Hi Pentaxian friends.
Is technology taking our photographic creativity away? Are we better photographers now that we have Digital SLRs that shoot good images in practically total darkness? (The K-5 ISO goes up to 51,200) Nowadays, everything is programmable, from scenes to portraits, from fully auto to fully manual, from fastest to slowest shutter speed, from largest to smallest aperture. Most new DSLRs have shake reduction, live-view, some have lens correction, scene recognition, self-cleaning sensor, etc.
Before giving my opinion on this, I would like to cite a comparison I experienced myself years ago, actually ten years ago. That seems like old school stuff now, but anyway...here goes;
Although photography is my passion now, there was a time when music had priority over my photography. Like many of you readers, I'm a guitar player. I'm not bad, but I'm not about to replace Santana or Eric Clapton. Anyway, about ten years ago, I invested in a home recording studio. I had a couple of keyboards, drum machines, digital recording console, mixers, sound modules, MIDI interfaced Computers and Software and a recording room dedicated to my music projects.
Although photography is my passion now, there was a time when music had priority over my photography. Like many of you readers, I'm a guitar player. I'm not bad, but I'm not about to replace Santana or Eric Clapton. Anyway, about ten years ago, I invested in a home recording studio. I had a couple of keyboards, drum machines, digital recording console, mixers, sound modules, MIDI interfaced Computers and Software and a recording room dedicated to my music projects.
Music: You see, when I was in my late teens / early twenties, I played in a band, back in Montreal. It was great back then. It was during the British invasion, (for those that don't know what that is, it's when the Beatles and Rolling Stones and a plethora of British groups took over the world with their music). Our group had two guitar players (lead and rhythm), a bass guitar player, a keyboard player and a drummer. We all sang, but I was the lead singer and lead guitarist. We traveled all around the Province, on weekends, and played in front of excited and sometimes out-of-control teenagers. Oh! that was the good old days.
...So back to ten years ago, I wanted to recreate that music we played, but I then lived in Oregon and the band members were and still are scattered all over. There were no chances of getting back together. So...I figured that by getting a recording studio, with MIDI instruments, I would be able to recreate each musician's part and blend my voice and guitar parts into the mix. It worked pretty well. I'm not a keyboard player, but with digital keyboards, I was able to play the parts slowly and then bring that up to tempo and pitch using software, similarly to using a word processor package like Microsoft Words. To be precise, I was using a software package called "Cakewalk". I programmed the drum parts and even "humanized" the drums so it wouldn't sound so "digitally-perfect". While recording, I never worried about mistakes and bad notes. Those were corrected after the fact, by inserting the proper notes or licks in just the right place. As for the voice parts, using multi-tracks, I was able to recreate the main voice and add harmony on other tracks. All this led to the grand finale, where I would play my guitar lead part. It was like having my band with me all over again, or so I thought.
I enjoyed doing that for about a year, cutting better and better tracks and programming spectacular music arrangements until one day...I realised I wasn't enjoying playing guitar as much as I wanted to. I was spending most of my time laying down tracks of other instruments parts, correcting the parts, harmonizing, arranging drum tracks, etc. All this programming for weeks on end, to finally playing my guitar part.
I WAS NOT PLAYING MUSIC ANYMORE, I WAS PROGRAMMING MUSIC.
The digital revolution has changed everything we do for the better! Huh...Maybe not. I eventually sold all of my recording equipment and instruments, except for my guitars. I still have many guitars. I don't often have a chance to play with other musicians, but when I play one of my guitar, it's not some kind of programming. My fingers do the playing and the feel comes from my soul. I hope that by now you see the correlation between my musical endeavors and my photographic endeavors.
Photography: I used to have a fully manual Pentax Spotmatic. I had to decide what the aperture was going to be, according to what I wanted to create. I had to measure light with a handheld light meter. Depending on what film I was using, I would set the shutter speed for action or long exposure. There was no anti-shake, no auto-everything. Color films at ISO 400 ( back then is was called ASA) was about as fast you could get. Yet, I enjoyed every seconds I was out taking or should I say making pictures. I got good at it to the point I wouldn't wonder what the images were going to look like after processing, I knew ahead, by intuition and experience.There was no instant viewing and films came in cartridges of 12, 24 or 36 exposures. I would get up at 5:00 A.M and go shoot wildlife in the natural morning golden light and fog. My heart would beat so fast when I knew I had taken a good shot. I couldn't waste any film, so I would meticulously chose my subjects and surroundings. I would come back home around mid-day and develop my color reversal film strips (transparencies, diapositives or slides, as called back then) with E-6 chemical and then, I would enlarge my best images using my Beseler enlarger,with the advanced Dichroic head. I would make 8 x 10 enlargements with cibachrome paper and chemical for better color rendition. My best images were sold at Arts and Craft events and local stores. I lived in Alabama by that time.
Back then, I was really making pictures. I was the master of my camera and images. I was composing every image carefully. I had the craft of photography almost mastered.
Now...I think the Digital cameras are the masters, along with Photoshop and all of the digital innovations. We are the slaves. Yes, the quality of the images is so much superior. Yes, you can make enlargements "poster size" with exceptional clarity. Yes, yes and yes; everything is better...except creativity. Like with my MIDI recording studio, whereas I was programming music, with my DSLRs, I am programming images. We all are and we don't even realize it. When you look back at your images, are they of what you actually shot or are they of what you imagined the scene to be, after changing it with Photoshop? Do you print your images or do you save them on your hard-drive until your computer crashes? I agree that someone with talent and a photographic background or education, can utilize today's tools to further expand their creativity. The majority of the current generation of photographers want a DSLR that is fully auto-everything and one that does the majority of thinking. They prefer exchanging or posting their images through the internet (at a low resolution) or sending images through their cell phones. It's all fine, but it's the camera that is creating and we take the credit.
Go ahead, will you put your DSLR in full manual mode and go create images.
Thank you for reading,
Yvon Bourque
18 comments:
Yvon, Pentax MX is now on its way to me. I plan to mount on it my old trusty A 50/1.2, load it with the roll of Fuji Velvia 100 or Fuji Superia 100 and take it for a walk.
I still opine that for my personal style of shooting likes of K10D are more than enough. Probably even less than K10D, something in between *istD and K10D really.
We must be walking the same path as I too was musician in my early years and after the temp band i was broke away I bought keyboards and Cakewalk and a home studio to add to my singing and guitar playing.
Technology does take the organic out of creativity. There is nothing like getting together with a bunch of musician and creating music.
I only shot film for a while before going into digital. I can say digital is cheaper, its very forgiving, but sometimes all the immediate gratification can spoil a person instead of shooting and waiting for the roll to get process and printed.
But I think these new cameras allow for a lot more creativity and create new forms of art like HDR. For me Pentax actually accentuates my creativity because of it size. It doesn't get in the way the way a bigger heavier camera would. They also allow for more ability to capture the moment at 7 frames per second and 51000 iso. Its just getting better and who knows when it will stop.
Umm... It might seem like you programming your images, but personally I think the good images are far more than just good camera. Give a Nikon D3s to somebody who have no imagination, patience or spontaneity to create good pictures, she won't be able to make one.
But if somebody have the above, but is not a technical person (like many of the girls I've met :)), it's far more easy to them to express themselves.
I've started with analog photography. My granddad was a good photographer, and I spent a lot of time helping him in the darkroom (eeh, the bathroom, to be exact :)). I appreciate darkroom skills. Digital is more accessible, but require the same amount imagination to create art (or even good images).
But that's my opinion :)
I also used a spotmatic for decades, now with my K10D ( it was the flagship when I bought it)I shoot in full manual most of the time. It just seems to make things so simple, if the shot doesn't look right for any reason I know which of the basic three things I need to change... that's it three! It's just like having a spotmatic with instant playback, a histogram and light and dark warning. It's better than yesterdays fully manual...cheating. With a tripod and a few filters and "stuff" I only need imagination.
Boris:
Good luck with the MX. It was a hell of a good camera and still is. It will rejuvenate your creativity.
fRANK d:
We must be twins, we just were never told. :)
tmt:
Digital is definitely cheaper per image. I don't completely agree that a Nikon D3s would make anyone with creativity take great pictures. It takes time and learning composition.
John Taylor Gordon:
I agree with you completely. That is the message of this post. Use the amera in manual mode, chose the aperture, shutter speed and ISO combination to produce the image you want. Add golden rules like the rule-of-third, etc, and make the picture you planned the first time.
I appreciate everyone's comments.
I think you are taking it wrong, i.e. you are misleading the cause with the result. The problem is not that technology is taking the creativity away, as it is just a tool. Jean Michel Jarre's music is not less creative than the one of classic composers (I you doubt it, listen to Oxygene or The Last Rumba). Similarly, photographs taken with DSLRs are no less creative than the one made with 3x5 inch large format camera.
It's all about people and the REAL problem is that advanced equipment is far too easily accessible. In my opinion is anyone is sticking with the "green" mode and using only a kit lens, that he should not have ever buy the DSLR. On the other hand, I have seen wonderful images made with an iphone.
So, the answer to the question "Is technology taking our creativity away?" is No! It only enables non-creative folks to shot pictures that have acceptable technical quality. But, if you really consider taking Photographs seriously think of image first and then use any tool you have(*) to make it. In that sense I think you conclusion is similar to mine.
(*) I should rather say: the tool you can use best. I feel most comfortable with digital and Photoshop (Gimp actually, but it is no difference) that I can use to obtain the effect I want. However, my colleague hates this stuff and prefers film and hours spent in darkroom. But the idea is the same: to use the tool, not to be ruled by it.
Maciek D:
I agree that it's just a tool, but a tool that can take your creativity away by automating almost the whole process. On the other hand, I don't think you could give a DSLR to a monkey and expect good images...I think, but I'm not completly sure. ;)
Yvon,
But look at this from the other side. An advanced camera can help non-techies to focus on the composition, capturing the decisive moment etc. Henri-Cartier Bresson was pre-adjusting his camera settings to the most universal ones (large DOF, average lighting etc.) and did not think on them while making pictures. At the same time Ansel Adams was manually controlling every single parameter of image capture and developing. Both of them were making remarkable pictures, both were astonishingly creative.
Maybe you are right when talking about folks who are just learning. They should indeed check what they can do manually. But once one is proficient, he himself decides whether to use manual mode (like Adams) or automatic (like Bresson). But it have to be a conscious decision of the photographer.
Luckily there is still more to photography than just aperture-exposure-iso settings. No computer will replace photographer's vision (provided he has any, but if not than he should rather go fishing instead of taking photos).
If you set your camera mode on AV for example and perhaps use exposure compensation to fine tune a shot, your camera is still only adusting film speed, shutter speed or f/stop. That is all there is...no magic settings,those are the only real tools the camera has. If you use any other settings( I tend to use auto if I am shooting a birthday party) you are just adding another layer of tools. How often have you messed up a shot because you forgot that you had left your camera in some custom setting. Composition is not dependent on camera settings...only painting with light is. Yvon is correct that you should use things like "thirds" but you can do that in any mode. I recommend shooting twilight pictures with a tripod to test your "tools" and create photos with beauty and feeling.
Still I'm sure new photographers without the film experience of Yvon and me will learn to use their tools just fine. But I can't help thinking they will sometimes be left wondering why a shot didn't work. Maybe it was the cameras fault : )
Maciek D,
So many ways to come to a conclusion on this. Give a brand new Nascar racing car to a person with excellent driving records and put then in a race. Do you think they will even complete the race? I would think there would be a long learning curve to that.They actually need to know a lot about mechanic so they know what to do not to ruin the engine, etc. Put a kid in front of a video car racing game. He will master it pretty quick but does he compare to a real nascar drivers?
I don't think that any camera can help anyone to make better image compositions. Make better exposure, focus on faces without even thinking about it, yes. It's only on who's face it will be focussing. Any camera can be used as a point and shoot in full auto mode.
If photography is p&s for you any camera will work. On the other hand if you want to show the world how you see it (or would want it to be) you'll have to figure out what composition is.
Yesterday, for the first time since 2002, I took photographs with film.
I'm sat here now with the pictures on the desk feeling really pleased with myself.
They weren't special pictures, I went out to test an old Praktica MTL50 with my favourite Helios 44-2 lens and used a cheap roll of Kodak ISO200 film, I just shot pictures for the sake of it and noted down the settings I used.
But I enjoyed the whole experience, I had to concentrate even more that when I use a manual focus lens on my K10. I had to remember to wind the film on, and I kept trying to chimp the black leatherette back of the Praktica!
Why do I feel so pleased with myself though? because out of a 24 exposure film I got 23 sharp, and decently exposed pictures.
With the K10 I can do the same 2 hour walk and come back with 124 pictures, all stored on a hard drive and barely seen.
I would like to exchange links with your site pentaxdslrs.blogspot.com
Is this possible?
I think technology has taken away much from much of the average shooters creativity. The late great Herbert Keppler observed that composition was lost because people used the autofocus point as their center of interest, and too many images ended up with the subject smack in the center of the image.
The same applies to auto exposure, black rocks turn grey and white snow also. Every thing is on cruise controll and no one is really driving these days.
Anonymous said...
"I would like to exchange links with your site pentaxdslrs.blogspot.com
Is this possible?"
It is indeed possible, but I need to check if your site complements this Pentax Blogsite. You can send me a link to it at brqyvn@gnail.com
Michael Perham,
Well said.
Michael Perham, I don't agree with you. What you writing about is really just a luck of SKILL and not some magic impact of technology. If people cannot adjust correctly exposure (to have the snow white and rocks black) or make proper composition after focusing, then they would not make any image in the old days when you had to do everything manually.
I repeat: the real problem is not that the technology takes creativity away, but that it makes people think they can make photos while they obviously don't.
Now we have better, more sophisticated tools, but we still have to LEARN to use them.
Unless you are talking about the cheap point-and-shot cameras, where you can manually adjust nothing... My photography teacher told that the equipment simply must not be an obstacle in making pictures.
And one word to Anonymous: I am happy that you liked shooting with your film camera. However, it is not true that with K10D you can simply snap 124 shots, store them in hard drive and barely see them. As a competent photographer, you still should choose 10 best ones (and in my opinion sharp and decently exposed is not enough to call the photo a really good one) and PRINT them. And trash the rest!
From my perspective, the biggest impediment to fully manual operation comparably facile to earlier film SLR cameras is the lack of quick, reliable manual focus.
We need an option for something faster and more decisive and positive, such as ground glass screen with a central split image central portion.
Merely electronically enlarging a central area on an LCD is not sufficient but it certainly is slower. A physically longer focus range would also help precision.
This is actually my biggest gripe about current high end cameras. We can deal with exposure issues by using the spot metering option.
Post a Comment