For Photographers the image of a shrinking Path: My reaction and others I know.

[kbg32]

And what does this all have to do with making a living now that times and the business have changed? Why you guys are fondling your cameras, here is an interesting read -

http://fairtradephotographer.blogspot.com/2010/03/microstock-why-would-reputable-company.html

 

[Pickett Wilson]

A company would do that to themselves because they don't care. The photo is just eye candy. Who's going to pay attention to it anyway?

 

[Ming Rider]

And what does this all have to do with making a living now that times and the business have changed? Why you guys are fondling your cameras, here is an interesting read -

http://fairtradephotographer.blogspot.com/2010/03/microstock-why-would-reputable-company.html

The body language of the group-of-five says nothing to me about confidence, which is what they're meant to portray.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

For me, using the M design is a way I stay out of my own Hell!!!!

I tend to skip through this type of thread very quickly ( if at all ) but every so often one is rewarded with a literary gem! LOL

 

[Ronald M]

I have 3 Nikon dslr cameras,40/200/700.

Only on rare occasions have I used anything but manual/raw. It is heatbreaking I paid a fortune for JPEG settings, saturation, sharpmess etc never to use them.

A near mint Nikon F2 came to me a month ago. I still put film in IXMOO cassettes with a bench winder in the dark.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

A few lines of code cost little and weigh nothing, Ronald.

 

[Finder]

What I learnt:

Amateurs cannot be good photographers. Case in point--Julia Margaret Camaron and Imogen Cunningham.

Technology and process add value to a final image. My image is more valuable the more I intervene in the process.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

I make parts for my models on the miller by setting the spindle speed, turning the handles, watching figures on the collars and measuring, obviously - I enjoy it, I've done it that way since boyhood. If I could afford it, I'd fit 'stepper motors', control gear etc. hook it to my laptop and sit back, smoke my pipe and drink coffee while it merrily cut out loco wheel spokes and chassis parts!....but I would still feel 'in control of everything
Dave.
but then maybe I'd get p#ssed off - doing programmes!

 

[kuzano]

Ah... Yes.. The Shrinking Path...

Ah... Yes.. The Shrinking Path...

Subtitle to the Crouching Tigers, Snapping Dragons, Eh Wot?

 

[easyrider]

"-- sports: Not many amateurs will invest in the long lenses required or have the skill to shoot sports."

Used to, when I went to shoot high school sports for the newspaper, I was the only photographer on the sideline. Now, there is a crowd of parents with high-end Canon and Nikon DSLR's with $2,000 IS zooms. One parent during last football season showed up with a 1DSMkIII and a 300mm f/2.8 Canon L lens. And I'm in a rural area!

It's a case against farm subsidies!

City folk don't have as much disposable income.

Here is a biz that seems to do well charging high prices:

http://www.photoreflect.com/pr3/store.aspx?p=1005

 

[Richard Marks]

What I learnt:

Amateurs cannot be good photographers. Case in point--Julia Margaret Camaron and Imogen Cunningham.

Technology and process add value to a final image. My image is more valuable the more I intervene in the process.

I must disagree about amatuers! On ballance the probability is a professional under limiting circumstances is more likely to deliver than an amateur, but this does not mean that amateurs are inherently bad. Infact only taking pictures when one wishes to as opposed to when one has to may have its creative advatages.

Secondly I have some reservations about a direct relationship between value, technology and intervention in an image. Surely good picture taking limits the necessity for intervention. Equally a poor shot is not worth the effort of hours of fiddling. Just my two penneth (tr. cents).

Best wishes

Richard

 

[Doug]

I agree cameras do not have souls.

True, but I like to consider and respect the creative efforts of all those who designed and built the tool... put something of themselves into it, so to speak.

My feeling is the M series makes it easier for me to express my inner self (my soul if you will). My photos prove to me this is so.

Entirely valid in my experience as well, and I could add a few other elegantly designed cameras too. Even if some controls turn the opposite direction.

 

[Robert Hooper]

I retired from professional photography because enough of my clients thought they could get acceptable results themselves with their own point and shoot cameras. Why pay me when they could do just as well, and a lot cheaper? That was a blow to my ego and self esteem. All my education and experience nullified by crappy, low quality, P&S technology and rampant ignorance. Well I must be wrong in that perception, because here I am, retired. I get frustrated when I remember how picky art directors and clients would stand over my shoulder in the studio, scrutinizing Polaroid after Polaroid, and today, I see so much absolute crap published by the same folks.

Now, I'm into digital myself, as a hobbyist. I hate post processing though, and all the tricksy things Photoshop will do. I try to shoot digitally as I did professionally with film, to get the image results I want right out of the camera, including crop. I pay attention to technique like I'm shooting transparency film.

Occasionally, I still shoot film and keep a collection of my favorite film cameras. I'm hoping I will continue to be able to purchase the film I find acceptable and be able to process it or have it processed somewhere, before I die. Wet photography is a medium which I hope will undergo a resurgence of popularity as the undeniable allure of digital imaging will hopefully lose some of its novelty, but for now, I don't see that happening.

 

[palec]

Case in point--Julia Margaret Camaron and Imogen Cunningham..

I'm curious, what is the case about? I've seen Cunningam's exhibition, but only few photos of Camaron on web.