You think it's bad now. Wait until the onset of G. A. S. (Many threads here on the topic)
Glad you're having fun.
They're the type that think the government bailouts are a good thing.
Thanks for the reads, folks.
How about a catagory for "You can make me use digital but you can't make me like it!"
I have noticed that any category 5 types I meet can be discribed more simply ...... as idiots.
Chris, that guy clearly needs to get back in his box and keep taking the medication.
However, I have to disagree with you about the number of types of photographer that exist. Whilst I agree with your descriptions of how photographers approach their chosen medium, what you've described potentially adds to the 'digital -v- film' wars that seem to dog many sites.
For instance you could, just as easily, have described photographers who specialise in landscape, travel, portrait, still-life, macro or daylight, night, tungsten, infra-red, etc...
There are probably many hundreds, if not thousands, of 'types' of photographer - entirely dependent upon the 'filter' you choose to define them. By your set of descriptions, I'm a type 3. However, I prefer to think of myself mainly as a landscaper and travel photographer. The camera I choose to take with me on any given day is, to me, completely incidental as it's the photograph that's important and not the means by which the image is saved.
Actually, I had to laugh when I read the bit about the magazine that "can give good information to film and digital photographers alike". Would that there were more like that. Seriously, I find it really sad that we, as photographers, have allowed marketeers to segregate us into film or digital supporters. I choose both. Unashamedly.
More worryingly, we've jumped on the marketeers' bandwagon and, because of our current propensity for polarised opinion, Type 1 and Type 5 photographers fill internet forums and magazines with abuse and ill-judged comments.
In the 35 years I've been a keen photographer, I can't once recollect a vitriolic argument or personal attack about colour being better than black and white but the various forums are filled with examples of Nikon versus Canon and Digital versus Film. "Vive la difference" as far as I'm concerned.
All the best.
Hi, Wow, what a great day! I got out and took a walk at the river with my husband. I shot 1/2 a roll of that C41 process B&W at the river and trees and such. I was planning on keeping track of all my settings for each picture so I could teach myself what i was doing wrong but that is just not easy to do! I gave up and just had fun!
At home I did some more interesting shots of my oldest daughters alto sax sitting next to the cases for her alto, tenor and bari sax, the piano keyboard, my daughter with the guinea pig, my youngest daughter, my husband, the moon, and anything else I could find that was interesting! I ended up shooting 2 rolls today. I have one more of those B&W rolls left to use then I will get some I can develop myself. I also have 3 rolls of color (I have one of those in the camera now to shoot).
Thank you for all the encouragement. I'll be sure to have tons of questions when I go to develop my first pictures myself!
How would you rate the Introduction to Studio Portraiture course? I too am looking for something to get me out and shooting more and to also learn something.
It gets better, I'm in my 25th year of photography as a hobby and still find lots of things to learn and experiment.
Wait until you learn to develop your B&W films, then put them on paper in your darkroom. This is where the magic begins.
Try this book "Black and White Photography A Basic Manual" Third Edition, Revised by Henry Hornenstein.
It is available at Amazon.com for less than $20 new, and cheaper used. It is the best intro to photo book I have ever seen for the price. There are more expensive books out there, but this book will give you everything you need to help get you started. It covers everything from camera controls to printing and developing film.
wats tht supposed to mean??
Get a textbook, and read it.