Do we rely too much on Technology

Specifically that is when it comes to photography.

There has been a lot of discusion lately regarding Pentax (and other marques) lack of ability to "get the shot" or "cope with a situation"

So is there a new generation of photographers who simply cant take pictures? or to put it strongly, lack the skills or patience to capture an image without having to resort to modern technology and expecting the camera to do everything bar composing the shot and pressing the shutter.

I suppose this is an extension to a question I posed several months ago about whether newbies were relying on digital manipulation to produce good images.

So are newbies to photography expecting digital technology to get them Joe Cornish landscapes or Franz Lanting wildlife snaps? and when it doesn't pan out they blame the camera, because reading between the lines it seems there are a lot of newcomers to photography who are trying to run before they can walk and when they fall down Pentax get the blame for tripping them up.

To be honest it really ticks me off, I failed to get one decent shot during the flying displays at the recent Thorp Perrow meet, did I blame the equipment? NO! I blamed myself for not being quick enough.

---

My Names Alan, and I'm a lensaholic.
My PPG link
My Flckr link

Very good points you have made here, in my film days I took more time to compose my shots, now with digital you press the button fire off as many shots as you can hope you have a good one and then try to correct them in computer software a luxury we never had, some newbies have never used film so they don't know what we're talking about, photography has to be learned the equipment you use doesn't matter is only the tool for doing it, I just prefer Pentax.

Jack

Everybody should have to do 6 months on film before being let loose with a digital body.

That way they'd learn about exposure, composition, shutter speed and how to use them all together.

I know what you mean about the flying display on Saturday 'spider, I stood near a post and got some good profiles. But flying birds!!

You need a much faster lens than I had.

---

Cheers, HG

K110+DA40, K200+DA35, K3 and a bag of lenses, bodies and other bits.

Mustn't forget the Zenits, or folders, or...

I've some gallerieshere CLICKY LINK! and my PPG entries.

Interesting thread Alan. Please allow me to add some thoughts and perhaps fuel to the fire.
We live in a era which can be summarized with two words. Instant Gratification.
Years ago there was a chap in Germany who made photography portable.(Banarck)
On the other side of the pond a guy named Eastman made photography available for the masses.
Remember the slogan: You push the button, we do the rest?

Now...fast forward into the digital age. Internet, Digital media and of course the clever marketing departments of the various camera brands who make Joe Public believe he/she can take pictures like a pro. How many times have we read that kind of slogans. Dslr's are pumped full with idiot proof functions to make sure the public can produce flawless results.

So Yes....We see a new generation who hasn't had the knowledge or understanding about metering, composing and all those things that relate to a good picture. There seems a shift in general thinking. People seem to aim for technical perfect, and seem less concerned about the aestheticly pleasing factor.

Now...Is this a bad thing? Forums like this or others on the web, will educate so that any newbie soon realizes there is more to a good picture than simply push the button and let the machinery take over. The talented ones will learn and adept because they understand old days technology still adds a lot of priceless knowledge in the "making of a good photographer".

And then there is the category who is blinded by pixel peeping and truly believes that only the best equipment will make them better.
Basically they are the R&D department's wet dream. Honestly....I think we should cherish those pixel peepers.
Because.....every once and a while a camera maker comes up with a good invention which actually makes sense. Think: SR or AF.
So all that wining and moaning is actually keeping the industry running.

Lets face it; How many cameras (even Dslr's) would be sold if the package would contain nothing more than what is offered by a Leica M8 without AV or P. We all end up as painters,I'll guess.

---

Best regards,

Martin.


Curious about my photography?? Just Follow the Light.

Well said Martin, so at the end of the day we are all point and shooters and the technology takes over,
Jack.

I think there's something in what you say here. I should state that I am by no means an 'old hand' at SLR photography - far from it. Nor do I feel many of my images are in the same league as the wonderful shots I often see here and elsewhere. However, I did a lot of film based (exclusively B&W and fully manual) photography at school (almost 20 years ago now); and have returned to SLR photography in the last couple of years.

Comparing the two, I have been struck by the 'instancy' (is that a word?) and accessibility of dSLR photography. It is very easy to take a lot of pictures (hundreds on a memory card rather than 36 on a film) very cheaply (Once you have the camera) and no need for a darkroom and a spot of chemistry to get the images - pretty straightforward with some cheap yet powerful software packages instead.

I think the new technology enables people to get a result which they will be (very) proud of pretty quickly, which is very encouraging to the individual and a great spur to keep going and trying to capture great images - a good thing I think. However the required discipline from the time of limited pictures on a roll of film and perhaps a wait to see results has clearly been eased somewhat.

For myself, I probably fall between the two camps. I certainly do use the technology to an extent (I am not exactly a photoshop whizz) but I also try to use a degree of skill and patience in the image capture process, otherwise I would just end up with hundreds of raw images to trawl through and process!

I have also been on a couple of photo workshops (with the wildlife photographer Chris Weston) which I have found to be really useful as well..., and in terms of getting to grips with exposure, shutter speed etc., I would point any newbie photographer to John Shaw's wildlife photography field manual - which I thought was brilliant (whether you're into wildlife photography or not), and I still refer to it now, if only get continuing inspiration from the pictures in it!!

Regards

Mat

---

Mat W

My Flickr: link

Jack I don't understand your comment at all. I sincerely hope I am not a point and shoot merchant but I very quickly add that no disrespect is intended to those that might choose that path.

I would have thought that the correct application of the most appropriate technology in order to achieve your intentions is the most sensible course. Why use a light meter? With experience it is possible the guess pretty well.

I think all the advances in technology give me a greater freedom to think about the shot in the reasonable hope that using all the assistance from more sophisticated tools will make the technical side easier to deal with.

Mike

---

---------------------------------------------------

You can see some of my shots at my Flickr account.

I think Jack's second comment was meant tongue in cheek in response to Martin pointing out Kodaks slogan of "You push the button, we do the rest" and also the introduction of photography to the masses with the ease of the "modern" camera compared to the old plate cameras.

---

My Names Alan, and I'm a lensaholic.
My PPG link
My Flckr link

If that is how you understand/read my post, I think you missed the point I was making.

---

Best regards,

Martin.


Curious about my photography?? Just Follow the Light.

But Alans last comment already proves you didn't.

---

Best regards,

Martin.


Curious about my photography?? Just Follow the Light.

Still not true if you post process or do darkroom work. So although it's a light hearted comment I think it's tosh and should be called out as such. But here's a smiley to show I'm not being combative

Mike

---

---------------------------------------------------

You can see some of my shots at my Flickr account.

I was not getting at anyone, I wish we had digital 30 years ago when I had my studio, those of us who are serious and passionate about our photography will use the best we can afford whether film or digital, what I think I was trying to say is that the masses are point and shoot because the cameras now do it all for you, we take more care in what we are trying to achieve, I was in a restaurant a few weeks ago and there was a Wedding reception on, (in Spain) the official photographer was setting up his photos with the bride etc. and there were at least 20 people standing behind him all with there point and shoot cameras, he was getting a bit frustrated with them as they were getting in his way, anyway this is digital photography today it's us the devoted that will pave the way ahead,
so keep on klickin'
Jack.

There's another point of view - the technology helps steeper and more efficient learning if the user is willing to learn and analyses results instead just click-click-clicking all the time.

When I had my first simple film camera, or even a bit later - Zenit 12XP (fantastic by all means) - couldn't afford taking and then developing lots of photos. So it was often a film a month or two. Then it was difficult to remember the settings and conditions. And I didn't experiment that much. Now I have instant results - I see what I'm doing, I can take a number of pictures with different settings and see what's happening - all virtually money free.

The usual thing - it's all about humans, not the technology, I think.

---

Kind regards,
Michal R. Hoffmann
K20D, DA 16-45mm, A 50mm F/1:1.4, DA 55-300mm; flash Pentax AF240Z

I think Mr Spider has a point.

I tried to get into photgraphy when I was 17,with an Olympus OM10 but just couldn`t get my head around film types,etc.

Up until recently my Samsung V70 was an ok 7meg P&S digital camera but I wanted something that could "get me in amongst the action".Last year I walked into LCE in Bristol and said I wanted a digital SLR that would allow me to take some decent shots at events such as an Airshow and duely walked out with a K10D and a Tamron 70-300 lens.

At RIAT this year I was like a kid with a new toy."How many pictures (female terminology..ha ha) did you take?",asked She Who Must Be Obeyed."Um,848 dear",was my reply,"but I`ve deleted 6 as they were out of focus"."And how many are you going to print off?"...and there lies the "problem" with photography meeting modern technology.

I now take photos for me,of things that are pleasing to my eye and if I feel they need a bit of manipulation then I do what I can for my eye.How can I do this?,well,for me,it`s the fault,if that`s the correct terminology of the manufacturers and the Auto setting,removing the need to read about shutter/aperture settings and the like.I save all my originals to hard disk but copy what I might want to show off in a seperate folder with event/venue title and numbers.Will I ever load some on a stick and woddle off to Asda and pay 15p per prints?,maybe,maybe not,although I do have access to have A5/A4/A3 etc reproductions should I so wish but one thing modern technology has killed is the time in the future when Great Grand Children come down from Granny`s attic with a shoebox full of prints.

Would I attempt to sell a photograph?,no way,mine are no way good enough,unless I got a shot of Jordan coming out the backdoor of Mothercare in Bristol that is...ha ha ha

If I don`t get the shot I want,it`s my fault,not the camera`s,afteral,a bad workman always blames his tools,even on Auto.

Why am I posting photos in the Gallery?,good question,I`ll answer that when I`ve got an answer.

A very thought provoking topic Mr Spider,well done.


Nic

---

K10D,K20D
Pentax 18-55,Tamron AF 70-300,Sigma 150-500
Kenko 2X Teleplus MC7
AF 360 FGZ

Personally I would have thought you use the tools that you have available at the time to their full potential. If those tools are not giving what you want then either get round the problem or change them.

That is the way of the world these days, it seems to me that only the older generation seem to hark back to previous times with no video, light meters and manual focus. It also seems to me Pentax has more than it's fair share of older members (and I actually count myself as one of those).

This post reminds me of my grandad when I was a kid going on about the "good old days"

---

. My Flickr