Are we stumbling, photographic zombies?

I've read this article on several different occasions.

link

No preaching either way from me. It either starts a thought process that progresses or it doesn't.

Best regards

Thanks for sharing.

Personally I shoot with my DSLR as if I am using film (which is how I started).

I think it is conditioning! If I go out and shoot I rarely use the screen, and still think in terms of rolls of film shot. 'I shot a roll and a half of 36 today'.

I also learned to keep both eyes open while using the viewfinder as it helps me see what is just out of the frame.

I do try to chase the light.

For me, I still try to get it right in camera, and find processing less smelly.

And I use a body, a zoom and a sling pack. Finances restrict me to that. I'm happy.

Cheers

Simon

I love having a DSLR but some time ago decided I would use full manual or TAV (no variable ISO in film days other than forcing a whole film) to get me back thinking about my photography more.

Like Simon I aim to get it as right as possible in camera. On my recent Caribbean holiday I finally got over mentally restricting how many images (36 in camera, 36 in pocket in film era). Took around 2,000 (many 8 frames a second of whales, dolphins and hummingbirds etc). I brought home 1200 and edited down to around 400 of the 11 islands we visited on a great adventure. Very pleased with the results. Several up on the wall and adding this week on the gallery here. I doubt I would have have captured bacK in 1970's - 90's.

I think going through the thought process and really thinking about what we are doing is a great thing, but I also think that for most of us film is not viable. My favourite films may no longer be made, nor are the chemicals so readily available. I honestly no longer have the time to spend all day in the darkroom and in any event much of what I produce is destined for the internet anyway. The process would be too slow and inconvenient.

Having said that, a nice film image is beautiful, and so is a nice digitally produced one.

My conclusion is that it's not the camera that produces the image, it's the photographer. It's also not the imaging process that produces the image, it's the photographer.

The medium, regardless whether it's film, digital flagship or a toy cam, does not necessarily stop the process. It's whom is behind the viewer and how they approach what they do in life that matters. You can quite successfully teach children to 'see' with photographer's eyes without touching film. The process is interesting, film will always have a special place in photography, but I would not glorify it beyond reason just because a person or two don't find the alternatives 'inspiring'. To me, it's the world that's the inspiration. The camera is just a tool. That said, I'd much rather look at it through my K1 then a Spotomatic. All that does not stop me taking pictures with my phone I find saying that technology is limiting, in any way, crazy. The only limiting factor behind the 645z is the human and maybe he/she need to put the cameras down all together, go out there and look and appreciate before picking anything up again.