What style of shooting are you adopting?

What style of photography are you adopting?


Results are only viewable after voting.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sun_Of_The_Beach

New Member
Sep 25, 2005
88
0
0
Yew Tee
For SLR users, most will find the cost of developing photos high, so will make sure that each photo is well composed before the shot. In other words, "One Shot, One Kill"

For most Digital users, most will shoot in volumes, and then view it in the LCD viewfinder, or download the best photo they capture. In other words, "choose quality from the quantity"

I am just curious about what kind of photography style most people adopt. :confused:
 

shoot till i tink i get it right theory....it can be 10 shots..it can be 500 shots..
 

i think i will trigger happy when i need to get something wrothy...:think:
 

I personally find that just shoot 1 best shot will be enough.... :D

Shooting many means more $$ as I am a FSLR user. :(

But also must depend on situation.... unless its damn imPt jiu whack more shots at different angles. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
 

Sun_Of_The_Beach said:
For SLR users, most will find the cost of developing photos high, so will make sure that each photo is well composed before the shot. In other words, "One Shot, One Kill"

For most Digital users, most will shoot in volumes, and then view it in the LCD viewfinder, or download the best photo they capture. In other words, "choose quality from the quantity"

I am just curious about what kind of photography style most people adopt. :confused:


Have you seen how SLR people photographed? "One Shot, One Kill?"

I had seen SLR people photographed. One "thousand shots" - and pray for "one kill!". There are exceptions of course. But the idea that SLR film photographers are "One Shot One Kill" is plainly inaccurate.

The closest I have seen of the "one shot one kill" are those photographers who use largeformat cameras. And especially the Ultra-large format photographers.
 

a half dead pic oso i happy! :bsmilie:
 

I see raw fashion/ads photos used up a few rolls for the same photo with slight variations and out of a few rolls, choose 1 or 2. Anyway, I also shoot as much as I can and choose a photo I like best. I believe in taking advantage of available resources than insisting on living in the past.
 

I believe in more shots. A priceless moments can never be recreated again.

Now with DSLR, can shoot more without developing cost.
 

dawgbyte77 said:
I see raw fashion/ads photos used up a few rolls for the same photo with slight variations and out of a few rolls, choose 1 or 2. Anyway, I also shoot as much as I can and choose a photo I like best. I believe in taking advantage of available resources than insisting on living in the past.

c if they can afford 2 do this if they r paid like those in Consumers Corner. :confused:
 

dawgbyte77 said:
I see raw fashion/ads photos used up a few rolls for the same photo with slight variations and out of a few rolls, choose 1 or 2. Anyway, I also shoot as much as I can and choose a photo I like best. I believe in taking advantage of available resources than insisting on living in the past.


Yours is one way of seeing and doing things.

"Living in the past" as you called it, had produced some of the most spectacular images in the history of photography.

What "mode" one adoptss should depend on the choice of photographic mediums and subjects. If for example, one is a photojournalist, and had to raise his camera above the heads of the masses of people, I will not be surprised if he had to expose hundreds of frames to get "that one". It is totally irrelevant whether he used a film or digital camera. But one can use a 35 mm SLR or DSLR for still life, and depending on the skills of the photographer, may even achieve a "One Shot One Kill" taret.

But if one aspires to take an image with a 20x24 inches film camera and contact print it, the nature of the process cannot allow for a random shooting. It will be a logistic nightmare. But the technical possibilities in a print from such a a 20x24 film cannot be equalled by ANY commercial digital process at this moment of time. At this moment, a 22 megapixel file cannot even dream of equalling the information in a 8x10 inches negative, let alone a 11x14 inches. We do not need to talk about 20x24 and larger.

So, in my way of seeing, the choice of shooting mode will depend on the subject matter and the choice of equipment.
 

student said:
Yours is one way of seeing and doing things.

"Living in the past" as you called it, had produced some of the most spectacular images in the history of photography.

What "mode" one adoptss should depend on the choice of photographic mediums and subjects. If for example, one is a photojournalist, and had to raise his camera above the heads of the masses of people, I will not be surprised if he had to expose hundreds of frames to get "that one". It is totally irrelevant whether he used a film or digital camera. But one can use a 35 mm SLR or DSLR for still life, and depending on the skills of the photographer, may even achieve a "One Shot One Kill" taret.

But if one aspires to take an image with a 20x24 inches film camera and contact print it, the nature of the process cannot allow for a random shooting. It will be a logistic nightmare. But the technical possibilities in a print from such a a 20x24 film cannot be equalled by ANY commercial digital process at this moment of time. At this moment, a 22 megapixel file cannot even dream of equalling the information in a 8x10 inches negative, let alone a 11x14 inches. We do not need to talk about 20x24 and larger.

So, in my way of seeing, the choice of shooting mode will depend on the subject matter and the choice of equipment.

I agree. As I said, for 20x24, your available resources are limited but if (theoretically) technology brings this level more affordable, I would still shoot quantities.

What I mean by living in the past is that this question 10 years ago will have a different answer from me. 10 years from now, I'm sure it will be different as well. Hope I was not misunderstood. Basically its one way of seeing things, as you say. :sweat:
 

Talking to a Nat Geog photog one time, he told me that he would be given 1000 films to shoot on a trip and be fined for each one he didn't finish!!
 

Phildate said:
Talking to a Nat Geog photog one time, he told me that he would be given 1000 films to shoot on a trip and be fined for each one he didn't finish!!
thats nice...just shoot everything you see....1000x32=32000pictures:bigeyes:
 

Phildate said:
Talking to a Nat Geog photog one time, he told me that he would be given 1000 films to shoot on a trip and be fined for each one he didn't finish!!

Yeah, every composition at different settings brings out a different photograph with different moods, purpose, etc. So every photograph is different. it really depends on what you are trying to tell...
 

i think it all depends on what you are shooting-

if i am shooting 'composition', i try to go for one shot one kill. i walk around, look into the frame and eventually sometimes not take a shot at all! i guess this attitude came from the SLR days and i find it very useful even with a DSLR because it makes me think about light and composition.

if i am trying to capture 'emotion', i just keep shooting without worrying (DSLR). with candids, portraits etc. it is very difficult to anticipate the right moment so one has to be ready all the time to shoot. and with a DSLR it doesnt bother me to keep shooting in the hope that i capture that elusive moment.
 

vkashi said:
i think it all depends on what you are shooting-

if i am shooting 'composition', i try to go for one shot one kill. i walk around, look into the frame and eventually sometimes not take a shot at all! i guess this attitude came from the SLR days and i find it very useful even with a DSLR because it makes me think about light and composition.

if i am trying to capture 'emotion', i just keep shooting without worrying (DSLR). with candids, portraits etc. it is very difficult to anticipate the right moment so one has to be ready all the time to shoot. and with a DSLR it doesnt bother me to keep shooting in the hope that i capture that elusive moment.


Agreed. If I am going on tour, I dont think I will shoot in quantity. Whats most important is to enjoy the moment, and the experience.

A photo or 2 of one scene will be able to generate thoughts of the experience at that time....;)
 

To me, I've got to shoot in quantities! Cuz my settings always wrong :bigeyes: must practice more or else everytime I try to take pictures of friends and family they alway shout "weeeii, faster ler.. you know how to shoot anot" that makes me sad..:bheart:
Anyways I'm just a month old DSLR baby still got lots to learn! :sweat:
 

jimbok said:
To me, I've got to shoot in quantities! Cuz my settings always wrong :bigeyes: must practice more or else everytime I try to take pictures of friends and family they alway shout "weeeii, faster ler.. you know how to shoot anot" that makes me sad..:bheart:
Anyways I'm just a month old DSLR baby still got lots to learn! :sweat:

Sama! I also about 1 month old only....thats why until I practice to a standard of "can see light", I try to use auto mode for family or friends gathering.

For now, most of time I shoot in quantity, at least until I improve my skills....

Has doing some reading up from books and net, and also from this forum. Very enlightening and tons of info to educate me. and sometimes kena "poisioned" in process....tripods, lens, bags, etc.
 

To me, "in camera" techniques are generally better than post-process. Composition, lighting, colour, mood and the subject need to be considered carefully with that look through the VF. Ultimately, it's a question of whether you can "see" something and portray a certain feeling or emotion and tell a story about the subject.

Of course, if we're talking action shots, then just let loose that "Continuous" mode and hope for the best.

So it depends on what you are trying to get out of your pictures.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.