Digital, the future, and the delete button.

jfretless said:
All,
I'm currently watching the BBC series, "The Genius of Photography."

Something struck me as I watched it last night. A lot of the great images shown in the series show blurred hands, slight OOF, etc...

In the digital age, it's apparent to me that the general populous is after the sharpest, clearest images. I would bet that a lot of these "photographers" are quick to hit the delete button if the image on the LCD is anything less than "perfect."

With film negatives, you pretty much keep all the exposures... be it because of the way we store the negatives in strips of four or five, or any other reason.

So, do you think that today's "photographers" are doing themselves a disservice by deleting any images that doesn't meet their requirements at the moment?

We all know as time goes on we look at the images we've taken in the past with a different eye.

In my case, being a "pack rat" and a tech geek, it's easy for me to keep "every" exposure I have taken with film and digital. Disk space is cheap and why delete something forever when it doesn't cost you anything to keep it.

Thoughts?

Thanks.
John
Click to expand...

I never delete in camera unless it's a shot of my feet or something. You really need to look at pictures on a larger screen than on the camera to tell whether it can be salvaged or not.
 
funkaoshi said:
I don't think my children will ever experience the same sort of joy I get from stumbling on an envelope with old photographs. Oh look, Dad's old hard drive. Here are 1800 photographs Spring 2008. If you don't want to look at your sea of photographs, who will?
Click to expand...

I don't think that is necessarily true.

Regardless of the subject, nothing now is never as good as "you" remember it.

...remember soda in glass bottles. ... the sound of vinyl records. ...high performance cars of the 60's. mechanical camera... who needs batteries.

Right? regardless of the subject, it will never be like is was.

Let your kids be the judges... I have a feeling that they will put a lot of value in to the pictures you have taken of them. ...better yet, I bet their kids, your grandkids, will cherish the images even more.

John
 
I have to admit that sometimes I don´t control myself and just hit delete in frustration because just missed the decisive moment. And regret it, because the shot was sometimes still worth it :bang: Hopefully it is not that easy to delete on the RD1, so I cool down just on time most of the times.

Otherwise, can´t see sh.. :cool: on the small RD1 screen, so I just wait to get home to delete.
 
bmattock said:
Yes, I suppose if I have one of my thumbs removed, I'll treasure the one that remains. But really, I'd sooner keep them both. I likewise have no interest in deleting photos to make the ones that remain seem more interesting to someone else.
Click to expand...

There was a flirtation with this kind of manipulation in poetry. There were modernists who purposely wrote as if a piece was a fragment of a larger lost work. I think it works for effect to a point, but purposely thinning how many exposures you took is beyond that to me.

Like or not, photography is now democratized and the world is awash with quick & handy images, which to me means that not only is deleting some of them is not only okay, but vital. I generally don't delete a lot in-camera, preferring to see things on my computer first, but keeping every casual shot is something I've given up. Some "failures" are instructional and interesting, true, but some are just plain garbage. No matter how big hard drives grow, I still don't want data that I have no intention of ever revisiting. Each of us sets our own criteria for what should get canned.
 
bmattock said:
I

The next generation has zero interest in our photos or our cameras. They'll be on eBay or the local dump before our bodies are even cold.

But I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

That would suck. First I would roll over in my grave, then come back and haunt their camera equipment.... You know, make them think the have front/back focus issues and excess dust on their sensors. ...making them go crazy trying to setup and perform focus tests with rulers.

...could you imagine? :angel:

John
 
You can certainly shoot all manner of blurry, out of focus images w/ a digital camera if it is manual focus, or even if it is AF. I think that this is two different ways of shooting. W/o a playback screen, a film photographer is going to take less shots, but probably take more time on each one, if possible. I am dubious of what you can tell on a small LCD screen anyway, especially outdoors.

I doubt that there is any real difference between deleting it on the camera, on the computer, or deciding not to scan or print the neg.

I suspect that the reason a lot of the great shots you saw on the telly were, no surprise here, taken by great photographers. They realized that there is a lot more to a good shot besides sharpness. Mood, viewing angle, the decisive moment, right film for a given subject, lighting, etc. Your subject matter is the most important thing. Even a poorly taken shot of Sophia Loren is going to look fine. A tack sharp shot of, for instance, Dick Cheney is going to look really bad.

Probably getting great shots cannot be taught. You can learn technique and master your equipment, but you either got it or you don't got it
 
Now you say it doesn't actually cost you any time. Which is it?

Looking through hundreds of photos is still a pain in the ass, even if all of those photos are of the same thing. And as I said before, a sea of photos you don't want to look at really has no value.
 
bmattock said:
I don't delete anything.

@pachuco - "...although I get tack sharp images I always feel they are a bit clinical..." Try using old manual focus lenses, you can have your cake and eat it too in that sense.
Click to expand...

I will try that! I have some great Canon FD glass and I can get an EOS converter I think.

It can't get me any more strange looks than when I bust out my M3 in the press box! You know the jokes...."is that your Grandfathers camera?" :p
 
pachuco said:
I will try that! I have some great Canon FD glass and I can get an EOS converter I think.

It can't get me any more strange looks than when I bust out my M3 in the press box! You know the jokes...."is that your Grandfathers camera?" :p
Click to expand...

FD glass just screams out for an A-1 or F-1 to use with them. They are cheap enough on the used market.
 
Al Patterson said:
FD glass just screams out for an A-1 or F-1 to use with them. They are cheap enough on the used market.
Click to expand...

I have an F-1N that I love but when I have to send images quickly I am stuck with my EOS DSLR's. Oh well!

Bill - Are those EOS converters not good? I have not used them but I think it would be cool to use the FD glass with my 30D.
 
bmattock said:
Don't hate me - I prefer the cheap, non-Canon-made, Cosina-made-instead T60 for my FD glass. For my FL glass, the lovely FX of my childhood, which I paid way too much to have completely restored. However, I do have a nice black FTb which I am quite fond of, a silver FT, and a Bell&Howell-labeled FD35.
Click to expand...

No problems from me Bill. I always wanted an A-1 back in the day, but bought an AE-1 instead. (No cash). So, now that A-1's are really cheap, I have two of them. I know a guy whose daughter uses his old TLb for her school photography class.
 
pachuco said:
I have an F-1N that I love but when I have to send images quickly I am stuck with my EOS DSLR's. Oh well!

Bill - Are those EOS converters not good? I have not used them but I think it would be cool to use the FD glass with my 30D.
Click to expand...


From what I've seen one can pick up a used FD class body for much less than the cost of an adapter. That being the case, why pay extra money for the adapter? (I'm talking about the Canon adapter, not the third party ones).
 
Pitxu said:
Or what should get shot.

Really, maybe more "editing" should be done before pressing the button.
This was discussed in another thread, do we shoot more on digital just because it's cheap?
Click to expand...

Yes, but does it matter? When I had access to a free darkroom, I bracketed a heck of a lot more than I do when I shoot film now.

On a lot of levels, it can be quite beneficial. Digital has done a tremendous amount for my photography, as it let me screw around and be far more experimental than I could have afforded to have been with film. I'm now a lot better of a photographer when I pick up a film camera.
 
Pitxu said:
For an experienced photographer it's a matter of quality over quantity.
Having said that, I think that that any tool or process which helps learning has got to be a good thing.
Click to expand...

Exactly. One has to become an experienced photographer somehow, and quantity can lead to quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom