|
|
Well... I'm not quite dead yet. Although, I'm quite certain I will be one day. But I love photography and believe in the philosophy of taking time to frame and compose a shot regardless of the technology being used. I'm a huge fan of Ansel Adams and the Zone system.
I agree that digital technology has made people lazy and has taken away from the real skill required to shoot well. This is why all of my shots are still considered and rarely altered in Photoshop. I have embraced both technologies, developing my own negs and prints early on and now enjoy the immediacy of viewing my shots digitally. No one comments on how well you've Photoshopped your shot. So I strive to get it right in the camera so I won't need to Photoshop it.
Also, make no mistake, digital shooting has its challenges as well. First off it lacks the colour latitude and fidelity of film. This is just simple physics and math. But done right, digital offers beauty nearly equal to film. Both technologies offer benefits and negatives and is a matter of personal choice and how one wants to work.
The only area in which digital helps photographers today is in exposure settings. Computerization ensures that the shooter always gets atleast a mediocre shot if not a properly exposed one. However, both technologies still require an eye for composition and can't be cheated. Digital cameras don't compose the shot for you yet. I shoot digital now but most of the time use fully manually settings to get the exposure I really want. Ie. thinking about shadow and highlight detail, as well as aperture for depth of field.
So please don't knock digital photography. But instead knock the shooters who don't care to take the time to learn the basics that apply to both technologies. They're not real photographers and it shows in their work.
Cheers, Osku
ages ago
(permalink)
|
