Evolve or Die!
obviously he can't make it in today's time and space.
You'll Never Walk Alone! - i have the best job in the world!
I am a non-professional, so my comments may be ignored.
We all know that equipments are, well, just equipments. Whether the equipment is film based or digital is really not the issue. Of course I feel that this particular ex-professional is over the board with his comments.
However, while I do not agree with the extreme statements made, I think I can understand the underlying sentiments that prompted him to make those comments. I believe the mindset of the "average" digital photographer is different from the mindset of the "average" film photographer.
There was an instance where I had a little "problem" with a modelling agency. To help clarify issues, I showed the ageny my contact prints, which was like one roll of 35 mm negatives and 4 rolls of 120, with a total of 100 frames. She looked at them and said, "that cannot be all!". I asked "Why not?" She replied that other photographers usually have thousands of images. I believe her, because I had seen how another wedding photographer took his pictures with his digital camera.
I am aware that many wedding photographers may not photograph in this manner (thousands of images!). But the fact is that the mindset for many is different.
Another thing. I have no idea who this ex-professional is, and what he is doing now or his reasons to not be a professional anymore.
I think the assumption that he is not a professional now because he "refused to change", or cannot make it, is unfounded. There are many reasons why people change jobs.
If you are taking photo for others, business.. if they are satisfied with digital camera, of course should use Digital camera..it is available yet cheap in cost.
If you are taking photo for your own passions, you should know what you want..there are a lot of things i am comfortable with my film camera, like i travel with less weight..less anxiety of preview the photo on camera..and i like to operate my manual camera..i like the way people to look at my nice looking nikon FM2, i like to concentrate of every shot..
yet of course, i spend $ on film and scanning and actually i scan them into digital so i can share online.. but yet i still don't really feel like i need a DSLR for own use..
People may ask, the money u spend can get DSLR already, if you are using film what if all photo comes back from trip is not good? u can't retake like DSLR on the spot..but actually some problems doesn't exist for photographer if they had really learnt what is photography...
or maybe I just like to be different?
but if i am into photography business, it is what Digital camera that should do the work..
why care and bother???
Eat breath LIVERPOOL!!!
I used to be a film wedding photographer for about near to 10years, and shoot less then 5 times using DSLR. I find it is a pain if I were to do post processing the images. Hence the max I go for about 500-600 images and handed over the couple 300 images.
My style is to shoot it right in the first place and wont do post process unless i leave it with no choice but to photo edit. Normally will just adjust the curve, brightness and WB ... or atmost unsharp mask ..
Let put this is perspective. In any field of work, you have the passionate, the methodical - not fantastic but dependable, the indifferent - doing the bear minimum to get by, and the skiver - produces crap but has a lot of reasons why this should be ok.Some wedding photographers who shoot professionally get so burnt out by it that the job becomes - click ok shoot 4 people playing with tea cup, click another set, all the clicks are shots that you saw in the sample album - all the albums produced as a near a clone to the any other as possible. They no long try for the job or for the couple. It a safe way of working , its not wrong. Digital and camera automation evolution brought a whole hoard with constant renewal of eager would be wedding photographers to try to use their equipment and make some bucks as well. If you are charging on the lower end of the scale this hoard will stomp you something firece. After all they think nothing of shooting for 12-14 hours and doing post production that can run as long as 10 days per job and for what a charge rate of a couple of hundred dollars. Of course they will throw in a lot of post production goodies since they also want to try to do those. For the bear minimum shooter this is bad news. For those who cannot convert - from choice or from inablity - it is also time to leave that line of work.This is in a global context not only in the little red dot on the world map. At the end of the day, it is just a comment - what you do and how you do and why you do is something personal, you do what is right for yourself. Why bother about another person's pov on this matter ? If the feeling is not there it time to stop.
This is no doubt the least amount of effort by the photographer because he/she just pass the work to the lab and can spend more time doing more assignments or go get a beer. All you need is a powerhouse strobe like the Metz 60CT-4 and you're all set.
Thing is, clients these days are not game for 300 x 4R kind of "packages" and those who can afford will go for magazine style / coffee table books.
lets just say all photographers be it amature or professional, each of them have their own style and preferences, one has to be humble and keep an open mind.
The transition from film to digital has changed the workflow altogether. It is true that it is now much easier to produce the pictures that are considered acceptable by yesterday's standards with today's technology. However, with new technology, expectations have also changed. In short, the bar has been raised higher.
Check out the works of top notch wedding photographers today. The moments they capture... the angles... the composition... their sensitivity to lighting... DOF... etc. In the past, film photographers did not dare to take such risks because they cannot see the effect immediately. Also, film was costly and more time consuming to process. (By angles and composition, I don't mean that slanted effect photographers nowadays like to use so much. That's just poor composition masquerading as creativity.)
It is not that film photographers cannot take creative shots. But because it is more costly, time consuming and risky, such shots tend to be limited.
But... if you just want those safe and flat photos as per the film era, it's actually pretty easy nowadays. So, it's not untrue, what this ex-photographer said...
It's like in tennis. Did you know that Bjorn Borg tried to make a comeback with his wooden tennis racket? He did not even make it past the 1st round because these carbon graphite rackets today make it much easier for players to play well... But to make it anywhere close to the top is something else nowadays.
hmmmz....oh well i embrace the digital age...but w/o the eye for photography..no amt of editing will help.....
He is 100% entitled to his opinion.
I wonder what the pros were saying when Rangefinders started "replacing" TLRs; or when SLRs started "replacing" Rangefinders; or when magnesium powder was replaced by flash bulbs; when strobes were used in place of tungsten; ad infinitum.
Last edited by iggy; 16th December 2006 at 02:09 AM.