Modes - for beginners only
Programme Modes - for people who can't be bothered to learn photography
Autofocus - a gimmick and now I need new lenses!
Digital - it will never outresolve film (even I thought that!)
Video in a DSLR - not in a serious camera surely!

All of these things represent progress and after a while become
standard. Personally I hope it does have a video mode, because if I
get one I will definitely use it, as it will allow me to be creative
in a different way.

Also, more features means broader appeal which means mroe sales which
means cheaper cameras. That benefits everyone.

OP Photovalve Regular Member • Posts: 457
Re: It's a toy, used once, then left in the closet

simon65 wrote:

But what have movie modes got to do with enhancing the photographic
process?

Movie making is still writing with light, just in a different way

Movie modes also popped up in compact cameras some time ago. I still
don't know anyone who chooses a compact on this criteria, and in fact
most appear blissfully unaware and unconcerned whether their camera
has this function or not. I suspect after the initial excitement has
died down it will be the same with the movie mode toy in DSLRs.

I bought a compact because it had a movie mode and my stills camera didn't. I had seen someone use one on holiday and I realised i was missing out, so I got one.

The beauty of having a movie mode in a DSLR for me is I get to use all my expensive lenses, I can play with depth of field and the results look like film (24 fps). That's an area of creativity I have never explored and I think it would be fun to try. It means I can use a long lens to get a movie of a cheetah running as well as a still, it won't cost any extra and it take up any more space.

I just think it's a shame that change is so often seen as detrimental.

J A K Forum Pro • Posts: 15,833
Excellent point! (NT)

"NT" means no text.

Joe Kurkjian

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

Ben_Egbert Forum Pro • Posts: 20,228
Not all new features good

Look at some examples.

1.Turn signals available around 1950, did not work right until around 1980.

2.Automatic transmissions, introduced around 1940, pretty good feature by 1980.

3.Cell phones so complicated my wife has to visit the store where she bought it once a week to get the Blue Tooth Ear piece sound working.

4.Pop up toasters, still not working after maybe 60 years.

5.Surround sound, tried over and over until Dolby made a decent version.

6.My car doors are always locked when I don’t want them to be locked.

7.Key in ignition beeper goes off every time I am trying to get out of the car fast for a road side bird.

-- hide signature --
 Ben_Egbert's gear list:Ben_Egbert's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Samyang 14mm F2.8 IF ED MC Aspherical +1 more
photo_rb Contributing Member • Posts: 707
You forgot "who needs FF"

That was a big cry when only Canon had a decent full frame DSLR

 photo_rb's gear list:photo_rb's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Sony a5100 Canon EOS 5DS R Sony a6500 Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 14-140mm F4-5.8 OIS +16 more
z2a Regular Member • Posts: 109
Re: The history of purists

If these new "features" are so good, why not add them to 1Ds III?
The 1Ds III is so expensive that it deserves these beautiful new features!

Please, canon, spare the 5DII, instead, add these new "features",
the pop-up flash, video mode, print buttton, mobile phone, email, tv,
etc, to 1Ds III !!

J A K Forum Pro • Posts: 15,833
Re: What is your point?

Mr EG wrote:

To play devils’ advocate for a minute one can say
that some of the best photographer of the past century have used
tools that would be considered primitive by today’s standard and were
still able to produce a masterpieces unrivaled even with today’s
tools (e.g. Ansell Adams comes to mind).

Um, Mr. Adams was the premier tech-no geek of his day; in fact technical approaches he contrived are still taught in schools and in use today. Adams didn't run around with a Brownie Hawkeye (or whatever); he used the best gear available for the job at hand and with a lot of hard work took that job to a higher level (compared to his peers). Adams not only used the best equipment but he also had the "opportunity" to be at many of the best places at the right time and clearly had an awesome eye for a great shot; that said, I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be discussing him today if he used my Brownie Hawkeye on all of his shoots.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

dotborg Veteran Member • Posts: 8,251
Re: The history of purists

Spencer wrote:

Auto Mode is for beginners. I don't know any professional or advanced
amateur who shoots in auto.

Tv and Av aren't auto modes?

-- hide signature --

Whoever said 'a picture is worth a thousand words' was a cheapskate.

http://www.pbase.com/dot_borg

Mr EG Regular Member • Posts: 354
Re: What is your point?

J A K wrote:

Mr EG wrote:

To play devils’ advocate for a minute one can say
that some of the best photographer of the past century have used
tools that would be considered primitive by today’s standard and were
still able to produce a masterpieces unrivaled even with today’s
tools (e.g. Ansell Adams comes to mind).

Um, Mr. Adams was the premier tech-no geek of his day; in fact
technical approaches he contrived are still taught in schools and in
use today. Adams didn't run around with a Brownie Hawkeye (or
whatever); he used the best gear available for the job at hand and
with a lot of hard work took that job to a higher level (compared to
his peers). Adams not only used the best equipment but he also had
the "opportunity" to be at many of the best places at the right time
and clearly had an awesome eye for a great shot; that said, I'm
pretty sure we wouldn't be discussing him today if he used my Brownie
Hawkeye on all of his shoots.

agree 100% but the fact remains that even with the gear we have today very few if any reach the level of work he did with the gear of that time. In other words if advance in technology = better image people would have surpass his work by now

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/jkurkjia

SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads