Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,884   Posts: 1,629,756   Online: 729
      
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Burnaby, BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    693

    "Are You Ever Surprised?"

    Background: The question (below) was posed to me at lunch today, when I was in the company gym working out. The conversation began when one of my office mates asked about photography after noting my Dwayne's Kodachrome T-shirt. The conversation evolved from generalities (what interests me...what interests her, etc.) into a bit of a discussion of the differences between shooting analogue and digital. She asked if I didn't find it difficult to shoot something without really knowing for sure that I had actually captured the image I wanted. She suggested (argued?) that one of the virtues of shooting digital was that one got immediate confirmation. I had to think about the question before I responded that "I generally have a pretty good idea what I have given that I have been shooting for a long time with virtually the same materials." The conversation continued on touching on a number of other photography-related matters (where do you like to shoot, how often do you go out just to shoot, etc.

    After I returned to work, I thought about the question further and began to wonder if I had been completely forthright with my response. Perhaps, I should have qualified my answer? In retrospect, I would maintain that, when shooting black and white under normal circumstances (i.e. not in those cases where "existing light" conditions make the effort a bit of a crap shoot), I am seldom surprised at the results I have obtained (this assertion is based on, as I said above, using a limited number of materials, for particular applications and processing with tight control (yes, I know, accidents do happen!!). Now where I began to doubt the veracity of my response/position is in the case of shooting colour transparency film. For a normal (i.e. metered) exposure, I have a very good idea about what I have based upon the films I am currently (for three years-plus ) using for my colour work (E100G/E100VS). Where I am less certain is when I bracket (depending upon the situation, up to +/-2/3 in 1/3 increments); I have had shots that should have turned out, but ended up being a waste of film; I have had other brackets that left me astonished with how they rendered a particular scene, often in a manner far more effective/dramatic than I would have imagined.

    So, let me throw the question out there: Do you always "get" the image you saw when looking through the viewfinder? Or, when shooting, in certain circumstances, do you get something that sometimes surprises/disappoints you?
    Some Nikons (F6, F5x2, F3P, F3HP, F2ASx4, F2A, F2 and a D800), with Ai/Ais Nikkors ranging from 15mm to 600mm; Leicas (M6X2), with Leitz glass from 28 to 90mm and a pair of Hasselblads (500c/ms), with Zeiss glass from 50 to 250mm. A bit of stuff for a no-longer practicing professional, but justifiable for a now-converted hobbyist who absolutely loves taking/making pictures.

  2. #2
    David Allen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    564
    I am never surprised with what I get in technical terms. However, for many years I have used just one camera, one lens, one film and one developer. The real surprise is when I get a negative that I think is not worth printing (poorly seen). Generally from the 10 exposures on medium format, I will get a minimum of 50% that I print - with the ones that I choose to not print being a combination of poorly seen images, images too much like what I already have printed and duplicates (when working at 1/30 or 1/15 hand-held I always shoot two images in case of camera shake).

    Bests,

    David
    www.dsallen.de

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,599
    Quote Originally Posted by BradleyK View Post
    ...So, let me throw the question out there: Do you always "get" the image you saw when looking through the viewfinder? Or, when shooting, in certain circumstances, do you get something that sometimes surprises/disappoints you?
    Q1: Generally but not always. Q2: Sometimes, but it is more often surprise rather than disappointment. But I've had that same discussion and understand the "opposing" viewpoint, despite being an avid film photographer.

  4. #4
    analoguey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    939
    Images
    2
    Hmm. Seeing in viewfinder to getting the same image...? How do you define that exactly? Fairly sure that 99% time, it's me wanting certain parts more emphasised in the image and not exactly as is in the viewfinder. composition wise yes, but colours, contrast etc., are subjective to what you want -hence ' making the image'?

    Sent from Tap-a-talk

  5. #5
    hdeyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central Canada and Southern France
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    326
    I'm surprised you went to the gym at lunch time.
    Because I do the opposite to David Allen, I've had too many surprises lately, (usually unpleasant), and am paring back the number and type of cameras and film I use. So no, I haven't always got what I expected, and yes, there have been a number of disappointments.

  6. #6
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,247
    When I started out I was mostly surprised with the results I got from color film. I often forgot the changes in color temp during the course of a day from cold to warm (sunset). The surprises weren't bad in fact they were often quiet nice. Also I see neither the image coming straight from the sensor nor the image coming straight from the film as final result. The magic and final results happen at the post-shutterpress stage meaning darkroom/fauxtoshop.
    The neg/file is the basis but not the whole building.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    201
    I try hard to get the image I want from the viewfinder. Most of the times I don´t like the result at all. But if I wait a few days and then look at the image again, I think I start liking it. I might have a problem with too high expectations.

  8. #8
    Alan Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Jersey .........formerly NYC.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    553
    She seems to asking a lot of questions about you. Hmmm.

    That aside, and more to the point of your question, I bracket. That's my chimping. Of course I would do more corrective work immediately if I had a screen to see the shot as I'm shooting. Of course, with digital, I don't take the time to do my best compared to when I'm shooting MF film. Even with bracketing, the pictures often fail. If not with exposures, with just plain content. If I get one good shot on a roll, I'm happy.

  9. #9
    Christopher Walrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In a darkroom far, far away...
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    7,115
    Blog Entries
    30
    Images
    19
    I will say to question number one that I always get what I physically see in the viewfinder. What surprises me is when my associative memories interfere with vision and I am expecting some golden quality that just wasn't stinking there in the first place.

    As to content, I have not had a snowy, blue butt egret enter the scene from the side in the milliseconds that the lens is open only to be there when I am able to view TTL once more. But I am hopeful.

    I do however envy you and your associates' lunchroom chatter. Though entertaining, mine generally consists of bodily sounds and odor. Rather juvenile. Suits me just fine.
    Thank you.
    -CW

    "Wubba, wubba, wubba. Bing, bang, bong. Yuck, yuck, yuck and a fiddle-dee-dee." - The Yeti

  10. #10
    MDR
    MDR is offline
    MDR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Austria
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,247
    Hey Film can beat digital in the realm of instant gratification Polaroid/Fujiroid/Impossible 30 - 60 secs from photo to print. And you can review the final result not the in between.

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin