p.3 #1 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
Almost the only time I hear about loving the "shooting experience" is with Leica shooters, looking for a reason to keep a camera with lenses that are front focused and who couldn't take an in-focus photo if their life depended on it they need SOMETHING to like!
p.3 #2 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
During the C19 lockdown when everything was closed, I remember walking my dog around my walkable neighourhood, with plenty of folks around. And I was noticing how complete strangers were slowly becoming more welcoming and chatty. My guess is that we all were starting to crave human connection.
So I began taking my camera with me on these walks, I'd approach someone friendly-looking, and we'd do a mini photo session on the spot. I still remember this older gentleman who sat on the front porch in a commanding pose, overlooking the scene in front of him. He invited me over to show off his old camera collection and the photos he took on his tours (he was a jazz musician prior to retiring). He posed for me while cracking jokes nonstop. Later, I printed the best shot and hand-delivered it to him, and we had another fun conversation with his adult son joining.
This was awesome, and frankly I can't imagine how that portrait (photo) by itself could beat the experience of getting to know that wonderful stranger.
p.3 #4 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
RoamingScott wrote:
Almost the only time I hear about loving the "shooting experience" is with Leica shooters, looking for a reason to keep a camera with lenses that are front focused and who couldn't take an in-focus photo if their life depended on it they need SOMETHING to like!
Then you’re biased. It’s used a lot more and refers to many cameras and lenses. Bird photographers shooting a diving bird at high speed talk as much about the fun of it as Leica shooters about their rangefinder experience.
p.3 #8 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
This is a really open ended question. I find it much more enjoyable to shoot a little Rollei 35 than an Olympus XA, and I like the sound of a Nikonos shutter more than a F3 shutter. Is that the experience? Or, if I'm by myself, I can get lost looking at things and shooting, but if I'm with a group of people, shooting pictures is pretty self indulgent. So is the experience the picture taking or the interpersonal dynamic?
Another direction.
I've started culling through my images. I started with 4x5 images from Glacier National Park in the 2000s. I'm trying to pick a group of oh 10-12 images, a "show," although I have no gallery or wall space to "show them." I'll just print them and they'll get stored away. It's just a thing I'm enjoying. I have plenty of 120 and digital images from Glacier that are probably better images, but I'm starting with the 4x5 since they're important to me.
I bring it up because if you work backwards and think of the "show" first, I'd probably shoot differently. I have a friend that works that way. He comes up with an idea for a set of images and then goes and works on that idea. It's like he thinks of images on a gallery wall and a year or two later he has a killer set that hangs together. I've always shot what I found interesting and now I'm trying to find "something."
p.3 #9 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
Nifty Fifty wrote:
Just taking pictures indoors all the time gets boring after a while, I think. And what's the point of carrying a camera around if not to take pictures?
It was a joke. Apparently not a good one. I use a big camera most of the time to shoot mostly local wildlife with. It's a pain to carry around it draws attention to you and makes you look like a big dork. Fortunately I'm generally shooting in nature preserves with enough other camera laden nerds to divert attention away from me.
I have been mulling around the idea of getting a much smaller retro-styled camera with a strong hipster vibe for going into the city (Chicago).
p.3 #10 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
Both are very important for me. Getting the photo certainly, if you go out and get crappy photo, why bother (except hopefully as learning curve so you get better).
I hate going to the same place and keep shooting the same thing over and over and photography really inspire me to travel and go to different places all over the world. This part I contribute to part of shooting experience.
I just came back from a trip shooting snow leopards in India. It was 4000m altitude, -10 to -20c degree and snow leopard were all long distance because we pretty much shooting from the opposite of of a ravine most of the time. IQ wise, picture was so so, not as good as typical African safari for example but the experience was priceless. Seeing those rare creatures 5 out of 6 days there was a treat.
p.3 #11 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
The experience aspect is lost on me. I’m an energy conserver. I’m in the get the photo camp.
DWOfPaul wrote:
When taking photos for yourself, do you find yourself prioritizing getting the photo or the experience of getting the photo?
For example, do you find yourself gravitating towards superzooms that let you capture a larger variety of photos quicker, or do you prefer sticking with a few MF primes because you enjoy the experience better, even if you miss some photo opportunities along the way? Similarly, on the camera side, do you prefer a larger camera with better AF, higher FPS, and more features, or a smaller, lighter, and more portable camera?
p.3 #12 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
Grenache wrote:
Maybe a different way to think about it is that the best gear in a shoot allows you to forget about the gear…basically to be confident that it will deliver.
Ironically, that does not mean that the gear doesn’t add to the experience. It instead means that it enables the experience NOT to be about the gear.
I would rather think about the gear prior to purchase than while I am shooting.
I think, based partly on my photography background but also on my music background, that while good “instruments” are not unimportant, they don’t do much of anything to get you to that “forget about gear” point. That comes from a whole lot of doing, to the point that you think consciously less and less about the mechanics of the doing.
p.3 #13 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
DWOfPaul wrote:
When taking photos for yourself, do you find yourself prioritizing getting the photo or the experience of getting the photo?
For example, do you find yourself gravitating towards superzooms that let you capture a larger variety of photos quicker, or do you prefer sticking with a few MF primes because you enjoy the experience better, even if you miss some photo opportunities along the way? Similarly, on the camera side, do you prefer a larger camera with better AF, higher FPS, and more features, or a smaller, lighter, and more portable camera?
Small MF primes 98% of the time-
I also prioritize the expirence I am doing and have the camera be part of that expirence. I don’t care about the shot unless its something I am doing and enjoying myself-
p.3 #14 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
gdanmitchell wrote:
I think, based partly on my photography background but also on my music background, that while good “instruments” are not unimportant, they don’t do much of anything to get you to that “forget about gear” point. That comes from a whole lot of doing, to the point that you think consciously less and less about the mechanics of the doing.
While I do not make much $ taking photos - I have had decades of experience playing music. Yes - getting the tunes in your head and under your fingers is the most important thing.
That said having equipment that doesn't hold you back is absolutely useful.
As a saxophonist - timbre, responsiveness, intonation, keywork that facilitates rather than hinders - all very important.
With regard to photography - my gear isn't holding me back.
When it comes to music a subpar horn, mouthpiece or reed they can absolutely be detrimental to a top shelf performance.
Just for fun and a chance to errr... blow my own horn (sorry!) I recently had a chance to play with some amazing young ladies from Japan that have a worldwide following - Tokyo Groove Jiyoshi. Two shows in Seattle and one in Vegas.
So much fun!
There is no way I would have done that gig on one of my lesser horns/mouthpieces/reeds so gear matters - at least for me.
Truly operating on the life is short principle here and trying to have all the fun possible while still able to.
To get back on topic of the thread -I'm all about having fun with photography and hopefully getting some memorable images in the process.
p.3 #15 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
I think i prioritize the location and getting outdoors at a nice location (or one i like) over gear.
Its nice to take light gear but sometimes it doesn't work. 18-55 is nice and light but 180 macro is much better at macro. I'm bad about taking one lens though
I went out to a nice spot tonight, got there too late, still nice even though no photos
p.3 #16 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
I started taking pictures as a kid and I've done is seriously for my entire adult life. I'm now in my 70s. I began photographing what I'm most interested in and enjoy most. With few exceptions, I've never photographed anything except nature - landscapes and wildlife. For much of my life "getting the photo" mattered more than anything else. In some ways, obsessing over that can be counterproductive.
Then I slowly came to the realization that the experience is what truly enriches life. I'm not talking about the experience of using the tools. I don't care much about that unless the tools get in my way. I'm talking about learning how a bird or animal behaves moments before it's does something, the smell of sage, the look of hoarfrost gleaming in trees, the roar and wind created by waterfalls, and on and on. Those experiences and the memories of them are priceless. Of course nice photos improve experiences, and later they act as memory cues to vividly recall the associated experiences.
These days I frequently take a morning drive to one of a few nearby reserves with the goal of having those kinds of experiences, not caring much whether I "get" any photos. It's better if I do, but if I don't I'll still have a great time.
p.3 #18 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
Looking back over a lifetime of amateur photography, lately my aim is less about capturing images and more about nostalgia. Trying to recapture the magic of photography as I experienced it in my youth. Sixty years of cameras, with more than a few of those years taking no pictures at all. Sometimes I’ve been more of a camera collector than an actual photographer. But when I look at my images from the past, particularly the 1970s & 1980s, I only wish I had taken many more of them.
Lately I’ve realized that for me there’s no benefit to newer and better gear. I’ve also found that trying to relive the past comes with its own form of GAS - I just bought an F6 to try shooting film, even though I already had an F100, which I bought a few years ago to try shooting film. These are both cameras I’d never have been able to buy back in the film days. For me, owning far too many cameras and far too many lenses is detrimental to the hobby of actually capturing images. I’ve never been able to commit to a one camera/one lens challenge, but I do think it would be the best possible use of my time.
p.3 #19 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
KankRat wrote:
I'd like someone to tell me what the photographic experience exactly is, so I'll know in the event I ever have one.
Getting to know a place, the light, the sounds, the smells, the taste and visualizing the mages that would capture these feelings…then going out and capturing the images.
p.3 #20 · Getting the photo vs the experience of getting the photo
RoamingScott wrote:
Almost the only time I hear about loving the "shooting experience" is with Leica shooters, looking for a reason to keep a camera with lenses that are front focused and who couldn't take an in-focus photo if their life depended on it they need SOMETHING to like!
I am in get the photo whatever it takes camp.
I just got Q3 and it is easily the worst ergonomics in camera ever created. Grip and thumb rest made it tolerable but OMG I don't get why people like this brick. And I see now why Leica people complain about menus [in other cameras]. You have to use menus with Leica because there are not enough joysticks and buttons on bodies. Unless you zone focusing, you have to go into menus on Q3 to shoot different scenarios. I practically never go into menus with any other camera. So you are right, shooting with Leica is an experience Images are great though. Over-sharpened, over-processed by default, and have to be heavily corrected [software takes care of it], but end result is great.
they need SOMETHING to like!
(except hopefully as learning curve so you get better).