DailyShooter
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
gdanmitchell wrote:
Once while out photographing I had a long and pleasant conversation with someone who was more comfortable sticking with his older perspective and not trying to understand more accurately how things work with newer tools. The reason it was pleasant is because he didn't take the "you young-ins are idiots and my way is the only way" approach. Instead he said — and I agreed with him — that her had shot and processed using film-based photography for years, he had tried to make the transition to newer photographic technologies, they didn't make sense to him, and he was just more comfortable continuing to work with film.
I thought that was a great perspective — that he was comfortable doing what he was familiar with and that he didn't need to attack everyone else who was moving on. Note also that I felt no need to challenge his preference. We share a pleasant 10-15 minutes chatting at a turnout overlooking a beautiful Sierra Nevada viewpoint that we were both photographing.
That conversation coalesced a thought that I had based on interactions with another photographer I know who has a long and respected career as a well-known landscape photographer (mostly — he is also known for a highly regarded project photographing NASA stuff) and former Ansel assistant who works (almost) entirely with optical/chemical photography. This person is among those who has inspired me, and I eventually realized that continuing to rely on the traditional processes made complete sense for him — he had mastered those tools in the service of his vision, and there was little reason to go in a different direction. (To be fair, he does know about digital techniques and they are part of his workshops — for example, some time ago he was scanning negatives, printing large versions of them on digital printers and making very large contact prints. But, again, I digress...)
In fact, none of the photographers I know in the real world — as opposed to this virtual, semi-anonymous online world — gets into these heated, insulting, attack-trading screaming matches that too many threads turn into. We all use different equipment, different techniques, and photograph different things... but rather than railing against what our acquaintances do we (mostly) are just interested in how they operate or (if it is too much) we just subtly roll our eyes and move on.
FWIW....Show more →
Context, Dan.
I'd have respond in the same way you did, regarding that 15-minute conversation with that other photographer, and in that context.
But this is a canon photography forum, and if one is a member, then it is safe to assume that one is very likely into photography, progress, attaining better, and aspiring to do better, and the exchange of truth. Sure, there are those who do not fit this mold, but most do.
So in that context...I respond as I do. There are thousands of silent readers, many who are new to photography, learning, hungry for advice, for the truth...shall we let them think that blown highlights can be recovered?
This is not Facebook, nor LinkedIn where millions of pictures of cats, family vacations, and landscapes are shared, exchanged, and commented on. For that context, my comments are very, very graceful, forgiving, light, and nice.
Context...
Edited on May 30, 2023 at 10:12 AM · View previous versions
|
