Whatever happened to Camera-craft?

chuckles

chuckles

Messages
4,463
Name
Barry
Edit My Images
Yes
I was at Bempton Cliffs yesterday and was amazed at the plethora of big lenses, etc. Walking along the cliff top footpath, loads of toggers were getting their BIFs.

I then heard all the shutters - 10+ fps - it was like quiet machines guns! Add into the mix - Servo focussing, fast ISO, huge memory cards and IS or VR. What has photography come to? Is it just a case of being there with an emptied wallet?

I then pondered over the abilities of two photography Craftsmen whose work I've always admired - Eric Hosking and Stephen Dalton. How did they managed with just 36 shots per roll?

So, it begs the question - What has become of camera-craft?
 
If it's there then people will use it. Evolution takes place in everything around us and it's simply evolution based on the technology available. In 50 years someone will be on here saying the same thing about the same sceanrio with the exception that it's now 1 million FPS with frackus-plasma-smell-inducing-pixel-shaping-scooby-doos. It happens. With the evolution of technology it's your choice to follow it or not just like it happened with film and digital.
 
YoshiK1 said:
If it's there then people will use it. Evolution takes place in everything around us and it's simply evolution based on the technology available. In 50 years someone will be on here saying the same thing about the same sceanrio with the exception that it's now 1 million FPS with frackus-plasma-smell-inducing-pixel-shaping-scooby-doos. It happens. With the evolution of technology it's your choice to follow it or not just like it happened with film and digital.
Click to expand...

I guess so.... takes the skill away though.

simonblue said:
I still shoot like i am using film,if i go to a place and their a lot of photographers about i usually move on,and see if i can come to the subject in a different way :)
Click to expand...

You and me both.
 
These days, I think its pretty much just the case that, people dont 'need' to learn the more traditional ways because of the advances made in camera/processing technology.

What we have now is quick, and convenient, so the majority of people dont see the point in looking backwards. There are plenty of this type of thread on here, the most recent of which was regarding the processing of shots (adding skies etc), and that thread went downhill pretty quickly, so I hope this one doesnt go the same way (y).
 
You could say that the photo will always be the same but the equipment will change. Obviously the images will get sharper, more dynamic range etc as technology advances but essentially you're just getting better tools to get the same image. You could also say that it's inspiring more creativity because someone will always be looking at different ways to beat other images and do things better. If technology didn't advance you could you might think that the catalogue of photos taken to date would all be the same with barely any differences with the exception of angles.

.....Maybe food for thought.
 
Ed Sutton said:
Craft and skill always were overrated. People looking at pictures only care about what they look like.
Click to expand...
I agree, but there is a sense of enjoyment and pride you can get by using good "camera-craft" and basic kit to get the results. Obviously doesn't matter one jot to the end viewer as you say, but it may matter to the photographer.
 
Everyone finds different enjoyment out of using cameras. There is nothing wrong with people wanting to rattle off 10fps or ponder a shot every hour. Neither is better than the other! The folks shooting speedy FPS may well know the the craft far better than most, but choose to shoot faster. It's all good. I'm sure people make up their own mind with me depending on whether I carry a rangefinder or an SLR with a massive lens. Thankfully it's not something anyone should lose sleep over!
 
chuckles said:
I was at Bempton Cliffs yesterday and was amazed at the plethora of big lenses, etc. Walking along the cliff top footpath, loads of toggers were getting their BIFs.

I then heard all the shutters - 10+ fps - it was like quiet machines guns! Add into the mix - Servo focussing, fast ISO, huge memory cards and IS or VR. What has photography come to? Is it just a case of being there with an emptied wallet?

I then pondered over the abilities of two photography Craftsmen whose work I've always admired - Eric Hosking and Stephen Dalton. How did they managed with just 36 shots per roll?

So, it begs the question - What has become of camera-craft?
Click to expand...

What has become of camera craft? It's been replaced with post processing and wide dynami range digital files that cover up a multitude of sins.

However... having said that, technical skills don't make good photographs. They make technically good photographs, but they are so often monotonous, derivative crap.
 
chuckles said:
I then pondered over the abilities of two photography Craftsmen whose work I've always admired - Eric Hosking and Stephen Dalton. How did they managed with just 36 shots per roll?

So, it begs the question - What has become of camera-craft?
Click to expand...

there was an article in OP on this where steve young was saying that standards were much higher now, and that the shots he'd acheived of a WSE inflight back in film days were no longer comercially viable against whats possible with today's cameras

end of the day the camera is just a tool - the craft is in how you use it (including using the new developments available to you) - if Hosking and Dalton had had 12fps and 500 shots per card available to them , and lightroom etc for post processing they'd have used them.

The only dimunition in camera craft is in people who think that burst and PP replaces ability rather than being in addition to it - they are the ones in film days who ripped through a roll of 36 on motorordrive and still didnt get anything useable
 
Ed Sutton said:
Craft and skill always were overrated. People looking at pictures only care about what they look like.
Click to expand...

And perhaps that statement begs another question - does what the picture look like depend on craft and skill?

I'll stick my neck out and suggest that the machine gun approach (which is partly what was implied in the OP) derives from a lack of imagination - the inability to predict what the finished result will look like. Does being able to accurately predict results imply skill?

I suspect that there are simply more people using cameras now that they are so much cheaper than they used to be, with no film costs to be factored in either; and the number of craftsmen is still about the same.
 
The high framerate replaces the luck!

You were at the right place. You spotted the right subject. You framed it well. And then you pressed the button just at the wrong split second. Unlucky.

Up your odds. And don't miss the shot.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
big soft moose said:
there was an article in OP on this where steve young was saying that standards were much higher now, and that the shots he'd acheived of a WSE inflight back in film days were no longer comercially viable against whats possible with today's cameras
Click to expand...

But that's not skill.... that's the cameras.
 
Pookeyhead said:
But that's not skill.... that's the cameras.
Click to expand...

its both - only the skillful get the best shots - some twerp with all the gear and no idea isnt going to get bif shots like Steve youngs , but Steve gets better shots now than he did 20 years ago
 
big soft moose said:
its both - only the skillful get the best shots - some twerp with all the gear and no idea isnt going to get bif shots like Steve youngs , but Steve gets better shots now than he did 20 years ago
Click to expand...

Exactly... so because the images are better is not really skill then is it? If the same photographer couldn't get the shots 20 years ago, then what allows him to get the shots now, is the gear.

Photography is much easier now than it was pre-digital. It just is. That's all I'm saying. The majority of mainstream commercial, wedding, social photographers now for instance... They'd be ****ed if they had to shoot film. Photography requires less actual photographic skill these days in order to get acceptable results.

I was shooting then, and I'm shooting now. It's much easier now.

It doesn't matter though... because photographic skill is often not what makes shots interesting any way. As cameras make it easier for the less skilled to create acceptable work, and the Flickrverse fills up with decorative art, the more people will get fed up of seeing it. This is why it's so hard to sell such work these days: Anyone can do it. It's worthless now.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Photography is much easier now than it was pre-digital. It just is.
Click to expand...

That's true, but it's not just a digital thing.

Film was easier than glass plate, auto exposure was easier than manual, auto focus was easier than manual. Digital added convenience to that list and made instant review easier than it was with Polaroid.

Digital is definitely easier and more convenient than film ever was (I'm not giving up film though!).


Steve.
 
chuckles said:
I was at Bempton Cliffs yesterday and was amazed at the plethora of big lenses, etc. Walking along the cliff top footpath, loads of toggers were getting their BIFs.

I then heard all the shutters - 10+ fps - it was like quiet machines guns! Add into the mix - Servo focussing, fast ISO, huge memory cards and IS or VR. What has photography come to? Is it just a case of being there with an emptied wallet?

I then pondered over the abilities of two photography Craftsmen whose work I've always admired - Eric Hosking and Stephen Dalton. How did they managed with just 36 shots per roll?

So, it begs the question - What has become of camera-craft?
Click to expand...

Nice to know two of the greats have not been forgotten,
 
Nothing happened to camera craft. There are people today just as technically skilled at operating a camera as anyone from the past.

In much the same way, there are people who are not technically adept, just as there always has been. Look around, there are piles of good photographs, and many more crap photographs - both taken on whizz-bang computer cameras, and on black boxes with a hole in the front.

More people owning cameras, and cameras being more technologically advanced doesn't have anything to do with whether people are skilled or not.

On a related note, as mentioned already, the technical operation of a camera has very little to do with good photography anyway.
 
Steve Smith said:
That's true, but it's not just a digital thing.

Film was easier than glass plate, auto exposure was easier than manual, auto focus was easier than manual. Digital added convenience to that list and made instant review easier than it was with Polaroid.

Digital is definitely easier and more convenient than film ever was (I'm not giving up film though!).


Steve.
Click to expand...


I agree completely. I'm not saying it's a bad thing actually. The easier the better. I look forward to the day when everyone in the whole world can take technically brilliant photographs. That way all that separates good from bad is content and not aesthetic. I think that will be a good thing.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I look forward to the day when everyone in the whole world can take technically brilliant photographs.
Click to expand...

I think that has already happened as far as trechnical quality is concerned. As long as there is enough light, the camera's automation will sort out exposure and focusing in 99% of cases.

All people have to do now is point it at something interesting!! (this often appears to be more of a challenge than any of the technical stuff).

Steve.
 
Steve-T said:
Modern cameras make things easier yes but then the skilled photographers up their game and produce even better shots.
Click to expand...

Is there evidence of this? I think top level photographers have created great work regardless of the technology used for many years now. Equally, technology plays no part in the mediocre efforts at the other end of the scale.


Steve.
 
Technology has made traditional skills in many trades redundant - not just in photography. There's no point in harking back to 'the good old days', they aren't coming back. Cameras can now, with relatively little human input, reliably produce technically brilliant photographs and what's wrong with that? If you want to spend hours playing around with glass plates or in a darkroom, fine, there's nothing wrong with that either, but it's not a superior way of producing photographs.

It's not the process you use to produce the photograph that matters, it's the content, and the ability and skill to get that right hasn't been changed by technology.
 
Interesting thoughts... too many to respond to individually. I wonder whether Photography will become known as "Image Making".

I cut my photographic teeth years ago and it was relatively easy to stand out from the crowd because of what I've termed, camera-craft, so I do know how things have changed.

I look at my work and there is a definite move to more image-making rather than technically perfect shots obtained through camera craft. Nowadays I'm noticing with other photographers it's more of an expensive 'point-and-shoot' brigade.... it's the final product which counts I suppane. I guess this is what happens as you age! I'm no technophobe, not by a long way but there is an inward satisfaction of capturing images 'the old way'. Thank goodness.
 
Q. Are people saying that having high frame rate capability has no disadvantage or negative side effect to photography? Is anything getting worse? Including peoples behaviour?
 
parkmoy said:
---clip---

It's not the process you use to produce the photograph that matters, it's the content, and the ability and skill to get that right hasn't been changed by technology.
Click to expand...

Do you think? How about manually focussing for a bird in flight shot against Continuous/Servo predictive auto-focussing? Surely, that's a camera process.

I'd challenge any photographer to get that right on a high %age good hit ratio. Don't get me wrong though - I'm not at advocating a return to old technology. I wouldn't have liked to have gone to all the effort I did on Wednesday and end up with nothing in the bag! (Yes, I did use so many fps and AF - just as I had an MD12 on my much missed Nikon FE2!)
 
ianp5a said:
Q. Are people saying that having high frame rate capability has no disadvantage or negative side effect to photography? Is anything getting worse? Including peoples behaviour?
Click to expand...

Dunno.... I know 10 fps takes longer to sort out in LR :whistle:
 
If you look at Wildlife photography, TV programmes etc., you can see that modern technology has allowed "camera craft" to move to a level that was not attainable even 5 or 10 years ago.

The same with Wildlife photography

Camera craft is still there and some talented and fortunate people have it in spades - but technology has allowed them to enter areas that were not possible a few years ago

Long may technological development continue and be available to all at reasonable prices

IMHO
 
Last edited:
I think you make a very valid point Bill - those 'older stagers' have you used their camera-crafts, married that to newer technology and produced some Master-pieces.

As somebody said earlier it would be interesting to see Hoskings would have produced nowadays.... fortunately we can see what Stephen Dalton can do (and it's pretty awesome!)
 
Last edited:
chuckles said:
Interesting thoughts... too many to respond to individually. I wonder whether Photography will become known as "Image Making".
s.
Click to expand...

it always has been- literally speaking it means painting with light
 
Morning,

Years ago I used to do the football for the local teams, (pre Premier League, so old First Division), and I was asked recently to do some game pictures of my daughters team in-play. Hadn't done it for years, lost the inclination.

I found it so much easier with modern AF gear, took a while to get my eye-in as it were, but for me, so much easier, so much I didn't have to consider.

As ever, just my experience...

Mike
 
But, could you have achieved it with your old gear? My experience suggests you would, just the same as me - I'll concede the point that it's easier though.

I think you're just proving the point that it is a craft and, as a craft, is slowing vanishing - just as Thatchers, Wood-turners, Farriers, Blacksmiths, Coopers, Wheelwrights, etc.
 
I agree chuckles, I see lots of nicely focussed and exposed pictures of all subjects, but don't see many I'd want on my wall...

Do it with the old gear, (f1s and A1s)? Not a chance, eyes not what they were, I love my AF now!

Mike
 
10fps shooting is nothing new though... 1995 canon launched the EOS-1N RS - 10fps on 35mm film... AF that carried over into the first couple of EOS-1 digital generations... of course you only had just over 3 seconds of burst mode before you had to put another roll of film in, but they were quite a machine for their time...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top