The Empty Mind -- film vs. digital

myoptic3 said:
Why the arbitrary 2 rolls a week and 3 prints. It IS arbitrary. Just shoot whenever there is a shot worth taking (you would be surprised how few shots you will take) and print only the great shots (not the good or very, very good ones). The empty mind comes from not, not thinking. Not from not thinking. Or, just shoot. However, Buddhist practice is one thing and photography another. You may actually want to think MORE and shoot less.

I am reminded of a commercial stock photographer who shot, according to him, over 2,000 rolls of film a year. Figuring it was just 24 exp per roll, that's , mmm, lets see....that's a LOT of pics! And he got 4 or 5 a year that paid the bills. So I wouldn't be worried about printing. I can sometimes get several printable shots a month, then not get any in a year. Edit, edit, edit.
Click to expand...

I didn't set out shooting the two rolls with any thought or concern about the end products. I did it to assure that I would continue shooting personal work. Photography not connected with my professional life.

For me I know that if I keep shooting something good will happen. It may mean I sell a print, make a new friend, find a new place to eat my lunch, or have a great ride on my Vespa. It has never worked for me to just shoot when I feel like it. The inertia of sitting still is too great. And waiting for motivation and inspiration to touch me too unreliable.

Once I am in motion though I am a different person. So I need the arbitrary two rolls a week. It is obvious though from reading all the responses here that were are all different in what works for us. And what works for me could quite possibly be the worst for someone else. But I keep looking and listening for new ideas and paths.

I do understand your comments about printing and "printable" negatives. I'm printing for different ends though. And like almost all of my prints they are short lived. I show them to a few people and they go into a box and may never be seen again. Still, printing them has value to me. Just not monetary value...
 
For me it works the other way around.
With an M I'm less bothered with the technical side of the process. I can concentrate much more on the image. Only a few controls and I can predict the outcome. Same with my Leicaflex SL2.
With the Canon 20D I'm much more busy with the controls and checking the exposure etc. It keeps me from getting into the flow. I might need more practice with it but I just don't trust the camera to get the result I'm looking for. I use the 20D less and less in favour for film.

Cheers,

Michiel Fokkema
 
Neither is pocketable, but surely you don't believe that the M8 is the same size & weight as the D200 (even assuming each has a comparable prime attached)?
Click to expand...

The Leica is smaller, but not by much. Either camera is too damned big to carry around in a pocket. Unless you consider a Domke 803 your pocket. :D

However, I do agree that a compact digital like the Caplio might be more "mind-emptying" than a D200 & be a lot easier to carry around.
Click to expand...

The notion that a Leica M is small enough to always have on you is largely a myth. It's smaller than an SLR, but still too big. These new small sensor digital cameras like the Ricoh's are truely pocketable and they have very good manual controls. Is their image quality equal to an M8 or even scanned film. No, but so what? There's something to be said for always having a camera on your person, and there's more to be said about a camera so innocuous that no one takes it seriously. I think the images being posted on the GET DPI small sensor forum certainly prove that.

The Ricoh GR-D and GX-100 ARE the Barnack Leicas of our time. Yes, I'm serious. :) Too bad no one at Leica recognizes that.
 
Last edited:
Geez! I carry Leica + 40mm f2 lens in pockets. It even fits in ANY cargo pants pockets.

Kevin, why are you so stubborn?
 
Well, having handled both, I think an M8 is considerably smaller (& lighter) & much easier to carry around. Besides, I don't think the OP mentioned anything about pocketability, just that the D200 was "a pig to carry" compared to an M6; the M8 is just a bit thicker than an M6.

Personally, I think ultra-small cameras (e.g., Olympus XA) can be a pain to use because the controls are too small (same goes w/cellphones). Easy to carry, yes; easy to use, not so much. The typical "Barnack" body is about the smallest form factor I'd be willing to accept for daily use, so the Ricohs do qualify by that measure, I suppose.

kevin m said:
The Leica is smaller, but not by much. Either camera is too damned big to carry around in a pocket. Unless you consider a Domke 803 your pocket. :D



The notion that a Leica M is small enough to always have on you is largely a myth. It's smaller than an SLR, but still too big. These new small sensor digital cameras like the Ricoh's are truely pocketable and they have very good manual controls. Is their image quality equal to an M8 or even scanned film. No, but so what? There's something to be said for always having a camera on your person, and there's more to be said about a camera so innocuous that no one takes it seriously. I think the images being posted on the GET DPI small sensor forum certainly prove that.

The Ricoh GR-D and GX-100 ARE the Barnack Leicas of our time. Yes, I'm serious. :) Too bad no one at Leica recognizes that.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
kevin m said:
The Leica is smaller, but not by much. Either camera is too damned big to carry around in a pocket. Unless you consider a Domke 803 your pocket. :D



The notion that a Leica M is small enough to always have on you is largely a myth.
Click to expand...

Carrying a camera around with you all the time is something that you just decide to do. Even if I have the Domke satchel with me the camera is always around my neck (M6). Traveling light I just have the camera around my neck with an extra roll of film in my pocket.

With the Nikon D200 I carry it with me around my neck. It's bigger and heavier but you get used to it. It becomes invisible unless you feel self conscious. I have had smaller cameras, point and shoots, that fit in my pocket but I use them less. Around the neck works best. Even at work in meetings I arrive with a camera.

I suppose after years of hauling an 8x10 around everything else is tiny...
 
I deliberately don't carry a camera with me all the time so that I enjoy what else life has to offer apart from photography.

My simple philosophy is live to photograph, not photograph to live.
 
I'm willing to wager a rather large sum of money that the majority of people who say they "always" have their M body with them are engaging in a form of deception. Self-deception at the very least. The M is not small; it's only smaller than an SLR. It's not light, either, and it's not water-resistant. Plus, it's a rather valuable item, and there's the understandable tendency to want to keep valuable things out of harms way.

Those factors combined mean that while the M is a very fine tool, it's often not THERE to do the job. And any tool that's not there is a rather useless in its roll as a tool.

Sure, the M is lighter and smaller than a DSLR. But if your real aim is to have a camera on your person at all times, there are some real "no excuses" choices out there nowadays.
 
I always carry my m mount body with me, though theres no way its fitting into my pockets. :) I just wear it bandolero with a neckstrap and pull it up to shoot whenever i see something interesting.
 
I could never get comfortable carrying the camera around my neck. I always ended up bringing the Domke 803 with me. And if I was bringing THAT, then I might as well bring the second body, too....and the 90....and the flash, because you never know.... :D
 
Same here. I've never understood those who insist on going strapless & carrying their camera in their hand(s) all the time. What if they don't have a bag & need to hold a drink or something? :p

jbf said:
I always carry my m mount body with me, though theres no way its fitting into my pockets. :) I just wear it bandolero with a neckstrap and pull it up to shoot whenever i see something interesting.
Click to expand...
 
After have tried Rollei 35, I think that Barnack and M bodies are perfectly balanced for taking shoots. Especially M when it is about take sharper pictures with slower shutter timings. I don't even manage 1/30 on rollei 35 due very sticky shutter and too unstable body.

I had backaches after using d70 with 17-70 zoom kit. It is not definitely light setup. Nikor af 50/1.8 feels quite large when I compare it with summicron:)
 
Nh3 said:
I deliberately don't carry a camera with me all the time so that I enjoy what else life has to offer apart from photography.

My simple philosophy is live to photograph, not photograph to live.
Click to expand...

My God! That's it. Except I am closer to being you're polar opposite. For good or ill I don't pay as close attention when I am not photographing. The camera parallels a hearing aid.

I have gone for long periods not making photos and that's when things get generally messed up for me.

Carrying the camera is not a burden though. And I don't fret anymore about having all the right equipment along just in case.


We are one varied bunch of people...
 
I remember how many times I regret at last few years not having a camera with me when good occasions appeared. Recently I have decided to put rollei or barnack in my pocket when I go to work or outside every time.
 
sonofdanang said:
As we invoke 'empty mind', consider that there are essentially three ego-states: Superior to, inferior to, and equal to.

Consider the 'unique'.

When you hear that 'blah and blah...' in your head, ignore it as you would chatter at a gallery and keep looking at the photograph. There is something else there. You took the picture. Follow the threads. As a famous writer once said, 'Just get the words down. You will always re-write, following alleys previously unrevealed".

Just keep working. The process is just the boat that gets you across the river. Once you're on the other shore, you gonna carry that thing on your head for the rest of the journey?
Click to expand...

it is called zen mode :)
 
tomasis said:
I remember how many times I regret at last few years not having a camera with me when good occasions appeared. Recently I have decided to put rollei or barnack in my pocket when I go to work or outside every time.
Click to expand...

Me too. I think it's been at least 4-5 years since I've started carrying a camera everywhere. When I go out specifically to shoot it can be any number of cameras I have. If I'm in casual dress mode I typically carry my Contax T2 or Rollei 35T in a coat pocket. But even on a day like today where I'm in my business suit the light-weight yet very sharp and capable Olympus XA is in one of the inner suit pockets....
 
Hi Steve,

I can only suggest you the exercise our teacher gave us during the reportage (photo-journalist) course.

Since he saw our way to shoot too "rational" and "far" from the subject, he suggested us to stroll along with our camera, whatever it was, and one or two friends that should have taken us in a secret / unknown place with OUR EYES COVERED, so basing our shooting only on our ears, smell and tact (our feet, mostly, when sensing you're passing through a different terrain / road) and shoot. Blindingly. Well, don't ask me why or how, but it worked. A lot of us (unfortunately me not since I was ill and couldn't do the exercise, and my wife felt ashamed to do such thing (!)) improved significantly and suddenly. Their shots were now more intense and interesting than when shooting only with eyes, and this doesn't mean necessarily they should be "straight" (horizontal). It worked like a removed lock from our minds. Try it and see if your way to shoot is later more pleasant to your eyes. The aim is making your other senses more important in the shooting process, not leaving to eyes the 100% of your shutter tripping decision.

Best wishes for your shooting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom