The Hidden Dangers of “Going Digital” In Photography!

An article.

From the article:

Link:

http://2009seniorportr​aits.com …tal-in-photography-2.html

(This almost reads like a Rockwell piece).

Ye gods. He needs to back off on the Shift key to make his tripe more readable

Was there actually some point in that mess? I missed it.

I had to check the date of that article, I was not sure if it was from 2001 or something... get with the times!

gonzogolf wrote in post #9853183
Was there actually some point in that mess? I missed it.

Yes, I think there was: self-promotion.

I swear, this almost reads like a Ken R. piece. The first word that popped into my mind was "pseudonym" (for Ken R.). Perhaps this guy realized that, like him or not, KR makes money from his stuff and decided to give it a try.

If you guys like it or not, he has a point. Especially with this one:

I'm in this business long enough, that I know at least few things. And unfortunately things really go this way. Noone (ok almost noone) bothers to do a bit more and shoot so, that photos would be good straight out of camera. Whole lot of people depends on raw, clone tools in PS, and delete button, not on their knowledge and their ability to take good photos.
I see this almost daily when people are asking me to work for us. They show some great/good/not so great photos, but almost always they are photos from someone who ranked 60th (we are sport agency). When I ask where's winner, answer is normally "Oh that one didn't work out good". I believe getting one good photo out of 500 sh***ty ones is no big deal, but that doesn't mean you are good. And that's what he is telling too. So in my mind, he has a point.

primoz wrote in post #9853332
If you guys like it or not, he has a point. Especially with this one:


I'm in this business long enough, that I know at least few things. And unfortunately things really go this way. Noone (ok almost noone) bothers to do a bit more and shoot so, that photos would be good straight out of camera. Whole lot of people depends on raw, clone tools in PS, and delete button, not on their knowledge and their ability to take good photos.
I see this almost daily when people are asking me to work for us. They show some great/good/not so great photos, but almost always they are photos from someone who ranked 60th (we are sport agency). When I ask where's winner, answer is normally "Oh that one didn't work out good". I believe getting one good photo out of 500 sh***ty ones is no big deal, but that doesn't mean you are good. And that's what he is telling too. So in my mind, he has a point.

You need to re-post this into one of the many threads about how GWC's are killing photography for the pros! You're describing one of the ways to distinguish yourself from the GWCs and such.

That article is really really bad - it does read like KR.

primoz wrote in post #9853332
If you guys like it or not, he has a point. Especially with this one:


I'm in this business long enough, that I know at least few things. And unfortunately things really go this way. Noone (ok almost noone) bothers to do a bit more and shoot so, that photos would be good straight out of camera. Whole lot of people depends on raw, clone tools in PS, and delete button, not on their knowledge and their ability to take good photos.
I see this almost daily when people are asking me to work for us. They show some great/good/not so great photos, but almost always they are photos from someone who ranked 60th (we are sport agency). When I ask where's winner, answer is normally "Oh that one didn't work out good". I believe getting one good photo out of 500 sh***ty ones is no big deal, but that doesn't mean you are good. And that's what he is telling too. So in my mind, he has a point.

I would agree with you Primoz.

To be good needs skill and dedication. It is not only the ability to have good gear but to know how to use it that will give results.

A good pro will anticipate and know when "peak action" is whether that is landscape (sky detail), sports (catching the dunk or rounding the gate), birding etc.

A bad pro will just mash the button at 10 FPS and hope he gets "peak action"

This guy has a point. A really good one too! In the past year or so i have pretty much set aside my 40D (Except for times when its absolutely necessary) and shot a TON of film and my skills and appreciation for photography have grown tremendously. My composition, timing, and overall knowledge of how a camera truly operates has also gotten better with film practice. Shooting film feels like an art to me while digital is just convenient. For some reason nowadays whenever i see a middle aged fat guy walking around with a big 70-2002.8 on his FF camera i just snicker because i have met so many people just like that who don't know how to operate half the features of the equipment they have around their neck. I am content knowing i can push my 40D to its max and don't feel the need to drop thousands of dollars on equipment to take better photographs. I make the stuff i have work.

If I was ever looking for someone to take my picture, I'd look far away from this guy, as his use of capital letters just pisses me off to no end.


And edit:

The medium doesn't matter. If you're good, you can take just as good of a shot with film as you can with digital. Every medium's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness. Digital is fast, easy, widely available...That's the best and worst thing about it. Film is slow, deliberate, demanding of the user. That's the best and worst thing about it.

pryan9 wrote in post #9854331
For some reason nowadays whenever i see a middle aged fat guy walking around with a big 70-2002.8 on his FF camera i just snicker because i have met so many people just like that who don't know how to operate half the features of the equipment they have around their neck. I am content knowing i can push my 40D to its max and don't feel the need to drop thousands of dollars on equipment to take better photographs. I make the stuff i have work.

Keep thinking that way if it makes you feel better. I personally presume the best of people unless and until they prove me otherwise. Just because someone can and does drop thousand of dollars on equipment, it doesn't mean they're not making their stuff work. I've met "middle aged fat guys with expensive gear" that know their gear and know what they're talking about.

Personally I dont care what anyone shoots - shoot film, digital, Xray, whatever works for you!

If people buy gear and dont use it to its best but are happy - let them be.
If people cant afford the gear but push the equipment they have and are happy - let them be.

I'm quite happy being one of the guys that can spend a decent amount on gear (but I do know how to use it)

He kind of contradicts himself. Saying that it's not really any cheaper, and then stating that the reason digital is so popular is because it's affordable?

Also, his little rant about how if you get a low end camera you can only see the images as a 2" thumbnails. I have seen a decent amount of large prints (12x18 - 20-30) made from not so great P&S's.

I think that as a pro, if you not shooting Digital theres something wrong. Maybe just my opinion. Though there is still market for medium and large format photographers.

Just my 2 cents.

After reading the article all I can think of is... Here is another pro photographer whining because digital levels the playing field and he's pulling out the "You didn't learn on film so you suck" card and he has no clue how to re-invent himself.

The whole "save money" argument is a straw man hand has nothing to do with anything. You don't need to invest a lot of $$$ to get decent pics. He has chosen to as many do. And I have no idea what the whole cell phone camera thing is about.

The whole save/delete thing is also a bunch of hogwash. Being able to see a pic immediatly and make adjustments accordingly is the best way to learn. He should have brought up that back in the film days, (yes.. I shot film for many years) that if you did not keep a very accurate record of every shot that there was no way to know what you screwed up in the first place and very little learning took place at all.

And then we find out the true reason of the article. He's pushing a marketing class to wedding photogs. Got-ya...

pryan9 wrote in post #9854331
For some reason nowadays whenever i see a middle aged fat guy walking around with a big 70-2002.8 on his FF camera i just snicker because i have met so many people just like that who don't know how to operate half the features of the equipment they have around their neck. I am content knowing i can push my 40D to its max and don't feel the need to drop thousands of dollars on equipment to take better photographs. I make the stuff i have work.

Good for you.

Speaking as a middle-aged fat guy who owns the 70-200/2.8 IS I'm also quite capable of making the stuff I have work too, so snicker all you want.