Post #365,785
11/4/12 10:49:41 AM
|
On the other hand ...
Some things the electronics can do better than we can. Maybe not for landscape, but any action shots you'd be insane trying to do it all by hand. You don't want to be like the F1 driver still holding out against electronic traction control.
--
Drew
|
Post #365,786
11/4/12 11:18:41 AM
|
Action shots need two things:
A long lens and a fast shutter.
And good light.
Action shots need three things. A long lens, a fast shutter and good light. And a monopod.
I'll come in again.
Seriously, though; for all but the outer limits of the technical envelope, it's about composition and seeing the shot. Not seeing it, but seeing it.
It's the one thing I work hardest at. What am I looking at? What is it that makes me want to take this picture? What am I showing the viewer here? Only then do I start farting about with exposure and aperture and ISO and whatnot.
Ansel Adams said that the most important component of any camera is the twelve inches or so behind the viewfinder. Or something like that.
Although I'm all over having an electronic light meter in my camera. Doing it manually? Bollocks to that! Autofocus? Ooh yeah, baby.
I know how to use a light meter, but having had cause to do so recently (messing around with an old completely manual film camera) I find myself wondering how photographers in days of yore ever got around to taking any pictures at all, what with the faffing with focus and exposure; just as you get your metering right, the sun goes "haha! Fooled you!" and fucks off behind a cloud.
I guess what I'm driving at is that it's trivially easy to find oneself defending one's poor pictures by reasoning that if only one had a better lens, a better body, a better filter - whatever - one'd have taken a better shot. Well, I don't think one would. I take the pictures I take, and the gear just helps me do that.
One thing makes me better: practice.
Practice, and constructive criticism.
Two things make me better: practice and constructive criticism.
Practice, constructive criticism, and seeing and trying to understand the work of others.
Oh, bloody hell.
|
Post #365,787
11/4/12 11:32:01 AM
|
Old story from photojournalism
Newspapers were at the stage where all the photos were from stringers. No staff photographers any more. Cheaper for the papers, unsteady as hell for the photographers.
A cocky new kid right out of college comes in and asks for a staff photog position. The photo editor laughed at him. Kid said, "You give me any camera you have, I'll have the page-one photo in your paper tomorrow." Editor pulled a 110 instamatic out of a drawer and wished the kid luck. Figured he'd never see the camera again, but it was worth it for the story he'd get to tell over drinks.
That night the kid went out to a high rise fire and took 12 shots. Brought it in to the night editor, got it developed, and ... well, you see where this is going.
So yeah, it's not (mostly) about the gear. But like you said, exposure and auto-focus FTW.
--
Drew
|
Post #365,792
11/4/12 3:04:52 PM
|
You said the magic word..
Ansel.
Someone will become the repository for some Kodachrome slides (!) I took, of A.A. at work (photographing the LBL Lab Director, Ed McMillan then.)
The session, done at a desk in control room for the 'Bevatron' were to be used in a coffee table book about U.C. (on some Anniversary or other) called, Fiat Lux.
Later, up on the "craneway" where he took some shots of the machine, I got to peek at his ground-glass, after he'd composed one. Friendly, non-primadonna kinda guy.
(Mentioned previously, wayback.)
I (natch) asked him at outset, if I might take some shots of (him + assistant) as he worked. Soundlessly of course.
OK, says he. These likely were via Nikon f--post 'Photomic' *model? and I can't recall why I had slide film in it: it was enough that camera was in my car / for this unscheduled Opportunity.
* ~'66 ergo well before the F-2, my last Nikon. May Kodachrome/dye-transfer==ANALOG.. Live Forever!
(Actually I think I like the expression I got on Ed's face ... a tad more than A's final cut: all this after he'd composed the scene, asst. holding passive reflectors etc. etc. so I had all those ineffable assists, needed only to ... ... Get the LIght Reading right!/Nikon did.
Ah well, photog stories are akin to bench racing before/after the T.T. -- fascinating mostly to fellow fanatics.
|
Post #365,793
11/4/12 3:12:28 PM
|
Russell, Adams, Hepburn, ... Where's your memoir?!?!!
|
Post #365,856
11/6/12 7:43:21 PM
|
Random chance, mostly. Take credit for that?
About only premeditated event was catching Audrey (starring in a SFWarfield Theatre production as ... Gigi!) and a thoroughly impressive portrayal of That ingenue, too..
Seeing the sneak preview in Pasadena, of Roman Holiday? Ditto. Who Knew!? I would witness the birth of a pixyish Legend.
{{sigh}}
Hell, I have an 'autograph' of Sir John Cockroft, who once lectured a tad at The Institute. Shoulda thanked him in advance: for that Cockroft-Walton 500 KV stack in the original ion source.
Thus, at two venues I have just happened to bump into several Giants (with those legendary shoulders-with-footpads) while, just-missing a few I'd like to have briefly chatted up.
Methinks that Memoirs are ~ for people who demonstrably assimilated / made use of all such brilliance acquired (through osmosis?) by later er, doing insanely-Great stuff.
Just an Observer though; early on I realized my preference to play with all the intricate nonesuch Toys, to some lesser purpose than.. inculcating Everything about some specialty and ... ...
You Know: toiling like Sisyphus evermore.. in search of [The New]
We also serve who only stand and kibitz.. magnifying the Absurdity of All and Everything, aka
The Miracle! that ... "there is Anything At All"--including *Oneself*
* An 'entity' {?} which, how/where/when-ever It exists: remains always a gigantic {???}
Maybe we get a Clue in the final brain shutdown..? Maybe Not. This 'It' seeks no Certainties
--those ego-derived phantasms suck the Life out of every moment, methinks :-)
Law above fear, justice above law, mercy above justice, love above all.
|
Post #365,908
11/7/12 12:18:53 PM
|
Not credit, exactly.
Let those that follow get to see glimpses of what life was like in those days. When unique individuals made a genuine lasting mark on humanity.
I can't cite an example, but I think a book on the lines of "here's what it was like living in the mid-late 20th century and here are some of the interesting things I saw and experienced" from your perspective would be a great read. Not to toot your own horn, and not to be a real-life "Forrest Gump"-like piece (I didn't like that movie much), but to show the humanity and history of the times.
Just a thought. :-)
Cheers,
Scott.
(Who briefly saw Walter Mondale march in a parade in Chicago and was struck by how tall he was.)
|
Post #365,911
11/7/12 12:30:19 PM
|
Really? I always got the impression he was short
--
Drew
|
Post #365,913
11/7/12 12:48:14 PM
|
He was 5-11" or 6' according to a quick search. Hmmm...
Maybe it was just a break in the crowd or something. He looked about 6'4" from my vantage point. Maybe he had a bunch of short people around him. ;-)
Carter is (or at least was) 5'9", but he wasn't in the parade.
Thanks for giving me the excuse to check.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #365,948
11/7/12 9:24:18 PM
|
ObAside: When Legends Gather.
|
Post #366,052
11/9/12 4:30:09 PM
|
Some IncreÃble assemblages there!
|
Post #366,057
11/9/12 6:07:49 PM
|
Yup. E.g. Ali and the Beatles. (rofl)
|
