How do you shoot? How do you choose?

[robert_landis]

<p>Hi,<br>

I have a very basic question. When you go out to shoot photographs, do you keep your camera set to one "film" mode, priority, etc? When shooting film, obviously you put in your film and started shooting. However, with a digital camera you can change settings easily and relatively quickly. For instance, even if you are out shooting the settings B and W with say aperture priority you might see an amazing color scene which requires changing your frame of mind and going on a tangent, thus switching to color, shutter priority, etc. (and taking time up moving dials, etc)<br>

So- do you stick with one conceptual mindset, or go into attention deficit mode and one minute it's Robert Frank, then it's Eggleston? ( or, am I just not experienced or focused enough yet to pick a direction and stick with it?)<br>

Thanks for your input; and I have no ego here to bruise so please let me know what your opinions are on how to best conceptualize one's photographic outing, without missing out on nice shots of either color or B&W. </p>

[Lek]

<p>I shoot RAW, so it's not such a big deal. That said, maybe RAW+JPEG would be an interesting experiment. Beyond that, I use settings that will let me shoot fastest for the conditions. On the street I'm shooting at about f4-5.6 on aperture priority (I'm shooting Oly so the DOF tends to be a little deeper at wider apertures), ISO 200-400. If it's especially dark or bright I'll adjust iso or aperture accordingly.</p>

[fi_rondo1]

<p>Shoot what interests you... only real suggestion I have is that you shoot in manual...learn your camera... there are things you'll discover that you'll never find out if you stick to programs and priorities, etc...</p>

 

[leslie_cheung]

<p>I shoot on A priority 90% of time. I check my shutter speed and ISO often and just concentrate on the picture and being alert. Color and B+W are mostly done in post.</p>

<p> </p>

[xxloverxx]

<p>I think:<br>

Manual <strong>everything.</strong><br>

One prime lens - easier to visualise without lifting the camera<br>

Adjust your exposure settings as you walk, preferably without looking at the camera - use your eyes to look for potential photos, not what setting you're fiddling with<br>

Stick with one ISO<br>

Basically, know your equipment well enough to use it in total darkness with your hands tied behind your back. Literally.<br>

Shoot however you want; don't worry about copying someone's "style". Think about nothing else.</p>

[nomad_.]

<p>Film, manual. I start with a sunny 16 estimate of exposure and then check with a hand held meter (I measure what I think is an average scene, and measure the palm of my hand, sometimes take an incident reading). I try to pick a film speed that will give me a middling aperture and shutter speed in the expected conditions, such that I have room to get more or less depth of field if I want it. The meter stays in the pocket most of the time, and only comes out if I feel the light has changed enough to merit a check. I keep an eye on the light and try to ensure the exposure is set correctly all the time. If it isn't, and if I need to be quick, I change the shutter speed and grab the shot. If I'm not sure and have the time, I bracket (or take another at a different speed). If I have more time, I do the sunny 16 and meter thing. Focussing varies between bang on the subject, prefocussing, and setting focus point for depth of field (either by picking it visually, or using the scale on the lens).</p>

<p>I've been shooting colour negative film since I got back into film photography a few months ago (but plan to do B&W once my darkroom is ready). I usually just get them developed and scanned to CD, so I can switch to B&W on the computer. I visualise in colour or B&W interchangeably while I'm shooting - depends on the subject.</p>

<p> </p>

[Brad_]

What Leslie said... More important to be aware of what's around you and receptive to the possibilities.

[acarodp]

<p>I shoot always in raw, and process with Bibble that ignores all camera settings except WB. So I don't care about "image" settings. I'm also always in auto WB, since I don't have strict WB consistency needs, and if I don't like the WB the camera picked, I can change it in Bibble.<br>

My cameras in the last 10 years or so have almost always been set in aperture priority, it is what I'm used to, and it works with my kind of subjects and my style.</p>

<p>In terms of "influences" or conceptual mindset as you call it, I don't really know. You may go to my gallery and decide ;-). What I mean is that it is quite evident to me that my style and tastes are deeply influenced by a number of great past photographers, but I'm absolutely not thinking about it when I'm out taking pictures. The fact is, I need to concentrate on the pictures, and as Yogi Berra had it "I cannot concentrate when I'm thinking" :-D.</p>

<p>L.</p>

[johncrosley]

<p>I was asked virtually this same question in a slightly different way by a very advanced shooter who requested and hired me to 'shoot' with him and teach him, side by side how to go about shooting 'street' - several weeks ago. We had a really good time, I think, and his skills improved perceptibly - even markedly, especially his 'people skills'.<br>

Now, I do a lot of 'street' shooting, but I also shoot a lot else, from 'news to nudes', and also 'fine art' and other things. One thing I do not do is a lot of Photoshop manipulation. If you want good landscape, you can find one or two in my vast (1400+ portfolio here or on another service which has about 100 photos -- including a few duplications).<br>

