The Empty Mind -- film vs. digital

kevin m said:
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.
Click to expand...

But from where do you dig out these pathetic conclusions? Kevin, I'm starting to think you only like to stir a debate for the sake of doing so.

The M system is VERY small. Like you say, it's only smaller then SLRs, but please don't forget the SLRs are created to be a small alternative to bigger formats. This is where the M system gained its reputation: its size and build.

Please visit this link and PM me so I can tell you where to send the LARGE sum of money you are talking about.
 
kevin m said:
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.
Click to expand...

I have carried an M everywhere for years. M6 originally, then M7. In briefcase, in belt pouch, or in shoulder bag. Now I carry a Barnack, but because I like the experience, not because I couldn't stand the weight of the M anymore. Collapsible lenses are our friends, in both M and LTM mount

Enough with the sweeping generalisations, eh?

Regards,

Bill
 
This is where the M system gained its reputation: its size and build.
Click to expand...

Ned, you're an exception to the general rule, that's for sure. In fact, I thought of you while I was typing. But the M gained its reputation in 1954, and it ain't 1954 anymore. The M isn't that small, it weighs alot for its size, and it doesn't like water. Which is why we see so many pics shot in "safe" locations, I guess.
 
I have carried an M everywhere for years.
Click to expand...

Really? Everywhere? Are you sure this isn't just a figure of speech?

Out in the rain? In a Kayak? When you're wearing nothing but a pair of cut off shorts and flip flops chasing the kids while they play on the lawn? That kind of "everywhere?" Those are the situations where my M bodies normally got left in the car, in the hotel room, or back in the house.
 
Well, with the digital M8, I think we're going to see a surge. If I was a war photographer, I'd be shooting the M8 instead of any other camera. But then again, with technology being what it is, even Cell Phones can do a good job over Leica, Nikon and Canon.

I think it's only personal... Depends on the photographer. The world is big and we represent a microcosm. Leicas are Tanks and they don't fear water, IMO.

kevin m said:
Ned, you're an exception to the general rule, that's for sure. In fact, I thought of you while I was typing. But the M gained its reputation in 1954, and it ain't 1954 anymore. The M isn't that small, it weighs alot for its size, and it doesn't like water. Which is why we see so many pics shot in "safe" locations, I guess.
Click to expand...
 
kevin m said:
Really? Everywhere? Are you sure this isn't just a figure of speech?

Out in the rain? In a Kayak? When you're wearing nothing but a pair of cut off shorts and flip flops chasing the kids while they play on the lawn? That kind of "everywhere?" Those are the situations where my M bodies normally got left in the car, in the hotel room, or back in the house.
Click to expand...

Yes. Unequivocally. Except the Kayak bit, of course, since I am English and have some modicum of decorum. Once it becomes part of you, it is not a chore. If it is not in my briefcase, belt pouch or shoulder bag it is on the floor, desk, seat, coat pocket, or what-have-you, close at hand. Now, as I have already said, my IID occupies that position, but because I'm having fun with it, not because it's necessarily smaller.

Y'know, it's ok to have a different opinion. There's no need to grind everyone to your point of view.

Regards,

Bill
 
kevin m said:
Ned, you're an exception to the general rule, that's for sure.
Click to expand...
If you really believe that you speak for the general, why not see that that belief is one exception too. Recognize that between millions photo camera users exist very very few photographers who don't see any obstacles. Antic Leica M pieces might look as some bothersome obstacles for most people. It is very natural and at the opposite some find using m system as far liberating. Rules of sport, journalism photography don't apply to art and vice versa.
 
I don't get the "I don't take risks" approach with film.

Film is cheap. Especially B&W film. I buy in bulk, and shoot mindlessly if I want to.

If you need to work faster and like film, then by all means get AF and AE, VR, higher frame per sec, etc. There is great technology for doing so in film cameras. An F5 or an F6 is probably as humanly close as possible as a "no opportunity wasted" camera.

People who really like digital are as enamoured of the process as are people who are in love with film. It's not a trap to like the process: how else can you achieve pixelation than with digital? how else can you achieve grain but with film?

I don't see how shooting digital to prevent you from being "enamoured of the process" is anything good. What, you like film, and should shoot digital, and hate it, in order to make better photographs? Do you think any competent photographer hates their tools?

Yes it's important to see past the warm fuzzy feeling of handling a Leica or a Nikon, but if it wasn't there in the first place you wouldn't be taking pictures. At the same time it's important to get out of your comfort zone, but I really don't see how digital would get you out of your comfort zone. Most people I know who shoot both in fact find the stronger discipline required by film to be an asset for their digital shooting.

If you want to learn to see instead of playing with toys, then don't get new toys. Go read on art history, learn to draw, practice composition, get a portfolio review, engage in heated debates about aesthetics, set up an exhibit and try to convince galleries to show your stuff, but DON'T GO BUYING NEW GEAR!

It's not the gear that will make you learn how to see. It's the people you meet and their art.
 
PhotoMat said:
Is that located on the function dial of my DSLR?
Click to expand...

hehe good one. it might take thousands years for DSLR manufacurers to design zen mode

If you really want use zen mode, you can find one invisible on antic leica m cameras after a long time meditation:angel:
 
I'm usually a little skeptical of abstract phrasing especially when the said phrase sounds rather mysterious and philosophical yet it does not make any sense.

Let’s say ‘empty mind’, for one it is a priori conjecture which predicates an idealized mental state with certain criterion of action and thought etc... But if pondered closely it reveals itself as just another mind-game which tries to achieve the basic and automatic function of human brain and that is the ability of human mind to simply perform an action without actually 'thinking about', like fixing your hair or breathing.

:D
 
Nh3 said:
I'm usually a little skeptical of abstract phrasing especially when the said phrase sounds rather mysterious and philosophical yet it does not make any sense.
Click to expand...

You might be taking the term "Empty Mind" too literally. I think my friend intended in as a suggestion to me to let go of my rules, expectations, beliefs, and such as it related to photography. Just for a little while. And god knows I have a lot of them that have served me well until they got obsessive --- things like the search for the finest grain, perfect developer, best camera, best lens, best subject, best paper. And others even more sinister like no cropping. Or one induced by Fred Picker of always having the view camera at eye level.....*what's that about*.

Anyways, he has suggested I let go. And I have at times and that's usually when I move off the plateau and onto another level. Sometimes up, sometimes down.

Right now the one that stands out best for me as an example of letting go is related to my reactions to the work of the Starn Twins. When I first saw it I rejected it as utterly without worth. Bollocks as some would say. Bad technique, just another example of the terrible art crap bull**** that arrives in public.

And when I was able to let go and view it with the "Empty Mind" I was able to see things that were quite amazing on a lot of levels. Still not the kind of work I would do or be interested in but I was able to abandoned my narrow minded view of things.

And this appears in so many areas, not just photography. What is difficult for me though is letting go of my beliefs in how photography should be. And look at it like a little kid. The world is way more cooler through those eyes. And it doesn't cost a thing or hurt me one bit.

Until I have to go to work..... *grrr* :)

I appreciate your comments and everyone else's. It has kept me thinking all week!
 
My 2 cents: your friend is wrong. It has nothing to do with the camera. Digital has it's own processes also and you could get caught up in those too. The M8 won't solve it either (been down that road myself), the image quality is NOT better than film, I don't care what anyone says. Stick with film if you feel comfortable with the process.

It's your mind that needs to be emptied, not your camera. By asking this question on the forum, it is obvious that your mind has been filled even more with your friend's opinion and now all of ours. You need to forget everyone's opinion (except mine of course). Jjust shoot for pleasure, not to reach a particular goal. Only them will you enjoy what you produce.
Ara
 
Steve Williams said:
You might be taking the term "Empty Mind" too literally. I think my friend intended in as a suggestion to me to let go of my rules, expectations, beliefs, and such as it related to photography. Just for a little while. And god knows I have a lot of them that have served me well until they got obsessive --- things like the search for the finest grain, perfect developer, best camera, best lens, best subject, best paper. And others even more sinister like no cropping. Or one induced by Fred Picker of always having the view camera at eye level.....*what's that about*.

Anyways, he has suggested I let go. And I have at times and that's usually when I move off the plateau and onto another level. Sometimes up, sometimes down.

Right now the one that stands out best for me as an example of letting go is related to my reactions to the work of the Starn Twins. When I first saw it I rejected it as utterly without worth. Bollocks as some would say. Bad technique, just another example of the terrible art crap bull**** that arrives in public.

And when I was able to let go and view it with the "Empty Mind" I was able to see things that were quite amazing on a lot of levels. Still not the kind of work I would do or be interested in but I was able to abandoned my narrow minded view of things.

And this appears in so many areas, not just photography. What is difficult for me though is letting go of my beliefs in how photography should be. And look at it like a little kid. The world is way more cooler through those eyes. And it doesn't cost a thing or hurt me one bit.

Until I have to go to work..... *grrr* :)

I appreciate your comments and everyone else's. It has kept me thinking all week!
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

I actually felt burned-out after an extensive period of constant photography. During this period I was simply shooting clichés and trying to imitate the photographs that I had seen and admired - most of the time unconsciously. My shots were all over the place, basically trying to say everything in catchy one-liners instead of a cohesive paragraph or an essay... My memory was overloaded and I finally burned-out and lost motivation to shoot.

Now, there is nothing wrong in great one-liners, they could be more interesting than a paragraph but to my mind they got tiresome and their finiteness stifled my drive to be creative. So, I stopped shooting, instead I went and studied the great masters... The experience was a total revelation and a humbling experience. I also realized how truly complex serious photography is and how one can easily get lost if not careful. So, that's when actually my mind felt free of all the prepackaged ideas of photography and I did not felt the empty mind but I felt librated. So, I decided that if I'm considering photography as my only means of self-expression then I should make it as cohesive and structured as possible and avoid the one-liners and catch phrases.

Anyway, I want to be prepared and focused and wait for the right subject. So, I guess what you need is to findout the right subject for you and then give it all.


 
Nh3 said:


Anyway, I want to be prepared and focused and wait for the right subject. So, I guess what you need is to findout the right subject for you and then give it all.
Click to expand...

It is not the way an empty mind works. But rather quite contrary. If you like preoccupied mind, that's fine too :)
 
kevin m said:
I used to carry mine "almost" everywhere, too. But then I discovered that I was missing alot of pictures I wanted to take in those "almosts." :)
Click to expand...

maybe you have better chance with plastic dslr ;)
 
maybe you have better chance with plastic dslr
Click to expand...

The fact that I actually used a pair of Leica M's professionally means nothing, does it? All one has to do is simply question the myth of Leica's supremacy as a silent, compact, take-anywhere camera and the darts come flying. This place too often resembles a house of worship more than it does a forum.

My point is that if one's camera is too heavy/bulky, too fragile or too valuable to take EVERYWHERE, then perhaps that particular camera is a limitation on one's photography. If one's CAMERA is more precious than the images it takes, perhaps one has the cart leading the horse, n'est-ce pas?

It ain't 1954 anymore.
 
It's the other way around.

It's not that shooting digital results in "empty mind" photography.

It's that you must have an "empty mind" to shoot digital photography.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom