NickTrop
Veteran
Quick!
Name two famous photographers everyone -- even your granny, knows! The Beatles and The Stones of photography! That would be:
1. Ansel Adams
2. Henri Cartier-Bresson
(Who said Salgado? No, no, no. He's more like Radiohead.)
What's the difference between them? Welp, there are many. But a big one is Adams would laboriously pick his location, then labourously set up his shots, patiently wait for just the right time of day when the lighting was just so, then labourously process the negative, then exhaustively laboriously work that print dodging and burning and timing and scrapping and starting over -- days, weeks, months until his print was PERFECT in his mind.
HBC
Ran around France clicking away trying to capture the "decisive moment". Went through rolls and rolls and rolls of 35mm film every day. Did he laborously work each and every frame he shot like ole Ansel? LOLz. Of course not! What's the matter with you? Are you some kinda bloke? He outsourced those bits, silly. Boring grunt work. No time for that! He had decisive moments to capture!
HBC could not have worked prints like Adams. He couldn't have. Those "infinite monkeys" would complete the works of Shakespeare before HBC would finish making all those prints. Similarly, could Adams have worked like HBC? Well, sure he could have. And you would have never heard of Ansel Adams. AA (not Arn Anderson -- he's a retired pro 'rassler) would have starved to death at a young age trying to sell his crappy prints.
So. What we have today are lots of folks running around snapping away with their digital cameras coming home with 1,000 pictures of their niece's 7th birthday party on a high capacity flash mem card...
Of course, these photos are all shot RAW. Perish the thought of actually using that sophisticated jpeg engine in their camera... What are you, an amateur? (Well, yeah... I guess I am. Though I did make $18.84 on Shutterstock last year...)
... then, once home, going into Lightroom and meticulously working each photo and every RAW file ala "Ansel Adams" inspecting each of those 36 million pixels at 1000% magnification (Look at how sharp those blurred out corners are! That $1000 "Art" lens was worth every stinkin' penny!) until that beautiful "descisive moment" candid you took of Aunt Maisey as she was eating a cream puff during dessert is just perfecto! It took six hours on Sunday sliding sliders back and forth and forth and back in Lightroom agonizing over every precious pixel -- but finally, FINALLY, you NAILED it! You truly captured Aunt Maisey's "essence"! Aunt Maisey will love it when I show it to her next week at poor ole Uncle Zeke's (RIP) post-funeral luncheon! Might help cheer her up, now that she'll be alone.
One photo down! 946 t' go! I'll get back round to doin' the rest of those. (Someday. Sure ya' will...)
And s' here's the problem. You (YES YOU!) are shooting like HBC. But you're processing like AA. Eh? And you can't. You just CAN NOT do it that way! Take it from me! I know! Either shoot HBC style, and process HBC style, which is straight out of the camera jpeg, outsourcing to that jpeg engine in your camera. (Computers. They really are job killers. Aren't they?) Learn to love it.
OR?
Shoot AA style, in RAW, a managable number of "frames" and obsess over every pixel of that RAW "digital negative" (eye roll) in "Lightroom" (ditto) to perfection.
But never the 'twain shall meet. Don't go shooting HBC style and try to process AA style. Please? Promise? And don't go to some beautiful location put your camera on a tripod and everything. And then go and shoot a SOTC jpeg. Okay? There oughtta be a law. Really.
To summarize
So -- for the love of god and country man, shoot HBC-style (SOTC jpeg) of your niece's 7th birthday party, willya? There's a time and a place for obsessing over RAW files. Like you're on holiday where there's a beee-youuu-t'-phil sunset. Or you're in Scotland and there's a lovely old castle (and it's haunted ya know. At least that's what the tour guide said...) that would make for a picturesque picture. (Me, I wouldn't waste time on the haunted castle but would be at the Laphroaig distillery for a tasting -- until they flicked the lights and said Yankee go home...) And that's the occasion for AA RAW style shooting and post processing.
Oh -- one last thing. If you're bothering to shoot and process AA style? Make a nice sized print of it please? Spring for a decent frame? Hang it somewhere in your flat? Okay? Do it for me.
You're welcome.
Name two famous photographers everyone -- even your granny, knows! The Beatles and The Stones of photography! That would be:
1. Ansel Adams
2. Henri Cartier-Bresson
(Who said Salgado? No, no, no. He's more like Radiohead.)
What's the difference between them? Welp, there are many. But a big one is Adams would laboriously pick his location, then labourously set up his shots, patiently wait for just the right time of day when the lighting was just so, then labourously process the negative, then exhaustively laboriously work that print dodging and burning and timing and scrapping and starting over -- days, weeks, months until his print was PERFECT in his mind.
HBC
Ran around France clicking away trying to capture the "decisive moment". Went through rolls and rolls and rolls of 35mm film every day. Did he laborously work each and every frame he shot like ole Ansel? LOLz. Of course not! What's the matter with you? Are you some kinda bloke? He outsourced those bits, silly. Boring grunt work. No time for that! He had decisive moments to capture!
HBC could not have worked prints like Adams. He couldn't have. Those "infinite monkeys" would complete the works of Shakespeare before HBC would finish making all those prints. Similarly, could Adams have worked like HBC? Well, sure he could have. And you would have never heard of Ansel Adams. AA (not Arn Anderson -- he's a retired pro 'rassler) would have starved to death at a young age trying to sell his crappy prints.
So. What we have today are lots of folks running around snapping away with their digital cameras coming home with 1,000 pictures of their niece's 7th birthday party on a high capacity flash mem card...
Of course, these photos are all shot RAW. Perish the thought of actually using that sophisticated jpeg engine in their camera... What are you, an amateur? (Well, yeah... I guess I am. Though I did make $18.84 on Shutterstock last year...)
... then, once home, going into Lightroom and meticulously working each photo and every RAW file ala "Ansel Adams" inspecting each of those 36 million pixels at 1000% magnification (Look at how sharp those blurred out corners are! That $1000 "Art" lens was worth every stinkin' penny!) until that beautiful "descisive moment" candid you took of Aunt Maisey as she was eating a cream puff during dessert is just perfecto! It took six hours on Sunday sliding sliders back and forth and forth and back in Lightroom agonizing over every precious pixel -- but finally, FINALLY, you NAILED it! You truly captured Aunt Maisey's "essence"! Aunt Maisey will love it when I show it to her next week at poor ole Uncle Zeke's (RIP) post-funeral luncheon! Might help cheer her up, now that she'll be alone.
One photo down! 946 t' go! I'll get back round to doin' the rest of those. (Someday. Sure ya' will...)
And s' here's the problem. You (YES YOU!) are shooting like HBC. But you're processing like AA. Eh? And you can't. You just CAN NOT do it that way! Take it from me! I know! Either shoot HBC style, and process HBC style, which is straight out of the camera jpeg, outsourcing to that jpeg engine in your camera. (Computers. They really are job killers. Aren't they?) Learn to love it.
OR?
Shoot AA style, in RAW, a managable number of "frames" and obsess over every pixel of that RAW "digital negative" (eye roll) in "Lightroom" (ditto) to perfection.
But never the 'twain shall meet. Don't go shooting HBC style and try to process AA style. Please? Promise? And don't go to some beautiful location put your camera on a tripod and everything. And then go and shoot a SOTC jpeg. Okay? There oughtta be a law. Really.
To summarize
So -- for the love of god and country man, shoot HBC-style (SOTC jpeg) of your niece's 7th birthday party, willya? There's a time and a place for obsessing over RAW files. Like you're on holiday where there's a beee-youuu-t'-phil sunset. Or you're in Scotland and there's a lovely old castle (and it's haunted ya know. At least that's what the tour guide said...) that would make for a picturesque picture. (Me, I wouldn't waste time on the haunted castle but would be at the Laphroaig distillery for a tasting -- until they flicked the lights and said Yankee go home...) And that's the occasion for AA RAW style shooting and post processing.
Oh -- one last thing. If you're bothering to shoot and process AA style? Make a nice sized print of it please? Spring for a decent frame? Hang it somewhere in your flat? Okay? Do it for me.
You're welcome.
css9450
Veteran
I can't speak for the others but I'm quite sure I do neither.
Bike Tourist
Well-known
Thanks for the entertaining essay, Nick. I'm afraid that, "Ow, ya got me!" I've often described myself as the photojournalist of landscapes. My tripod and monopod have provided the framework for many a spider's web.
As a carryover, I suppose, from my earlier film days I don't shoot a lot of frames, preferring to get the shot right the first time and I never chimp (well, almost never). I have always believed (but can't prove) that the old photographers had to some degree be involved with the process of photography, Adams a lot, HCB minimally. This made them better photographers. Can't prove that, either.
Yeah, most photographers who shoot raw (why do people capitalize?) probably mess up more images than they save. But, if it contributes to their enjoyment that's fine with me. Unlike earlier digital days, jpegs will stand a lot of post processing without doing noticeable damage.
Oh, by the way, Shutterstock, although only a shadow of its former self when it had only a few million images, still compensated me way more than $18.84, enough to keep modestly retired me in Leicas and Nikons.
As a carryover, I suppose, from my earlier film days I don't shoot a lot of frames, preferring to get the shot right the first time and I never chimp (well, almost never). I have always believed (but can't prove) that the old photographers had to some degree be involved with the process of photography, Adams a lot, HCB minimally. This made them better photographers. Can't prove that, either.
Yeah, most photographers who shoot raw (why do people capitalize?) probably mess up more images than they save. But, if it contributes to their enjoyment that's fine with me. Unlike earlier digital days, jpegs will stand a lot of post processing without doing noticeable damage.
Oh, by the way, Shutterstock, although only a shadow of its former self when it had only a few million images, still compensated me way more than $18.84, enough to keep modestly retired me in Leicas and Nikons.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Well I got that backwards. I shoot weddings on 810 and the landscapes with my phone.
Sumarongi
Registered Vaudevillain
I'd love to add some rambling burps, but I have to admit one cannot top NickTrop...
ptpdprinter
Veteran
Life is rarely either/or. There is a middle ground. Make the number of images you want. I suggest fewer rather than more, but that is up to you. Obviously, if you shoot street, you are likely to have more than if you shoot landscape. This is the important part: Edit your images down to a few that are your best and are worthy of printing. In the olden days, we did this with a grease pencil and a contact sheet, just like HCB. Discard the rest. There is no sense cluttering up your hard drive with rejects. If you are using Flickr as your backup, you have room for improvement in this area. Process the selected images until you are happy with them. Some will take longer than others. Print. And remember: you will be judged by your least successful image.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
First of all, OP needs to study Inner Silence and how some of the portraits were taken.
Second, lets just cut this ... about HCB.
2a. He was not printing, because he has best printers working for him. And he knew what and how he wants it to be printed.
2b. HCB was not snapping as OP might assume. HCB was constantly training his senses and vision. He was drawing in sketchbook. And he has education in art (painting, perspective) and was surrealist by his circle and humanist by his views. It means the VISION and SENSE.
2c. It is known what HCB would select the scene and wait for the trigger.
2d. AA is nothing but home cat, comparing to HCB. It is HCB who followed Chinese Red Army for months. At the war. And HCB knew what is war. It is HCB who took Gandhi last picture in one hour before Gandhi was gone. It was AA who was casually traveling in USA. HCB was first photographer to bring real life pictures from countries AA never been.
Sorry, can't stand lack of knowledge.
BTW, HCB went to the AA land and his landscapes of America are way more alive and interesting comparing to AA rocks and trees. IMHO.
Second, lets just cut this ... about HCB.
2a. He was not printing, because he has best printers working for him. And he knew what and how he wants it to be printed.
2b. HCB was not snapping as OP might assume. HCB was constantly training his senses and vision. He was drawing in sketchbook. And he has education in art (painting, perspective) and was surrealist by his circle and humanist by his views. It means the VISION and SENSE.
2c. It is known what HCB would select the scene and wait for the trigger.
2d. AA is nothing but home cat, comparing to HCB. It is HCB who followed Chinese Red Army for months. At the war. And HCB knew what is war. It is HCB who took Gandhi last picture in one hour before Gandhi was gone. It was AA who was casually traveling in USA. HCB was first photographer to bring real life pictures from countries AA never been.
Sorry, can't stand lack of knowledge.
BTW, HCB went to the AA land and his landscapes of America are way more alive and interesting comparing to AA rocks and trees. IMHO.
bmattock
Veteran
Being colorblind means I cannot labor over post process. I typically adjust levels and call it good.
goamules
Well-known
I do both, actually many more styles. I shot Large Format film, but also wetplate collodion. You MUST carefully plan wetplate shots, there are no options to "snapshot" with them. When I want to shoot action, I use an action camera, either digital or film 35mm. When I want to make a beautiful contact print, I shoot 8x10 film.
Dogman
Veteran
cz23
-
Nicely said, Ko.Fe. Couldn't agree more. And with 35mm vs 4x5 and 8x10. It's all about expression.
John
davidnewtonguitars
Family Snaps
I can pretty much get the Sunday lunch group shot in 1 exposure, but to really capture the many moods of the rusty nail in the shadows of the fence post takes half a roll at least.
Gee, isn't photography supposed to be fun?
Gee, isn't photography supposed to be fun?
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
Thanks, Nick.
leicapixie
Well-known
I have read much about both AA and HCB.
Ansel was NOT meticulous, nor laborious!
Once a friend was invited on a shoot, an early shoot.
Off they went at what we now call "terminal velocity", into the hills..
Suddenly they veered into a truck stop, for "the best steak and eggs" !
Read about "Moonrise" done in 2 exposures..
HCB actually was not good at portraying his fellow French citizens...
The book on France simply awful..
He waited patiently for the shot.
Japan trip was only 1.5 rolls a day...
I shoot mainly on "toy" digital cameras these days, JPEG only, some PP.
I love my film cameras and film, shooting very carefully.
My Rollei TLR rolls can last a year..
I love 35mm format, the compactness and rapid usage.
I will though shoot a series if needed!
You cannot repeat TIME and Event.
If careful with exposure, film development, watch your screen on digital,
very little work reqd. Even when i did darkroom, it was simplicity..
Ansel was NOT meticulous, nor laborious!
Once a friend was invited on a shoot, an early shoot.
Off they went at what we now call "terminal velocity", into the hills..
Suddenly they veered into a truck stop, for "the best steak and eggs" !
Read about "Moonrise" done in 2 exposures..
HCB actually was not good at portraying his fellow French citizens...
The book on France simply awful..
He waited patiently for the shot.
Japan trip was only 1.5 rolls a day...
I shoot mainly on "toy" digital cameras these days, JPEG only, some PP.
I love my film cameras and film, shooting very carefully.
My Rollei TLR rolls can last a year..
I love 35mm format, the compactness and rapid usage.
I will though shoot a series if needed!
You cannot repeat TIME and Event.
If careful with exposure, film development, watch your screen on digital,
very little work reqd. Even when i did darkroom, it was simplicity..
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
The only credit I could give AA is unsurpassed quality of prints. And here I understand Nick"s Jumping Over top Tops message. Even if shot is boring, quality of the print is attraction on its own.
About the Moment. Americans have their own nazism moments in history.
AA was assigned to get portraits in the concentration camp and he failed.
It was nothing but giftless snaps. Dorothea Lange did it right.
This is why even American militants get the picture of crime against humanity they were committing.
One of HCB rules was - no short hops on the tops. He has to stay on same location for months. To study it. To feel it. To know it. It is more complicated than drive in and walk and wait for the light in the middle of nowhere.
mich rassena
Well-known
It never occurred to me I couldn't just take and process photos in whatever way I see fit.
NickTrop
Veteran
You too? I laughingly say I'm the only color blind person who's also left-handed,with kids who are third generation full-blooded Italians living in America.
I'm color blind bad. There are those glasses they sell now for CB people like us. Before you buy them you take a color blindness test online on their site to determine the type and severity of your color blindness. I took the test and the result was "Sorry can't help you. Don't buy our glasses." True story.
NickTrop
Veteran
Yay! Someone who's intellectually honest!
NickTrop
Veteran
Not saying you can't. Just suggesting you shouldn't do it in a particular way.
bmattock
Veteran
Interesting, I thought I was color-blind bad, but I apparently passed their test:
MODERATE
DEUTAN
(pronounced “dōō’tăn”)
However, I honestly don't really have any interest in corrective color-vision glasses. I really do not see the value in them; I see colors just fine; I just don't know what they are called.
If your defects are anything like mine, you also have some benefits - better night vision, you rely on texture and movement and light and shadow more than color to identify things. This can be useful in both my previous careers in military and in law enforcement. We all see in B&W at night when light levels are too low to 'see' color. Some of us are more comfortable in that world.
There are limits to my capabilities as a photographer due to the color-vision thing and I accept that. I tend to use my digital cameras for color and depend on them to be accurate - adjusting levels, perhaps some horizon adjustment or cropping as needed. That's about it. Sometimes I even do levels in a batch job if I have been out machine-gunning at a parade or something.
For film, I stick with B&W and there I am much more at home, and since it's film, I take my time and compose each shot carefully. Much less likely to spray and pray.
But I am no AA or HCB. If I wanted to be anything, it would be one of the Czech photographers like Saudek or Sudek or the American photographer Meatyard.