Are We Less Skilful…..?


Status
Not open for further replies.

Rafael

Deregistered
Jul 5, 2007
346
0
0
Since the inception of digital capture with preview in DSLR, are we less a skilful photographer than before? when we use film base SLR by using our absolute skills and experiences because there’s no preview of what and how we are capturing, not before getting results from the traditional darkroom or printing lab. :think:
 

if this were a dead horse,


it would have be beaten until it became a cow. with mad cow disease and alive and running around the seven seas.
 

When use films we need to calculate in our head............ and shoot.

I do not know how the new batch learning process photography, as i was trained in the old schools.
 

Since the inception of digital capture with preview in DSLR, are we less a skilful photographer than before? when we use film base SLR by using our absolute skills and experiences because there’s no preview of what and how we are capturing, not before getting results from the traditional darkroom or printing lab. :think:

i am always going to say

"who the hell cares what you use, how you get your pictures? it's only the pictures that count, nothing else, nothing less, nothing more." :)
 

In school, it might be the process that counts.
At work, it's the results that counts.
 

In school, it might be the process that counts.
At work, it's the results that counts.

the process is the thing that allows you to produce good results more often.

but a good picture captured through luck, whether there is lack of skill or not, remains a great picture. and while it is always good to encourage people to improve; there is nothing wrong in marvelling in the beauty of a good photograph even if it was captured with nothing more than auto mode in a P&S camera and was a once in a lifetme fluke. :)
 

I went into a photobook shop in Funan yesterday, and was shocked at the huge number of books on how to light, how to compose, but also many more books on how to digitally work on your images, photoshop books, etc, etc........I think the learning is in the after processing work...:)

I haven't used my lightmeter for years :), but I still shoot sparsely, and take my time to compose and wait

HS
 

people who use computer less skillful than a person who use traditional typewriter (those that cannot erase)? Since computer has backspace, those veryold typewriter dun have erase button (not those modern typewritter) ... so people who use type writter make lesser mistakes (better at typing)
 

people who use computer less skillful than a person who use traditional typewriter (those that cannot erase)? Since computer has backspace, those veryold typewriter dun have erase button (not those modern typewritter) ... so people who use type writter make lesser mistakes (better at typing)
that depends on attitude and person, not the equipment. simple as that.

whether you use film or digital, if you want to machine gun with film, it happens too.

does it mean that film users were on average better? maybe, because of the cost of every frame. but did it mean that more good photographs were produced last time? not true.

i make it a point to type properly without making mistakes because i hate backspacing. that and the fact that i used to play typing games for fun when i got bored of wc2. :bsmilie:
 

I went into a photobook shop in Funan yesterday, and was shocked at the huge number of books on how to light, how to compose, but also many more books on how to digitally work on your images, photoshop books, etc, etc........I think the learning is in the after processing work...:)
the funniest part is that, i read many of those processing books, but most of the learning i did with playing with my own images, spoiling my own images with oversaturation etc. :)

to be honest, the books i learnt from the most were not those that told me what to do, but the ones that showed beautiful photos. and they are way more enjoyable. i used to spend entire days at the national library just flipping, flipping stacks of landscape photography books. wait until sunset, and then go and shoot, try to understand what they were doing. those were fond memories.. now i have less of such opportunities. :(
 

Last edited:
As in, "How To Polish Turd"? :bsmilie:

http://www.asiaone.com/Wine%2CDine+...ntertainment/Story/A1Story20071214-41110.html :bsmilie:

here is a polished turd.

sierra.jpg


well, many.

http://www.frieze.com/issue/review/santiago_sierra1
 

Last edited:
.......but I still shoot sparsely, and take my time to compose and wait

With a digital camera I can't wait anymore.

If the coconut won't fall for me to shoot.

I'll shake the tree. :bsmilie:

If xmm doesn't appear anywhere for me to shoot.

I'll join a photoshoot. :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
 

Since the inception of digital capture with preview in DSLR, are we less a skilful photographer than before? when we use film base SLR by using our absolute skills and experiences because there’s no preview of what and how we are capturing, not before getting results from the traditional darkroom or printing lab. :think:

I would agree with most here and Mattlock said it eloquently.

While it's no use trying to offer absolutes, because we have no statistical figures to offer either way, I guess if one goes by general trends and attitudes, many have either not even bothered to learn and master the basics of light or exposure, and have taken on the attitude of 'Aiyah! Read/do so much for what? Later just photoslop lor!'

In that sense, we have lost an edge which some never bothered to acquire in the first place.
 

Since the inception of digital capture with preview in DSLR, are we less a skilful photographer than before? when we use film base SLR by using our absolute skills and experiences because there’s no preview of what and how we are capturing, not before getting results from the traditional darkroom or printing lab. :think:

Less skilful or not not so sure, but definitely have an easier time during shooting as compared to film users last time. At least you will know if you have acceptably exposed images or not.
 

I would agree with most here and Mattlock said it eloquently.

While it's no use trying to offer absolutes, because we have no statistical figures to offer either way, I guess if one goes by general trends and attitudes, many have either not even bothered to learn and master the basics of light or exposure, and have taken on the attitude of 'Aiyah! Read/do so much for what? Later just photoslop lor!'

In that sense, we have lost an edge which some never bothered to acquire in the first place.
but then hor...da vinci and the other painters will balk at the lack of painting skills ppl nowadays. too dem easy to make a picture. instead of drawing, and putting lines to canvas, its just click click click. not much skills required. the old masters are turning in their graves...:what:
 

Since the inception of digital capture with preview in DSLR, are we less a skilful photographer than before? when we use film base SLR by using our absolute skills and experiences because there’s no preview of what and how we are capturing, not before getting results from the traditional darkroom or printing lab. :think:

Not quite true or accurate.

In professional circles for years the use of a Polaroid back that gave an excellent indication of lighting and exposure was a standard technique used in commercial studios globally. It wasn't used so much for portraiture as for product photography where the shot had to be perfect.

Studio portrait photographers were masters at what they did (if they were any good) and the rest of us learnt the profession the hard way and computed various components for the techincal side in our brain in nothing flat. That really hasn't changed with those of us who learned on film.

Digital has however reduced the amount of skill needed to produce an image of a given quality at a technical level, however it can't supplant the artistic side of things, nor the previsualisation or know when to over ride the supplied numbers, change metering patterns or change lenses. What the new technology has allowed is for more people to take a reasonable quality image. If you compare what joe or josephine blow takes today to 30 years ago you'll find the difference staggering. At the professional end of the game there's still a lot of knowldege and skill required to be competitive.

PhotoShopping however is a newish and additional skill, however it was around before digital cameras became popular and those of us with longer memories can remember well scanning film and chromes half the night to produce digital images. It could be argued that today there is an over reliance on PhotoShop to cure bad images which is something I completely endorse. Photography really is about man (or woman), a camera and capturing the great image in camera. If this is done properly then PhotoShop becomes an adjunct and can be used sparingly. Now that is the mark of a good photographer.
 

yes I think most people are less technically skillful than before.
Period.

For myself, I got to agree...I usually try and error and look at histogram to verify. If I shoot film, I will be wasting lots of rolls due to my unsound skill
 

Status
Not open for further replies.