mark-b
Well-known
let's hear it for the dslr...yeah i can hear it, the subject can hear it, and they're huge, so everyone can see it a mile away! if i need to be inconspicuous, that is not the way to go, though.
let's hear it for the dslr...yeah i can hear it, the subject can hear it, and they're huge, so everyone can see it a mile away! if i need to be inconspicuous, that is not the way to go, though.
it is often tossed about like a badge of merit and frankly i don't really understand it. i have learnt, from some of the greats, that the magic combo is shoot a lot and be ruthless with your editing.
My prefered method of shooting is best. Pity those who disagree.
a lot of those dlsr are quite compact and quiet. the e420, canon rebels, d40/d5000 etc. with a prime and a wrist strap they are pretty darn "stealthy" if that's your thing.
i adore rf's for certain attribute. viewfinders and wides being two particular strengths. i also adore the the continuous focus/servo modes in pro dlsr bodies. horses for courses i suppose.
Even so, it's quite easy to overshoot, even with film. Editing (say) 10 rolls is one thing. Editing 100 is quite another. After a while, I get 'pictured out' and can't edit any more, and I know I'm not alone in this.
Cheers,
R.
AMEN!!!
There was once a saying among news photographers: film is cheap! Missing the moment out of some misdirected sense of frugality is a certain method to ensure a short career.
Much has changed with the move to digital, particularly at major events where many now use wireless transmission from the camera to an editor's computer and the images are moved (filed to the wire service or news desk at the publication for posting to the internet) in a matter of moments.
The "net" is part of this fundamental change.
Where photogs were once responsible for a page one shot and a couple of images for the jump page or perhaps several for a photo page, now publications insist on photo galleries with dozens of images, each representing a page view from which revenue is generated. It takes a great many more images from which to edit a few dozen for a web gallery than only a few for the print publication.
My prefered method of shooting is best. Pity those who disagree.
Mine too! 😀
Love this 'discussion.' Carry on! :bang:
I agree that shooting many pictures and make a tough edit is one of the key for the success. But IMHO it depends also on occasion. Of course for a sport photographer, or anyway an action photographer it is an advantage the possibility to work like this. Nothing against it. My question (which is not complaining or refusing this way to work) is that I'm told DSLR with their automatism (autofocus, exposure etc) leave the photographer the possibility to concentrate more on the subject and the composition. Now if it is so (and the tecnical aspect are ok because of automatism) they would need less picture to get the right one compared to the people that have to concentrate also on technical aspects to be set manually. Of course just my opinion,regards
robert
For work, I need a DSLR along with me on just about every assignment. Also, I overshoot on every assignment, and why the heck not? If I'm lugging my RF/DSLR gear to a shoot you better believe I'm going to get as many photographs as I can with it. Why else did I buy it?
I agree to a point but this 'evolutionary dead end' has dominated photography for near on fifty years now ... and sure it's run will come to an end when someone comes up with a system that works better than the mirror and prism! In the meantime we have cameras that are at the pinacle of their evolutionary journey and we'll probably miss them when they're gone. 😛
let's hear it for the dslr...yeah i can hear it, the subject can hear it, and they're huge, so everyone can see it a mile away! if i need to be inconspicuous, that is not the way to go, though.