decisive moment

[candc]

When I started out I never had a motor drive so I always had to try and anticipate the decisive moment. I still shoot that way but I suppose I am not taking advantage of what the modern camera can do. I guess if I was shooting for a living I would feel obligated to shoot a sequence to deliver the best shot to the client but that kind of takes some of the excitement out of it for me, what do you think?

 

[mwh1964]

A good picture is never just firing away, but to see the moment before it happens. However, moderne tech will help you getting the best possible outcome.

 

[candc]

A good picture is never just firing away, but to see the moment before it happens. However, moderne tech will help you getting the best possible outcome.

True, but don't you enjoy hitting the best shot with your finger instead of sorting through them?

 

[distant.star]

.
What I enjoy is looking at a good picture. I'll do whatever it takes to get it!

 

[TexPhoto]

.
What I enjoy is looking at a good picture. I'll do whatever it takes to get it!

Amen brother. Have you ever seen a great sports photo and then realized, oh this sucks, he was motor driving. I don't want a t-shirt that says I shoot RAW. I want good photos.

candc, I would rather just see some of your photos than worry about how you took them.


Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

 

[candc]

Okay, I will start shooting that way more, it will feel different but you have a good point

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I've generally never used the high speed shooting capability of my cameras, I did try to capture a whip cutting a flower in someones hand one time, but that was neigh impossible.

I was looking thru a old 1916 National Geographic, and noticed that photographers did ok with out motor drives. It definitely makes capturing some images easier and removes the need for skill and timing.

 

[dpackman]

An interesting philosophical question that is clearly answered practically by "do what you need to to get the best shot." At my level of photography, the question is just whether to take a camera along or not. For with a camera I look at the world in a different way. Perhaps this is a better way, but it is clearly different.

 

[Loswr]

So, capturing a burst is 'cheating'? If so, better turn off AF, use M mode and disregard the light meter. Turn off IS, too. Next time your taxes are due, use only a paper and pencil - no TurboTax, no calculator, not even an abacus. Where does it end? Become a Luddite, maybe...

I'm in the camp that says it's all about the result, and if technology makes that easier, great.

 

[scottkinfw]

Take a hybrid approach.

Still be "at one" with the subject. when you anticipate "the moment" fire it off. If it is something fast, don't hesitate to use your fastest frame rate (you have one for a reason, and to not use it is illogical).

Remember, unless photographers are posting a problem pic, they will show only the good ones. It is not cheating.

 

[candc]

So, capturing a burst is 'cheating'? If so, better turn off AF, use M mode and disregard the light meter. Turn off IS, too. Next time your taxes are due, use only a paper and pencil - no TurboTax, no calculator, not even an abacus. Where does it end? Become a Luddite, maybe...

I'm in the camp that says it's all about the result, and if technology makes that easier, great.

no i am not saying its cheating, what i am saying is that it is more rewarding to me to recognize and hit that decisive moment than it is to pick from a sequence

 

[candc]

i am not talking about the results, just what i like

 

[Menace]

Personally, I'd use my camera's technology to its max to achieve best possible results - I've paid (good money) for it, it's there to use and I'll it use without any remorse.

On the other hand for yourself, you can always get hold of a working antique camera system, learn to use it and master the developing process and see if you find it satisfying.

 

[Sporgon]

When I started out I never had a motor drive so I always had to try and anticipate the decisive moment. I still shoot that way but I suppose I am not taking advantage of what the modern camera can do. I guess if I was shooting for a living I would feel obligated to shoot a sequence to deliver the best shot to the client but that kind of takes some of the excitement out of it for me, what do you think?

I can sympathise with this. Having shot with film for so long it took me a long time to adjust to all that digital offers. With digital you can cover everything without worry of running out of film. Remember 36 exposures ?!

Being able to cover exposure, focus, frames per second etc results in more perfect pictures. It's a fact. In doing so it has also de valued photography but that's another story. Everyone is aiming to produce perfect images to it is pointless not to fully utilise all that digital offers.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Burst isn't the same as spray and pray.

When I'm doing sports stuff I'll get to the venue early and walk around to work out whats going to give me the shot I want, taking into consideration foreground and background perspective, taking into account the likely gait of the sportsperson, the available light, it's relevance in terms of 'the story' of the event.

I'll practice my exposure and tweak my settings during warm ups, then when the decisive moment occurs I'll be ready.

I might shoot in burst mode, I will almost certainly shoot in AiServo (of course if you are adhering to the decisive moment ethos you will MF, you will zone or hyperfocal, won't you?) Burst will give me a choice of up to 8 images per second.

I'm not photgraphing handsome young couples strolling out of parisian cafes.

Had Cartier-bresson and all the great street photographers had colour film, had reliable predictable af, had motordrives of course they would have used them.

The fact is that they didn't. They had mechanical leicas or rolleis.
So a certain style of working was forced upon them.

I love using manual film cameras, they require a different way of working, thats for sure, but I actually think there is as much skill in predicting and preparing for a moment than waiting for a moment to occur.

The fallacy of course is that the street photographers had intent, it wasn't just by happy accident.

Gulp. Some if the shots (robert dossineu) are now widely accepted to have been staged.

What with the classic looking fuji x cameras there appears to be a longing to return to a more innocent time. Or a more craft based technique.

Bin your fuji x. Pick up a voigtlander bessa, a minolta hi-matic 7sii, a minolta cl, or if you can afford it a leica mp.
Pick up some film. Mono.

Go and see if finding the decisive moment is as much fun as you'll think.
I can virtually guarantee that in this day and age with the pederast and terror paranoia, that the most pleasant rewarding thing about your experience will be using an old camera.

It's great. The decisive moment guys weren't retro. They were state of the art.

If they were working today they may still use a 35mm lens, but it would be on a 1dx.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Apologies for typos. On iphone!

 

[Loswr]

i am not talking about the results, just what i like

I see. So, you're engaging in 'camera use' as opposed to photography, and your images only serve to 'keep score' of your ability to press a button at precisely the right time? To each their own...

 

[Orangutan]

no i am not saying its cheating, what i am saying is that it is more rewarding to me to recognize and hit that decisive moment than it is to pick from a sequence

If the human species were interested only in maximal results we wouldn't have many of our sports. Why run when you can drive? Why drive when you can fly? For many people accomplishing a goal with a specific limitation is rewarding all by itself. Consider the following: race-walking, joggling, caber-tossing, classic car rallies, bi-plane races, many forms of classical music composition, haiku poetry, etc. It even happens in photography where photographers will take their modern digital beast in the field, but limit themselves to 36 shots for the day as an exercise in careful composition and exposure (i.e. learning to take time to fully appreciate a frame before pressing the shutter release)

Short of "spray and pray," my goal is usually to get the best possible shot, but I completely respect your desire to practice the "one shot" technique when you feel so inclined. I would only suggest you experiment with other methods because everyone should taste unfamiliar food once in a while.

 

[GuyF]

Paul Walnut - bang on the money, dude.

Oh, and who's decisive moment is it anyway? Cartier-Bresson's shot taken behind the Gare St. Lazare (Google it) might have been better a split second later with the pedestrian's toe just in the puddle causing ripples. No? We'll never know since he didn't have motordrive.

 

[fragilesi]

I can see both sides of the argument but when you are shooting fast moving animals or action like say soccer then I'd suggest that it must be an incredibly rare skill to be able to time a shot to a split second to get the very best result.

I normally use burst mode when shooting any such subject, as much as anything because the action is often just so unpredictable. Hell, watching sports the players often don't know what's coming next let alone a photographer .