As usual Moose says what many of us might have said, if we were as
thoughtful and generous with ourselves as he is. Another very nice
contribution to the other people on the list the list, Moose.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Mar 30, 2006, at 3:31 AM, Moose wrote:
> Paul Braun wrote:
>> In the past, I could look at all the photos posted here, a lot of
>> really
>> excellent shots, and could say to myself, "Well, I do have the OM4Ti,
>> but I don't have experience with the fancier, more specialized
>> films and
>> processing that they do." And could hide behind that excuse for
>> why my
>> photos are decent, but not remarkable.
>>
>> Now, I have the same "film" and same "developing equipment" as
>> everyone
>> else, so no more excuses.
> Unless you are in the business of selling photos, isn't the most
> important thing whether you like your results? Or even just the
> process?
> What does it matter what others think?
>
> I have on occasion posted shots that just knock me out - to complete
> silence from the list. But when I go back to look at them again to see
> what's wrong with them, I usually agree with my first assessment.
>
> There are also occasionally, but not often, I must say, shots posted
> here that I think are junk I would just toss if I took them. Yet
> others,
> including presumably the photographer/poster, like them a great deal.
>
> Taste is a funny thing, and part of what makes the world so
> interesting.
>
> AG posts some excellent B&W shots, then comes back and puts them
> down as
> derivative and not furthering the art - after several folks post
> positive comments about them. If I set my goals based on matching what
> someone else has done, and don't achieve it in my own eyes, perhaps
> it's
> because I might better serve myself by creating something that pleases
> my own instincts, rather than some external standard.
>
> I can see what AG is talking about, and yet, what is completely new?
> What does advancing the art mean? Those are really internal standards
> within himself.
>
> I recently have been scanning some decades old film I shot. I look and
> see many shots of the same things I shoot today. Todays shots are
> sometimes technically better, as I've learned a bit and have beter
> equipment and film, but essentially the same. I go out and see a
> pretty
> flower, know I shot one like it last year and shoot it again. And when
> the shot comes up with the look I was trying for, I still get pleasure
> out of the process and the results. So someone else might say I'm not
> progressing, and I wonder where it is I'm supposed to be going. I get
> joy out of the process, why should I care?
>> Time to really buckle down, study and learn,
>>
> The way you put it, it sounds more like work than pleasure. But that's
> just one person's opinion.
>> and blow off a couple thousand shots to analyze what I can do better.
>> Fortunately, it won't cost me a couple grand in developing to do
>> that.
>>
> I'm not personally convinced that is the best way to learn. With
> digital, I have certainly taken more chances than I would have with
> processing costs in mind before, with some occasionally great results.
> In fact, the ratio of keepers in certain types has convinced me I
> should have been less careful and cheap with film. And I have taken
> series of shots with slight variations to learn how the DSLR is
> different in things like exposure and DOF from a film SLR. Multiple
> shots where shutter speed is slow to get a sharp one out of many can
> work too, but the others just go in the bit bucket.
>
> On the other hand, I don't shoot thousands of photos at random and
> I get
> a great deal of pleasure out of the process of working in the digital
> darkroom with those shots I've visualized and shot with care to
> optimize
> the result I wanted when I took the shot. I sometimes find myself
> thinking "I should take some more shots here, it's free and maybe that
> will improve the end result.", but mostly, I just can't see it and I'm
> content to take the one or two. Generally, I get what I want and
> when I
> don't, more shots usually wouldn't have helped. Just because one can
> take endless shots doesn't mean it's the best thing to do. For one
> thing, it ends up taking up a lot of time going through the "ok,
> but who
> cares?" shots and deciding which to keep and which to dump.
>
> I know I waste time when I thing I should be taking pictures
> because I'm
> somewhere scenic, or some such, but there is nothing that visually
> excites me or that I can see as an image that will work - then I shoot
> off a bunch of pics that later just waste space and time. Those are
> times when I ry to be wise enough to just enjoy the moment and rest
> the
> camera.
>
> A ramblin' Moose
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|