Sniper or Spray and Pray

Kudos to the Best Western. How was the complimentary breakfast?

I mostly use a film camera. So, I'll generally expose only a couple of frames per subject.

Now with regards to people on the move, my main strategy is to pre-focus, stay in one place and allow the subject to walk into a predetermine spot - which gives me a little control of the background in the photo.
 
Solinar said:
...

Now with regards to people on the move, my main strategy is to pre-focus, stay in one place and allow the subject to walk into a predetermine spot - which gives me a little control of the background in the photo.
Click to expand...

That is a good strategy. In the following I snapped shot of the scene then noticed the bicyclist coming out of the corner of my eye, waited then snapped again (notice that I did not "shoot").


Restaurant Barcelona by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr
 
Greg Maslak said:
You might know this book already but "Garry Winogrand/edited by Leo Rubinfien for SF MOMA" is comprehensive with photos from the contact sheets Winogrand never saw. It demonstrates your insights well. Also, check out Jeff Wall talking about Winogrand. He explores the idea of being in the event or "happening" of the photograph as what Winogrand was doing especially later in his life.

https://davidcampany.com/the-domain-of-occurrence-in-conversation-with-jeff-wall/
Click to expand...

Thank you for the Jeff Wall interview reference. I think some of their discussion may be based on false assumptions regarding Winogrand though. Winogrand didn't "shoot without looking" or "work hard at not composing" as they claim - total misunderstanding of his pictures I think; indeed it would have been very hard to obtain his actually very precise compositions without a well-honed instinct for careful framing. See http://www.photogs.com/bwworld/winogrand.html
I tried shooting without looking through the viewfinder, but when Winogrand saw this, he sternly told me never to shoot without looking. "You'll lose control over your framing," he warned. I couldn't believe he had time to look in his viewfinder, and watched him closely. Indeed, Winogrand always looked in the viewfinder at the moment he shot. It was only for a split second, but I could see him adjust his camera's position slightly and focus before he pressed the shutter release. He was precise, fast, in control.
​
Footage of him that I have seen elsewhere of him at work confirms this. And he is on record as talking about the importance of the edges of the frame, what gets included and what gets left out. This is pretty much the opposite approach to the automatism ascribed to him in the Wall interview.

They refer to Stephen Shore's gift for composition, which I admire. I admire Winogrand (and Frank) in part precisely because to me they were as good as Shore in compositional genius.
 
I'm wondering, especially given the age distribution of the population here, whether having grown up as a film shooter...oh, pardon me...photographer, trained so many posters above to be "snipers?" I started in film with a Yashicamat TLR. That's what I could afford, and I had read a book by Andreas Feininger recommending medium format in order to develop good habits and shot discipline. The Yashica taught me those things but also instilled deep 35mm envy in me when I somehow covered basketball and wrestling with that camera for my high school paper. At any rate, there are a lot of former and present older film photographers around here, and I wonder if their shooting habits were largely formed by film photography?

I have several digital cameras now, but still shoot only slightly more frames when shooting digital. I also try to compose carefully and pass on a shot when I don't like what I can get. But I am almost never shooting action or sports. If I did, I'd probably shoot a lot more and set the camera to "continuous high." As is, in my old age I am back to shooting mostly 6x6 black and white. Full circle.
 
One case for using multiple shooting (Also known as Motordrive) is that the second shot has a better chance of being sharper. Most of us know this. Doesn't apply as well to tripod users I imagine. I don't spray and pray, I'm digital but I just don't seem to have the urge. A 16gb card will last me all week.
 
Well, shoot! Before someone shoots me another dirty look I think I'll shoot on outta here and shoot a few hoops with some of my buds, a bunch of really straight-shooters.

Sorry...just messin' with the speech police.

Seriously...while I never spray and pray, I do oftentimes shoot on continuous with a moving subject or when circumstances that are fluid--just depends. But I seldom make more than 3-4 exposures. With cameras today capable to 6, 8, 12 or more fps, sometimes those turn out to be 7-8 exposures.
 
I guess we’d better contact the mods and have the “Shooting the Shooter” thread title changed to “Making a photograph of another person making a photograph”.

“Shooting the Shooter” does sound quite murderous.

Mike
 
I wondered that too. The guy I was speaking was was my peer, in his early sixties I guess.

I was also wondering how end product matters. My goal is a print on the wall, not sharing on the web, social media or gigs of images to look through. Though scanning film does create gigs.



product
ChipMcD said:
I'm wondering, especially given the age distribution of the population here, whether having grown up as a film shooter...oh, pardon me...photographer, trained so many posters above to be "snipers?" I started in film with a Yashicamat TLR. That's what I could afford, and I had read a book by Andreas Feininger recommending medium format in order to develop good habits and shot discipline. The Yashica taught me those things but also instilled deep 35mm envy in me when I somehow covered basketball and wrestling with that camera for my high school paper. At any rate, there are a lot of former and present older film photographers around here, and I wonder if their shooting habits were largely formed by film photography?

I have several digital cameras now, but still shoot only slightly more frames when shooting digital. I also try to compose carefully and pass on a shot when I don't like what I can get. But I am almost never shooting action or sports. If I did, I'd probably shoot a lot more and set the camera to "continuous high." As is, in my old age I am back to shooting mostly 6x6 black and white. Full circle.
Click to expand...
 
I agree and I was careful not top pass judgment.

that said, I disagree with this guys photo teacher friend. If one in a thousand is a "gem" you never know how you got that gem or how to repeat the process.



Mcary said:
I generally walk around and look at stuff and think to myself either no, yes or maybe; if its no I just move along if it's yes I may 1-2, or 10 frames trying different angles or compositions. If its maybe than I generally snap 1 frame and from that I can usually tell if there's something there or if I should just move on. During a short outing say 1-2 hours I may shoot between 5 and 30 frames while on an all day outing it maybe 5-100 frames it just depends. Generally I feel that I'm very selective during the initial review/edit and usually delete about 50-60% of the images that I shoot. Personally I don't think there's a right or wrong approach instead everyone just needs to find what works for them.
Click to expand...
 
Schnaiper, schprayier...

What still and tripod has to do with amount of pictures taken for something else?

Most of the multiple frames I have to retake is for my gear for sale. Taken with camera on the tripod :).

I never used tripod in the film only era. I took next to none still something photos.
It was just expensive back then on film and not so cheap now to spray.

Sniper is wrong word, IMO. The kiss...
 
One more Winogrand bit, if you will all indulge me. In the interview with Barbaralee Diamonstein he scolds her quite harshly for bring up the "snapshot" aesthetic. He talks about framing and composition while making lots of photos. You can watch it here if you like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wem927v_kpo

Now no one would accuse Cartier-Bresson of "spraying" but in the box set of "Decisive Moment" there is a contact sheet reprint of the frames around the two Red Army officers eyeing the girls at the tram stop. There are at least four rather indecisive versions.

It's pretty hard to just take one and walk. I certainly can't do that.
 
KM-25 said:
I remember covering a Clinton speech in Wichita KS for regional AP. We were setup on the back riser with long glass, secret service all around and this young buck blurts out, "I can't believe I get to shoot the president!". Secret service then motioned for him to come over so they could have a chat.

It's time to lose the term "Shooter", it has never been a good one. I still make photographs for the New York Times by the way...
Click to expand...


Not my favorite term, either. But, Shooter was the title used for David Hume Kennerly's book on working Vietnam, President Ford, etc.
 
wwfloyd said:
Not my favorite term, either. But, Shooter was the title used for David Hume Kennerly's book on working Vietnam, President Ford, etc.
Click to expand...

Didn't DHK marry President Ford's daughter?

Trying to get back on topic. Even when I had all the film I could consume and free processing I didn't take multiple frames of anything but groups and concerts. The vast majority of the shots on film that I thought were great were single frame events.

With my iPhone, I do multiples of close-ups as the focus is off where I want it about 50% of the time in the first shot. I do have to admit there are times when I fire off several frames a couple of times I surprised my self and got a triplet that I happy with.

B2 (;->
 
I'm totally a sprayer for three main reasons:

1. I love the action of taking photographs, and I mentally see photos all the time.
2. I have a powerful drive to document my life and world, almost compulsively.
3. I have a fear of gaps or missing segments in my recollections and knowledge of my history.

The result is terabytes of images, often very repetitive as they involve photos of regularly traveled paths, regularly visited places, and often-seen people. When I go somewhere different, I have an even greater urge to document it.

Some might ask what I'll do with my images later; I take great pleasure in being able to relive times in my life, and knowing exactly where I was and what I was doing at any given time. This has had practical benefits, as I have been able to know who was at particular parties or gatherings, when certain things occurred, and even being able to prove when I arrived at, and left an old workplace when my pay was in dispute.
 
I snapped differently at different times!
When I was pro first doing model portfolios and "headshots" ,
I very quickly learnt to expose way less!
I moved to Medium Format and used 1 roll, 12 exposures..
Before it was 3x36 exposures.
Editing drove me crazy and having to print everything myself was hard labor.
Weddings, well covered were vever more than 10~15 rolls of 24 exp.35mm.
It was c-41 and done by pro-lab.
BW photojournalism if 35mm never ever used motor drive.
I occasionally still use film and 120 film in Rollei.
A roll can last a year!
One roll 36exp (usually 39/40) exp. as load in dark..
I never exceed it in a days walk.
Digital is more but not on almost video setting, seldom duplicate or bracket.
Less is more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom