Too much technology?

the damn thing. And that's a sad factoid......

 

I love Jeremy Payne's comment that the camera you always take or have with you is the one you will be constantly producing enjoyable photographs with. I know I hate carry tons of gear around locally or especially traveling.

 

I may even go with a Canon G10 (yes, shooting RAW) this year and see what I can produce with this much more travel friendly too. Just click on the discussion forums at www.dpreview.com or other photography hosting sites and search for compact camera names. You will be astounded what you see. Local news shooters, studio shooters (where did I read recently one high end FASHION mag photographer shot his cover with a Canon G10?) and more easily produce prints up to 16 X 20 that look fantastic. The Luminous Landscape guy (Michael ???) is one of my favorite sites to pop into to and read about some astounding techniques and photos.

David

I bought a G9 last year for just the same reason and have been very happy with it for the times I did not want to lug the dSLR and lenses around and my brother got the G10 for the same reason. Nice photos, shoots RAW and does a decent job especially at lower ISOs. On 2 recent non-diving trips I took that one and on two other trips I took it even though I had the dSLR. In fact I am thinking about getting a housing for it to have as a back-up or even some trips where I do not want to carry a ton of stuff for whatever reason.

I recall the trip I made after school to Europe, 3 bodies, 5 lenses, unknown amount of rolls of slide film. Carrying less and EXIF data for all those things and more would have been real nice....

If you review all the posts in the Image Gallery and Image Improvement areas, there is little or nothing about technology, megapixels etc. In these areas the posts are about technique, and the basics of composition exposure etc that are common to all technologies. Possibly with the exception of my Manatee post using the D700 demonstrating the possibilities with high ISO (available light). Giving up strobes (technology for sure) made possible by high ISO performance, also technology, go figure.

The technology discussions seem to be confined to the DSLR, Gear Lust and General Discussion areas for the most part.

So to me it seems there is a place in Wetpixel for everything.

Jeff,

I AGREE those columns have some interesting and worthwhile discussions. But I'd bet there are many more posts on gear and technology. Which is OK, too

Your great image posts with the D700 (I thought you said you WEREN'T going to house that puppy for UW use?) show that for many available light situations YES increasing resolution at higher and higher and ISOs can open up new "views'.

I guess maybe I read too much into the gear discussions and like TV I should just "click off" more

A fun discussion none the less!

dhaas

Deepsea,

There are two big selling LR books. The first is "Lightroom 2 for Digital Phgotgraphers" by Scott Kelby. It covers everything LR can do and then some in the authors typical style. Very segmented and sort of line by line instruction. Some like it, some don't. The second is "The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 2 Book" by Martin Evening. A more intellectual view in my opinion. Much more information on why the software works like it does. I tend to go to Martin's book first when I have a question. But that's just me. I highly recommend you check out the free Adobe TV lessons on video, depending on how you learn you might not need the book.

 

Have fun,

Steve

Hey Steve

Thanks for the recommendation on the Adobe lessons, they are a great basis for seeing what LR can do.

Happy 2009

Karen

Happy 2009

Karen

I started a campaign a bit back to raise funds for Dean to be able to dive in warm water and I can add your new equipment to the campaign as an off-shoot.

 

Right now it is a resounding success and everyone who replied thought it was a great idea**

 

to the New Year

 

 

** Of course everyone who replied was limited to Dean, but it is still is 100% positive rate.

I was starting the ball rolling... Come on everyone who lives near warm water.. you know you'd love to spend time with the 'loveable cheeky chappy' that is ME !!!!!..... Don't be shy

Get your hands in your pockets and donate as much of your hard earned (well some of you get it for nothing) cash and i will be there in a flash, giving up my time and cold quarry diving to pleasure your lives.

That was a public broadcast on behalf of the ' Dean needs warm-water party'

Dive safe

Dean( I LOVE YOU ALL)B

Regardless of how often its brought up, I couldn't agree more with pgk's original post. Sometimes people get soooo wrapped up in the minuscule technical details that they totally lose sight that the technology is not the most important aspect of photography. Its one thing if you can actually SEE the difference between a nit and a nat, but the ironic thing is that some of the most "techy" people carrying the most expensive cameras and housings don't even share their own work with us on a website or a in gallery. Rather than listening to someone brag about the newest gadget they just bought and why its so superior, I'd be much more interested to see what they can do with it.

Makes me think of a friend of mine who is a trust fund baby who drives a Ferrari. I just shake my head and wonder what he's compensating for. (OK, that was out of line)

I will continue to concentrate my efforts on my shooting technique with whatever camera I have in hand and even more important on photo composition and my search for the image that nobody else has yet to capture. I'm also planing to trade in my back-up happy snappy SP-350 for a G10 because sometimes my stock agencies want what those cameras capture too and they do need higher res and the quality RAW images provide, but my stock buyers could give a fat rat's ass about what kind of camera shot the picture, provided it meets their resolution and quality specs.

I'm not saying technology isn't important and I'm not talking about digressing back to the film days (get real). I'm saying SHOW me WHY its making you a better shooter.

Bonnie

I know, I am bit late to the party on this one (been party-ing). But I think a big part of issue is that on online forums (fora, sorry Paul) it is a lot easy to debate technical issues based in objectively measureable areas - camera performance etc - rather than more complex and subjective issues such as images (its a lot easier to say someones view on a camera is incorrect rather than their image is useless! And so debates tend to focus around gear because it is just easier to discuss and debate.

In my experience on trips and workshops photographers want to talk endlessly about technique and what goes into creating great images, and I find that there is rarely much gear talk. Perhaps because this is also because folks are in the doing phase of this activity, rather than in the sitting and waiting for the next time phase - which people tend to be when on Wetpixel.

Alex

Technological discussions and experimentation allow shooters to explore different techniques in photography. The ability to share such ideas is a great thing. It took one geek to realize that digital sensors needed IR/UV and AA filters. Discussion of that turned into a camera purpose built for astrophotography. Another example that is closer to home is Dr Alex Mustard. He developed magic filters to better his ambient light shooting on reefs. The filter discussion came to experimenting with filters on strobes to match the filter on the camera etc etc. Would someone have done it anyways? Yes, people were doing so with Lee filters before magic filters existed. Did the technical discussions help popularize the technique and build up more ways to use filters? I would think definitely.

PS

A quote from James Nachtwey, photojournalist:

"I can only speak for myself, but documentary photography and photojournalism are based on perception, not on technology. It doesn’t matter to me if my pictures are shot on film or digital."

James used the latest Canon 1D series for his work in Iraq. Alex Majoli used several Olympus P&S to shoot the same wars. Majoli joined Magnum the year Nachtwey left to form VII. Nachtwey is also sponsored by Apple and Canon. I'm sure Majoli would be too if he chose to. Point is they both choose equipment based on their needs and shooting styles. Both had to learn about the digital world and how to work within it. The camera is a tool and those who understand their tools well usually know how to use them VERY well. There is such a thing as technical photography.

I think there is a place for both here. I am not a tech guy. I didnt even own a computer until I got a d70 when it came out. I learn a tremendous amount from the teckie people on this site, and look for the posts to learn. On the other hand we have photo sharing, and posting areas on this site for those more atuned to photo sharing. I hope both continue and coexist

Perhaps because this is also because folks are in the doing phase of this activity, rather than in the sitting and waiting for the next time phase - which people tend to be when on Wetpixel.

Alex

You got that right Alex, sitting around just kills me, and my bank account. Just gave in today to lustful thoughts and bought the 14-24, boy technology makes it easy.

But I did get out and take photographs for a few hours today even if it was not underwater.

Just gave in today to lustful thoughts and bought the 14-24, boy technology makes it easy.

Did I ever mention that you are my hero?

You got that right Alex, sitting around just kills me, and my bank account. Just gave in today to lustful thoughts and bought the 14-24, boy technology makes it easy.

But I did get out and take photographs for a few hours today even if it was not underwater.

So are you saying is once married with kids, the most lustful thoughts are about cameras and lenses? How depressing!

So are you saying is once married with kids, the most lustful thoughts are about cameras and lenses? How depressing!

Drew, that's about as funny as a fart in a spacesuit, but you are partially right. I do have lots of other lustful thoughts but lenses are the only ones I can go out and buy without worrying about having parts cut off.

Space suits have air filters

I was merely worried about married family life... nothing personal meant. 14-24 with D700 is very nice.

Space suits have air filters

I was merely worried about married family life... nothing personal meant. 14-24 with D700 is very nice.

The girlfriend making you worried?

You got that right Alex, sitting around just kills me, and my bank account. Just gave in today to lustful thoughts and bought the 14-24, boy technology makes it easy.

But I did get out and take photographs for a few hours today even if it was not underwater.

Tsk.....

I think that one thing that draws me to photography and especially underwater photography, is the fact that you have to BOTH have technical and artistic capabilities - it helps to be "whole brained", rather than "left or right" brained". Without the artistic vision and imagination you might have great gear but you will produce boring images and witout the tools and knowledge how to use them, you will be hard pressed to create the image that you "see". I find similar satisfaction in photography as I find in for example playing the piano - creating something (presumably) beautiful(tho the neighbors might strongly disgree) thru disipline, mathematics, practice, patience, emotion and action.

I am a geek by profession and have made the observation that those "fellow geeks" who "worship" technology also are the ones who sometimes loose sight for the forest for the trees. I view technology as a tool to accomplish something or provide a solution - and in my ideal world technology would be clever, functional, low maintenance and preferrably invisible. Unfortunately I am finding more and more that technology is becoming an end rather than the means to accomplish something.

Unfortunately I am finding more and more that technology is becoming an end rather than the means to accomplish something.

I suppose that you have pointed out what is really the crux of all this, and to illustrate what you say I am going to post a recent (not underwater) photo taken above my home during a recent spell of sunny but very cold weather. This digitally shot image may or may not grab you but please look at it before reading on.

It is a very crisp, detailed and contrasty image. But what may change your perception of it is that the lens it was shot on is now 40 years old! This is of course entirely irrelevant and is of no interest to most viewers. Whilst technology has progressed this doesn't mean to say that using the latest equipment is actually going to improve either the aesthetic or the technical aspects of an image.

Ansel Adams didn't know how to run Photoshop but if he were practicing today I bet he'd take a keen interest in it.

Technical knowledge and creativity are two different and unrelated things. It's rare to find a great photographer who doesn't know how his camera works or who doesn't care about using good equipment. It's good that engineers responsible for advancing the state of the art don't consider 40 year old technology good enough.