Are good images the antidote for GAS?

C

chipgreenberg

Well-known
Local time
7:20 PM
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
448
A few months back I wanted to try shooting with a new “look.” Part of this aesthetic was effectively using out of focus areas in my images. I’ve never been a wide open -bokeh guy. I started doing homework on which lenses produced the best bokeh. Looked at a huge number of examples online. Started scouring the internet for what good examples of these cost used.

This was a fun exercise. Just as I was hip deep in my “homework” I started editing images from recent shoots done in this style. And I had some images I was really happy with. And lo and behold the bokeh from my current gear looked awfully nice. And I became more interested in shooting more with my current gear and seeing what it and I could do than looking for something new.

I like cameras. I’ve had tons of them. Really nice ones. But I like to create images which isn’t always about the camera.
 
I think you're onto something chipgreenberg. I know from my own experience that when I'm making images that I'm really happy with, GAS goes out the window. But when I'm in a slow period, making images that seem pretty blasé, then GAS comes on strong.

A great cinematographer told me something many years ago, "It's easy to buy gear, making beautiful images, on the other hand, is much harder."

Best,
-Tim
 
Where are some lenses which I was interested in, but they have awful bokeh.
I'm taking pictures not for bokeh, but I don't want lenses with awful bokeh (swirl, double images, buzz).

Good image often not directly related to the gear for me. Almost any gear will give good picture. From Holga to M10. It is not gear, but photog.
Willing to work, improve, learn, try. It could be done with same gear.
 
For me it is the printing that currently seems to be keeping the lid on my GAS. I am contact printing some past 8x10 negatives and am deciding that I really need to work harder on my technique, not my gear.

In plain English; A lot of my negatives really suck and are very hard to print.

Since it does not seem to make any difference which lens I was using then the only thing left is the photographer.

Maybe the secret to curing GAS is to realize that you are not as good a photographer as you thought you were.


I think I was getting better negatives when all I was using was my K1000 and my M 50/2.
 
For me, gear isn't about image quality or having the best to boost my ego. It is about comfortable compromises. I want the best camera, for me, that meets my criteria for what I want to personally accomplish. I'm not pro, so I can use anything. I prefer digital. However, my hangups are the body and lenses have to be on the smaller side, the AF has to focus at a sufficient speed in or to bring my camera to my eye quickly without missing the shot, and I prefer classic controls. If I have these things, I tend to make my best photos without having any excuses.
 
"I think I was getting better negatives when all I was using was my K1000 and my M 50/2."

That's because you probably were. Your 35mm lenses were designed for sharpness, while LF lenses generally are about coverage. That LF contact print may have tons of micro detail, but it likely won't pop off the wall like a print from a smaller neg.

You're either a LF shooter, or you're not. I tried it, but quickly gave it up because I preferred the negs from the two 6x6 I would always bring along when taking out the 4x5. I didn't have to lug all that gear either w/ a MF camera, not even a tripod, so the shots could be a lot more spontaneous.
 
I buy gear because I'm curious and fascinated with it. It's been years since I needed any more than I already have. I certainly don't want to just keep acquiring more, however. So my bargain with myself is that before I buy a piece of gear now, I sell something that I already have.

And yes: the more photography I do, the less I have the urge to buy more equipment. What I have is good enough. :D

G
 
Bellows compensation. Are movements involved? A K1000 with a built in meter is certainly easier!

Pioneer said:
For me it is the printing that currently seems to be keeping the lid on my GAS. I am contact printing some past 8x10 negatives and am deciding that I really need to work harder on my technique, not my gear.

In plain English; A lot of my negatives really suck and are very hard to print.

Since it does not seem to make any difference which lens I was using then the only thing left is the photographer.

Maybe the secret to curing GAS is to realize that you are not as good a photographer as you thought you were.


I think I was getting better negatives when all I was using was my K1000 and my M 50/2.
Click to expand...
 
For me GAS is about getting something that will let me do what my current gear won't of course this always bring up the question of how much do I really need/will I use that capability example the high ISO capability of say a M246 or M-10 vrs that of the M9.
 
I'm not sure. When I look back at some of the images I have printed, I wish I had shot them on medium format digital rather than APS-C. Unfortunately, there is no going back.
 
I have tried enough cameras to settle on one that seems to capture most of the pictures that appeal to me. It only makes sense to concentrate my limited photography time using that camera.
GAS lies in the interest in diverse types of cameras, and is a pursuit altogether seperate from photography. I find no shame in having a drawer full of cameras that never hold film.
 
For me, GAS was largely cured by giving into it. Over the last ten to fifteen years, I've tried so many different camera systems -- lots of rangefinders, some medium format, different SLRs, from many manufacturers, some real old pre-war stuff up through the 1970's -- and a fun experience shooting film through all that different stuff, but I found myself always coming back to the same camera system as my fav.

By giving myself the permission to get the stuff, and then actually getting and using, I learned need wasn't there, and then want disappeared. As a postscript, I'll point out it didn't cost very much, because for every item I sold at a loss, there was another I sold at a profit. All used stuff of course.

But everyone's different. This was just my journey.
 
I didn't have GAS because I was hoping to take better photos (though good lenses really help), but because I wanted to see what it was about all the other brands that had folks singing their praises.


I've done okay with most of the stuff I bought, even the ones that were inherently crap. It came down to a matter of how the camera controls worked, and if the lenses were any good. Lots of mixed results later, I did gravitate back to my favorite brand, and found some other favorites along the way.



My biggest thing is I don't get enough practice in to keep improving, and switching cameras constantly became a hindrance to that. I found myself concentrating more on how the camera was doing, then just enjoying taking photos. If I had stuck to one brand, and just built the system out, that would have been the best way to go, and still satisfy the GAS attacks.


PF
 
I think digital GAS has been common while sensors and firmware/software were continually improving off a low base. Now that most digital imaging platforms are "good enough" it's probably getting more like GAS of the film camera days. Some purchases (most?) are emotional and some based on need or curiosity.

A one camera, one lens project is a good respite from GAS, to concentrate on the picture-making. Browsing the RFF Classifieds is counterproductive!

But in answer to your original question: "yes".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom