Tag Archives: photographer

Thinking about, Just what is a Great Lens for Portraiture

Posted by enmanscamera on

Model 1,   Danielle, 24-120lens at 105mm  Ms. Perault

This past week a friend of mine dropped off his lens for me to try. After talking about the lens’ quality, he added that it was a great lens for portraiture. Now there is a lingering question, “What is a great lens for portraiture?”

Although I hadn’t given his Tokina 50 -135mm a run through yet, I expected he was right regarding it being a good portrait lens.  On my cropped sensor camera the lens would have an effective focal length of approximately 75-202mm.

I mentioned this to another photographer, and he paused for a moment, and then said, “Oh, it acts like a 75-202”. I realized he had no idea what “focal length” meant and although I didn’t go into it at that moment, I’ll mention for those few readers that aren’t familiar with the long used photographic term. A lens’ focal length refers to the distance between the imaging plane, or the sensor, and the point where all light rays intersect inside the lens. A longer focal length leads to higher magnification (telephoto) with a narrower angle of view. A shorter focal length lens has less magnification and a wider angle of view.

The longer focal length, as in my friend’s 50 -135mm will have a pleasing effect on a subject because the minimally curved surface of the lens flattens the perspective between the eyes and ears. The wider the focal length is the more the front element (lens glass) is curved making the distance or perspective between the eyes and ears more visible.  A wide angle enlarges the nose and reduces the size of the ears.

Personally, I want as much focal length as I can get. The longer a lens is the better, and my choice then depends the ratio of length to weight, as in my big 70-200mm would be a perfect lens in the studio, but it’s weight becomes a liability when following a couple around at their wedding.

I have heard photographers say that the 50mm lens is a good portrait lens. Well, that’s 70mm on my cropped sensor camera, but still has too much curve in the front element for my comfort. An actual 70mm lens acts like a 105mm on my camera and that’s much nicer.

I can remember going to a Dean Collins’ workshop. I had worked hard to get an invite to one of his limited participant sessions. Collins demonstrated his shooting techniques on both a medium format (2 ¼ in film) and 35mm cameras. He used a 350mm on the medium format, and 300mm on the 35mm, and with the addition of a slide presentation he discussed how the longer lenses flattered the features of those he made portraits.

Information on Dean Collins can be found at: http://strobist.blogspot.ca/2006/08/review-best-of-dean-collins-on.html

A three hundred millimeter lens is spectacular to use for portraits and I think there are lots of fashion photographers that might be using 300mm and longer lenses, but I have to use a tripod or at least a monopod when using longer than 200mm or I have camera shake, so I defer to a lens that is much easier with which to move around. I have used that 50-135mm for some staff portraits I made for a local business and I must say it was fun to use; most of my shots were at 105mm and longer.

I recently read a post by a photographer who stated that only lenses with an aperture of f2.8 or wider were good for portraits, and his reasoning is because the background should always be out of focus.  I don’t really agree with that. A wide aperture just means one can reduce the depth of field. To me it depends on how far away, or how busy the background is, and I know how to control depth of field when required. The length of the lens, and how it affects my subject, is much more important.

A longer focal length, or telephoto lens reduces the effect of lens distortion and helps keep facial features in proportion. The longer lens also creates a more shallow depth of field that helps one’s subject to stand out from the background. I think those photographers that regularly do portraiture all have their preferred lenses that they are comfortable using. Photography is a creative medium and the final answer as to what is the best is up to the photographer and, of course, whether or not the subject is happy with the result.

I always appreciate your comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

What is Bokeh?

Posted by enmanscamera on

Window Pane bokeh Sedum bokeh Wooden wheel bokeh

Wikipedia defines bokeh as “the way the lens renders out-of-focus points of light”. And my dictionary states; “bokeh, bōˈkā. “The visual quality of the out-of-focus areas of a photographic image, especially as rendered by a particular lens.”

Bokeh has become another one of those not-so-well-understood terms that has become over used, and in many cases misused, by photographers since recent technological advances in cameras have made the medium of photography so accessible and popular.

A young photographer walked into my shop last week and asked the question, “Do you have one of those depth of field lenses?” I knew what the answer was because that was not the first time I have been asked the same question.

The first time I was asked I thought there might be some new piece of equipment on the market and inquired if that meant a wide aperture that controls depth of field. That’s where the word bokeh came up. The response was, “Ya, depth of field, bokeh.”

In my classes I include a tutorial on depth of field and more than once participants have interrupted me saying, “Oh, so that’s what bokeh is.”

Actually, the word bokeh comes from the Japanese word boke, which means “blur” or “haze”, or boke-aji, the “blur quality”.  That’s right, not blur, but blur quality.

Wikipedia carries on stating, “However, differences inlens aberrations and aperture shape cause some lens designs to blur the image in a way that is pleasing to the eye, while others produce blurring that is unpleasant or distracting—”good” and “bad” bokeh, respectively. Bokeh occurs for parts of the scene that lie outside the depth of field”.

One of the problems with that word might be that photographers are applying it when trying to describe not only control over depth of field, but selective soft focus. Those new to these effects are searching for a quick term to define effects that they don’t understand.

The authors of www.picturecorrect.com write that there are, “fundamental differences between soft focus and bokeh. In soft focus photography there is an intentional blurriness added to the subject while the actual edges are retained in sharp focus, but in bokeh it is only an element of the image that is intentionally blurred. Additionally, bokeh tends to emphasize certain points of light in the image as well.”

Bokeh appears in the areas of an image that remains outside the focal region. Because of this the most common technique used to add it is a shallow depth of field created through a wide open aperture”.

Depth of field is, “That area, in front of, and, behind the subject, that is in acceptable sharpness.” In my experience depth of field is one concept that eludes many photographers.

I suggest photographers think of it as selective focus. Thinking that way will help one make decisions about how much should be in focus around the subject, and, of course, allowing bokeh to appear.

In my opinion, one need not be surprised or critical when someone says they want a “depth of field lens…ya know, a Bokeh lens”. Every medium has its slang or jargon, and. unless one has enough interest and energy to study a fast changing technologically like photography, I can understand the confusion using many of the new words.

As always, I do appreciate your comments. Thanks, John

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

Photographers and Christmas Pictures

Posted by enmanscamera on

tree 2  presents Xmas Cat

Christmas is only a couple days away. Gosh, that was fast! Oh well, I like Christmas with all its trappings. I’ve been listening to Xmas music, watching plenty of not-so-great Xmas TV shows, attending both my granddaughters’ Christmas concerts, decorated our tree and most of our house and I have already been eating candy and lots of holiday snacks.  It’s Christmas.

This time of year is filled with photo opportunities. Yes, pictures of our home and the landscape covered in snow are great, and I have been having a great time wandering around in the fresh snow, but the unique opportunity I am writing about is the pictorial story of everything that happens around us during this holiday season. I have years of film slideshows and digital CDs of my Christmas’ and plan on continuing for many years to come.

Photographers might try to tell a story and take pictures of everything.  For example, the decorated Xmas tree and house, even that Christmas Eve dinner table, and maybe the morning breakfast with the family on Christmas. Then get the camera ready for the gift opening. Yep, photograph it all and approach every photograph as if it’s the most important you’ll make. It doesn’t matter whether it’s for a client or for family archives, all pictures should be printable and viewable. I prefer a DSLR camera and every image gets post-post processed before anyone sees it.

Not one for the point and shoot style, I usually think a bit about how I want to make each picture and I take lots of pictures while things like opening presents are happening. I always use a flash and shoot wide with the intention of cropping for the most dramatic effect later. I sometimes think setting up a couple lights on stands would be great, but my family will only put up with so much, and anyway a stand might get knocked over in all the excitement.

Always use a flash for family stuff and go for as much depth of field as possible. My lens of choice for the past few years has been either my 18-200mm or 18-70mm, either one works fine in the confines of my house. They both focus fast and close and that’s all I need.

My family is used to my photographic demands as I expect most photographer’s families are. When we are at the table there isn’t a bit of hesitation when I get up and move in with my camera, everyone knows what to do. Even my son’s young daughters pose. Please don’t embarrass people with pictures. Good photographers shouldn’t be the kind of picture taker that crouches down in everyone’s face as they eat.

My family and friends know that I’ll delete those that don’t live up to my personal expectations. Well, I think they know. Maybe my family and friends think I only take good pictures. Yes, lets go with that. They don’t need to know how long I spend editing in post-production.

As I began, Christmas is only a couple days away. Give that camera’s sensor and lenses another cleaning and make sure flash and camera batteries are charged up.  Yes, I am already having a good Christmas and that’s going to continue with lots of holiday picture taking that I’ll extend into the New Year.

From my wife, Linda and me, have a great Christmas and take lots of pictures.

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

A photographer’s musing on Black and White photographs

Posted by enmanscamera on

beach fog Chase Falls Coast silhouette

This week there were two things that made me start thinking about black and white photographs. The first was a discussion with a fellow that stopped by my shop, a film shooter, who announced that, in his opinion, the only way to get high quality photographs was to use black and white film and to make prints with chemically processed, black and white photographic paper.  The second was a notation in facebook advertising an exhibition that for some reason selected out black and white photographs as their own medium separate from photography, i.e., two exhibitions – a black and white exhibition and the other was photography.

I don’t agree with those long time photographers’ that belief that only film produces high quality images. That is now a discussion long past its time, the technology has changed, and in my opinion, for the better with improvements in camera sensors and programs like PhotoShop.

When I used to spend hours in my black and white printing lab I had the best enlargers and enlarging lenses that I could afford, and searched and researched the different manufacturers’ chemicals to obtain the most control I could get over contrast and density of my negatives (film) and printmaking paper.

I would work for hours in a darkened room to make the final images more than they would be if I just printed the straight negatives, as they were when they directly came out of the camera. These days I search out computer programs that give me the most control over my digital files and instead of expensive enlargers and lenses, I have a computer and 30 inch monitor. And I still work, although no longer in a darkened room, to make my final images more than they are directly out of the camera.

I know most modern photographers like to talk about cameras, lenses, and of course sensor megapixels. Not much has changed. It seems like only a few short years ago that photographers were talking about cameras, lenses, and film. And many of those that I spent my time with were discussing how to get the best image out of a black and white roll or sheet of film.

A few short years ago I thought all this had been lost.  Digital technology arrived and with it a new and exciting way to produce my personal photography, but I was disappointed with the quality of printmaking, especially black and white.  I believed that manufacturers were only interested in selling mega pixels and cheap inkjet printers.

Colour photography was getting better and better, but not so with black and white. I was disappointed with the in-camera presets for B&W images.

Many photographers, and I include myself in that group, wanted to produce black and white photographs that matched those we used to print in our chemical based darkrooms. That took a bit of time for software makers to catch up, but these days I am seeing lots of excellent black and white photographs.

An understanding of PhotoShop is important, and with program’s like NIKsoftware’s Silver Efex, producing those film-like black and white images of time past is relatively easy and if one has a pigment ink printer, making a high quality B&W print, once only available in a chemical lab, is now absolutely possible.

I like black and white photographs and to me there are some pictures that just look better that way. When asked, I’ll say something like, I like the mood created by processing this image as B&W.  Now we can look at different versions of any picture and choose the one we think says the most about our personal vision and has the best impact on viewers.  I think a photograph is a photograph and don’t agree with those trying to describe B&W as a different medium than colour. I suspect those may be the same people that like to say any image that has postproduction work is not a “real” photograph.

Some pictures look better as B&W and some look better as colour. It depends on what the photographer is trying to say about the subject. As for B&W, I admit that lots of my images end up as B&W.  I’ll finish with a quote by famous Canadian photojournalist, Ted Grant.

“When you photograph people in color, you photograph their clothes. But when you photograph people in black and white, you photograph their souls!”

I always appreciate your coments.

my website is at www.enmanscamera.com

Meeting Photographers and Photographing Bighorn Sheep.

Posted by enmanscamera on

   

Last week I wrote that I had a great time doing photography as I toured Victoria’s waterfront, and said that along with photographing a different environment I met interesting people, and even spent time with other photographers.

One of my goals for that Victoria excursion was to meet and spend time with the well-known painter, photographer, and documentary filmmaker, Karl Spreitz. His interesting career included working as a news photographer in Prince George, BC, for CTV television, for the BC Department of Travel and Industry, and as staff photographer/editor for Beautiful BC magazine.

Spreitz, now in his eighties, is a fountain of knowledge about film and photography and has been acquainted with most of the important west coast Canadian and American photographers for the past 50 years, and I was delighted to be able to spend the afternoon talking to him about photography and listening to his stories.

I like being a photographer. I also enjoy socializing with other photographers and spending time with a long time photographer like Spreitz is a rare opportunity I will always take if given the chance.

After I returned home from Victoria I was provided the opportunity to go out with my friend Walter to photograph bighorn sheep. We sat on a windy, sagebrush-covered hill overlooking Kamloops Lake. They should have been in rut at this time of year and we hoped to get shots of their violent head butting, but as it was most were bedded down or lazily wandering through the sagebrush.

As I sat I thought about Spreitz making fun of us that live in the BC interior. He said when the magazine needed pictures from the region I live in they would just look for any old picture of sagebrush and bighorn sheep and run with that. At the time I knew he was teasing me, I laughed then and again to myself on that windy hilltop, thinking that was exactly what I was viewing.

Our strategy was to let the sheep get used to us. We sat and waited for something to happen. Once the sheep got comfortable with our presence, we slowly moved in for closer and better pictures.

Both Walter and I had our long telephoto Sigma lenses. Walter’s is a 120-400mm and mine a 150-500mm. For this type of photography we preferred multi-focal (zoom) lenses. The sheep sometimes got pretty close and a fixed focal length lens would have been limiting.

I know I am always recommending tripods, but on that occasion with all the steep climbing and odd angles, tripods made photography awkward, so we had to hand hold those big lenses. The acceptable technique is to follow the old photographer’s rule; “Always use a shutter speed equal to or more than the focal length of the lens.”   I make multiple exposures, expect a few soft images and hope for the best.  However, on that occasion there wasn’t any real action from those lazy bighorn sheep and it was easy to get usable, shake-free exposures. I suppose the challenge was to get images that were interesting.  I don’t know about Walter, but for me that meant climbing around to get lots of different angles, and for that occasion I even ended up taking several pictures of an oncoming train in the colourful Kamloops fall landscape.

Finally, we were overcome when the wind became so strong that it became hard to stand (or sit for that matter) without moving, so we headed home. We had been in the hills most of the day and even though our memory cards weren’t loaded with exciting pictures we agreed that the day had been fun anyway.

How much better can it get? Two consecutive weekends filled with fun photography in very different places, and, in my opinion, both spent with, interesting photographer companions.

I appreciate your comments.

My website is at at www.enmanscamera.com

Photographing Victoria’s Harbour

Posted by enmanscamera on

        

We had decided to escape for a few days to Victoria, British Columbia, over the Thanksgiving weekend. The ferry docked at Schwartz bay, we disembarked, and made the scenic drive into Victoria. This is a bustling, picturesque city surrounded by water that is, in this photographer’s opinion, a perfect place for a photographer to wander around looking for photographic opportunities.

We were lucky in that our hotel room was on the ninth floor with a beautiful view overlooking a panoramic harbour only a block away. It was perfect setting for a photographer. Upon reaching our room, the first thing I did was set up my tripod on the balcony, attach the camera, and start taking pictures of the view. I wanted photos that showed the warm afternoon light, and later on more photos displaying the early evening sky as the city lights began turning on, and finally as the sun vanished, I made lots of long exposures with the only illumination coming from the harbor and the city.

Our first morning had a beautiful blue sky with only a slight breeze and as my wife got together with her long time friend and left for a day of site-seeing and some shopping, I got out my camera and made my way to down to the water front on foot.

My wife and I live in the very dry interior of the Province with rolling hills, lots of lakes, and a large river, however the ocean and everything connected to that environment there is unfamiliar and exciting and I couldn’t wait to start taking pictures.

I chose to bring my 18-200mm lens. The 18-200mm is a lightweight, multifocal length lens with an aperture range of f/3.5 – f/5.6. I know that many photographers these days are favoring wider apertures like f/2.8, but I would be using smaller apertures because I wanted scenics with a sharp focus from foreground to background. Using a wide aperture would reduce that depth of field. And for those readers that would say, “what about those lowlight evening images from the balcony?” My answer is that those were the images that especially needed all the depth of field I could get and most were f/8 or more.  Besides I was using a tripod and a cable release. Anyway, there wasn’t anything in my pictures of that lowlight cityscape that would be moving and I could use as slow a shutter speed as was necessary to get an exposure that worked.

I call lenses like that 18-200mm “vacation” lenses because they are so versatile. I have never been one for carrying lots of equipment and a lens that gives me both wide and telephoto capabilities saving me from carrying a bag full of lenses. My plan was to spend as much time as possible walking along the waterfront. I meandered back and forth thinking nothing of retracing my path when there might be another subject angle I wanted to consider, and the added weight of a heavy wide aperture lens, or additional lenses, would have slowed me down. Exposures change with how the sun reflects off a subject and returning to a place previously photographed several blocks away seemed worth the effort.

I had to get used to how the reflection off the water tricked my camera’s light meter. I don’t know if all cameras are the same, but in my experience relying on the camera’s meter in many cases will result in an over exposure. So I always underexpose around large bodies of water. That’s easy. I just make a few exposures and check my histogram until I am satisfied.

I had a great time photographing boats, planes, birds, and pretty much anything else on, off, and around the water that caught my eye as I roamed Victoria’s waterfront. I found new subjects, met interesting people, and even spent time with other photographers. I really enjoyed the change of photographic scenery and highly recommend any photographer to change things up to refresh their perspective.

I appreciate your comments.

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

Metering to Achieve the Right Exposure

Posted by enmanscamera on

I was leading a workshop about off-camera flash and had been discussing lighting. I paused and to make sure everyone was following and asked if there were any questions. One participant responded, “I don’t know what you mean by metering each light differently?  What is a meter?”

Caught off guard, I replied, “It’s how you get a proper exposure”.  He blankly looked at me, but fortunately, before I confused him more, another in the class said, “no, he means in his camera”.   I realized he had just asked a question (maybe one of the most important of the day) I should have anticipated early in my lecture.

Today’s high tech cameras are wonders at balancing all the light in a scene and many photographers unfortunately choose one of the programmed modes, point their cameras, release the shutter, and never look at anything on the camera but the LCD again.  Even using a flash, just the right amount of light almost always seems to be perfect. However, if we want to control and master light, whether it’s the sun, a reflector, a camera mounted flash, or off camera lights, we need to understand how that light is bouncing off the subjects we are about photograph.  Why would we bother when these newfangled cameras are marvelous?

That photographer in my lighting workshop had never used his camera on anything but the Aperture priority mode. That means he selected the aperture and the camera’s computer selected the shutterspeed.

In this workshop we were directing one flash to brighten the background, one to create a highlight on the subject’s cheek, and another high to the front as main illumination. Each of those lights had different intensity, and it’s the meter (consider it a tool) in the camera that we use to easily tell us what each individual exposure is so we can control the image.

Here is an example of critical metering I wrote about on 6 September; “The guest had a perfectly good camera, but criticized it, and said he wished he had a better one because the backlighted couple we were photographing were being recorded as silhouettes.”  That photographer had his camera set on a program mode and was of the belief the camera was capable of solving the high contrast lighting.

The camera’s computer couldn’t determine correct exposure with a strong changing backlight, and since he didn’t know how to use the camera’s meter all he could do was claim it was the camera’s fault.

On that day I began by metering to determining the overall exposure. I started with an ambient exposure, and by reading my camera’s meter, I decided to stop down enough to make the ambient backlight an underexposure, then added a flash slightly off camera which brought up the luminance of my subject so that, unlike that confused photographer that didn’t use or pay attention to his meter, I ended with a very usable photograph that didn’t need to be saved in postproduction.

I prefer using my camera on manual, but in both situations those photographers could also have used their camera’s Exposure Compensation (EC) feature. EC works great, and worth reading the instructions to learn, but for the application at my workshop, and at that fast moving outdoor wedding I prefer the “M” or manual mode. However, I must admit that although I like using exposure compensation, as it is fast and efficient, I get involved thinking about other things and forget to reset the EC. Staying on manual, and using the meter display at the bottom of my viewfinder helps me to remember.

Using the metering tool determines how the camera sets exposure, and today’s cameras make it easy for the photographer to choose a metering mode for the shooting conditions. Understanding the meter tool allows for control over the different exposure modes that determine how the camera will set the shutter speed and aperture.  I can only stress that readers who have DSLR cameras learn to use the meter.

Everyone’s comments are welcome.

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

On the Subject of Film

Posted by enmanscamera on

When the subject of film comes up my first impulse is to flippantly say something like, “Oh, film was nice, but no serious photographer would use film.”  Well, that’s not right. And should any of us be putting a definition on what a “serious photographer” is?

In my opinion, film, and those photographers that use it have positioned themselves in a new place among image-makers. These days most photojournalists and commercial photographers employ digital technology, but I think those that are interested in pushing this medium into a creative place are increasingly becoming aware of the unique characteristics of film.

A film purist can easily set up a home lab with an enlarger and complete chemical process, but there are also those that have embraced both digital and film and the results of the technological cross breeding can be exciting. Film has, in my opinion, a tactile quality that is different than digital capture.

Let’s not get into the boring discussion of film vs digital. That’s become wearisome. Film is different than digital. I think it depends on how one wants to show a subject to viewers. And as I wrote, I think the technological cross breeding of film and digital is exciting and rewarding.

The dialogue now may be about computers, monitors, and software. With film we wanted the best enlargers, and enlarger light sources. What lens was mounted on the enlarger was as important as the lens on our cameras. I had a cabinet filled with many different kinds of enlarging papers from around the world, and another stacked with a wide assortment of developing chemicals for both film processing and printing. All this is still available if one is willing to take the time searching out suppliers.

Serious digital photographers are faced with expensive computers and Photoshop’s steep learning curve. Those serious practitioners of film photography will still be dealing with lots of learning. However, quality film cameras, and quality film processing equipment is cheap and the required processing and printing equipment can easily be found languishing at garage sales. I think one needs to search out the best film equipment in the same way as the best digital hardware.

I don’t use, or even think about, film much, but in the last two weeks I have had several conversations with different young photographers that are making images with film cameras and starting to accumulate the equipment to process film and print pictures.  I will admit I enjoy talking about all that. I liked film cameras and same as with today’s photographers, I thought about and researched those cameras in my quest for what would fit my needs the best.

On the subject of using film photography and digital photography, this week has also found me reproducing a client’s very old photographs. (some easily over 100 years old) I photographed each image, loaded them into my computer, then using PhotoShop corrected the fading and discoloration, added contrast, retouched cracks, and finally sharpened and saved them on a CD.  Most photographs were over 40 years old will start to fade soon, if they haven’t already. And those boxes of family history may be lost as people move them to damp basements or garages when additional space is needed.

Making a quality digital image from the negatives or slides of those wonderful old family photographs and saving it on a space saving CD is ideal.  As I mentioned these two mediums work just fine together and a matching print can be made it the future.

I welcome the chance to exchange thoughts with those photographers who are using film in this day of digital technology. Many see it as a “retro” kind of thing, but maybe it’s not that at all. Including film in the creative and artistic process of photography is just one more factor in the continuing evolution of this exciting medium.

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

This photographer’s thoughts on photography as art.

Posted by enmanscamera on

I didn’t include an image this time because I couldn’t think of what would fit with my philosophical   musing.

Wikipedia, the free, on-line encyclopedia states that, “Fine art photography refers to photographs that are created to fulfill the creative vision of the artist. Fine art photography stands in contrast to photojournalism and commercial photography. Photojournalistic photography can be defined as photography that provides visual support for stories, mainly in the print media. Commercial photography’s main focus is to sell a product or service”.

Photography as art has changed over the years since the beginnings of photography in the mid 1800s, and in my opinion, with the dramatic escalation in photography and the making of photographs since digital technology became the mainstay, photography as art interests more and more people.

By the middle of the nineteenth century photographers felt their art should be held in the same exalted status that painters claimed for theirs. Their contention was that it was the photographer, not the camera that made the picture. The goal was, and still may be, to convince not only the art community, but also the community-at-large that photography should be treated as art. Then, as now, the discussion was about whether the different aspects of photography, commercial, photojournalistic, or those created only as personal creative vision should be considered art.

Presently, that art may be nothing more than a screensaver on one’s computer display. Some photographers do go further and it is not unusual to see a personal photograph, or that of a friend’s, framed and hanging on the walls of one’s home.

I have always been interested in art photography and over the years studied the history of when photography started being included as art in major exhibitions as well as what is currently being accepted as art in the medium of photography.  The Wikipedia definition is interesting because it separates what it declares as fine art photography from photojournalism and commercial photography.

The question photographers can ask is, whether their photographs only work as “visual support”, are produced to “sell a product” or as a creative vision?  Do many photographers wander around documenting the world around them and hope to be lucky enough to have final images that fit into one of those categories? I often wonder about that. However, I personally have come to think that definitions as to categories have changed. Maybe it is the way modern viewers see and use photography.  That quickly-snapped portrait of a favorite pet displayed in the owner’s home is cherished enough to be included as art along with the rest of the owner’s sometimes expensive art collection even though some scholars of the arts may disagree.

Remember, even in this technology charged time when making photographs is more popular than I think any other pastime, photographers are still contending with critics that hold that only painting and sculpture are real art.  For me the lines have become blurred, and I see photography as an artistic medium equal to others, although I am not altogether comfortable in categorizing any photographer’s work.  The camera is a tool that helps photographers be creative and photographers only need to decide on their own particular style, and what, as Wikipedia states, is “created to fulfill the creative vision of the artist”.

In my opinion, what that “creative vision” is should be entirely up to the photographer and the audience for whom the image is produced.

My website is at www.enmanscamera.com

Talking about cameras

Posted by enmanscamera on

I am still a bit surprised when people inform me they have decided to keep using film cameras in this day and age of high-quality digital camera image output, and that is just what I was told by a couple last week.  Of course, my response was that they should use whatever makes them comfortable. 

 I find that many photographers using film want to offer a rationale for using film and make statements like “this camera has always taken very good pictures”. I suppose that’s a rational statement, however, but the difference between digital and film is like driving an old 1970 Ford sedan and the newest Ford hybrid model across Canada.  There is a lot more performance, comfort and options available for the operator of the newer model so that the experience can be more pleasurable and certainly more efficient.

 This couple were so emphatic about how great their old film cameras produced pictures that I assumed they do their own darkroom work, but they take their film into a lab that processes it, then scans it to a computer, then with predetermined settings the computer makes the desired print sizes. Hmm, not much photographer input there and most of the process seems to be digital technology. Oh well, at least they are taking pictures.

 I do believe that digital camera users become better photographers faster because of the instant reinforcement of their camera’s LCD, then again because it is so easy and quick to check images on a computer display.  Last Thursday my shop was filled with people discussing equipment. I have to mention that just before I talked to the film camera couple, I had been discussing digital cameras, but the question was “ What’s the best digital SLR camera, what do you like?”  Well, I like them all.  I haven’t had the chance to try every new camera out, but from my reading I think Nikon, Canon, and Pentax all have excellent products.

 My advice was they should first decide what they had available to spend, and then decide on how they like to shoot: sports, landscapes, family and so on. Of course any camera will do everything, but some are better for sports and some won’t hold up to the elements if packed on your horse or bounced around getting cold on the back of a snowmobile. My suggestion was before they choose to do some research before they buy.

 But film? Well if one is into “retro” or likes to experiment with technology from the past picking up an old film camera and the equipment for processing and printing doesn’t cost much and might be lots of fun.  However, for those like me that are dedicated to producing quality photography I would, of course choose a DSLR (digital single lens reflex) camera.

 
www.enmanscamera.com