I started out shooting in my '20s, met Henri Cartier-Bresson very briefly, not knowing who the heck this Frenchman was, as I was sent to his 'show' by a work colleague at Associated Press where I was a brand new hire as a photographer. I went to his 'showing' of a 'few photos' -- literally all the De Young Museum in San Francisco was filled with all the great classic Cartier-Bresson photos, and although I hadn't heard about the man at all and did not recognize his name, returned, put down my cameras and AP and I came to an agreement they would make me a writer (at which I was very very successful and immediately though without any previous training).<br>

That's how overwhelmingly great Henri Cartier-Bresson's works were to me. The colleague who had known him had said to me 'you have to meet my old China hand and friend Henry --your work reminds me of his'. I had maybe 20 -30 good photos, Cartier-Bresson had a museum full, and I was totally overwhelmed, and literally 'gave up' photography as a life pursuit.<br>

I didn't want to be a HCB wanna be or 'of the school of', and because I had never heard the name of this guy who made decades worth of fabulous photos, I figured not only had he done it all and why try to reinvent the wheel, but he was just one of many (not the first and foremost as I later found out).<br>

Charlie Rose in preparing to interview H C-B interviewed Richard Avedon, famed fashion photographer, and asked him<br>

Q. It's been said that Henri Cartier-Bresson is one of the top ten artists of the Twentieth Century. Do you agree?<br>

A. (Avedon) Why not? He's really the father of all of us photographers.<br>

And there I was, age 22, giving up my life's aspirations because I was comparing myself to this man (not at all knowing who he was, but recognizing his genius from his work. It's like an 'art student' seeing Picasso's works then laying down his brush because he could not be so great (but had never heard of Picasso - such naivete I had).<br>

I took a few photos from time to time in the interim, successfully too, but without dedication. <br>

Six years ago, seeking to revive my OLD largely B&W photos that had survived, I joined Photo.net and began posting some. <br>

My first post is still my best photo ever and still my highest rated. I never submitted it for critique, but it might easily have been Photo of the Week, if I had known to do that. (Balloon Man).<br>

In interim decades, something had come over me during largely inactive years -- taking photos had gone from hot sweaty work to something entirely intuitive and suddenly FUN!<br>

I took a photo of a wife murderer, his cigarette tip in focus at 2:00 a.m. at a Greyhound bus rest stop, and his face and all else completely out of focus, huge stress and 'age' showing on his face, as he dragged on his coffin-nail . . . . and the photo became a symbol for his entire life . . . . a wasted life, burned out at one end, almost lifeless at the other (after being released from a penitentiary). (Single Photo, color).<br>

It was easy and fun, and soon I was stepping back into the shoes I had left in my early '20s.<br>

I shot auto-focus anything and soon had 18 cameras and lots and lots of lenses -- many bought at very good prices, but of highest quality as people often almost gave away top class equipment for someone they thought had talent (and had thought to put a classified ad in the newspaper) I had old equipment too, Nikons, Leicas and others, unused or accumulated in the interim 'in case'.<br>

I put them to use -- good use.<br>

By end of first year, I had here over 2 million 'views'. Thumbnails 'views' then were counted as 'views'. <br>

Frankly I shot and posted almost anything, and put in folder several hundred that were never posted for critique . . . to free myself from the ratings, critique treadmill that seemed to drive so many. Frankly I hardly ever gave any hoot about 'ratings'. Still hardly do - I do dislike low rates for no reason but respect all honest rates, low or high.<br>

I still shoot everything that interests me, AND NOW I HAVE HUGE INTERESTS.<br>

Wonder of wonders, because I had several careers and a very interesting life with many worldwide travels (not taking photos usually, and seeing much of life in the interim), I had a hugely easier time recognizing 'interesting' scenes, and applying my own 'viewpoint' to them.<br>

Before, being inexperienced,I recognized some scenes, now I may get (as I did yesterday 10 to 20 worthy captures on a download on an 8 gig chip with a 12 megapixel camera shooting JPEG fine and RAW. That's now a HUGE percentage of keepers, and it's increasing.<br>

I also had the intervening years with my enormous experience reviewing everything photographic that passed my way - and my first wife had worked a while for 'Art in America Magazine' so for that time I hung around its NYC offices, just a little, and its new and old issues were strewn around our apartment. <br>

Also, I kept a book of Cartier-Bresson's photos I bought at that showing by my bedside. <br>

I'd review it from time to time, and my heart would race.<br>

It seems I absorbed some of what I observed in that book and in other publications and works by osmosis or some other way rather than just by shooting.<br>

You can learn about photography just by viewing photos too, and I did in the decades interim from every available source, and also visited most of the world's great museums.<br>

My photo work transformed and I became amazingly prolific.<br>

I set each camera I shot with to 'A' as I always had chosen aperture with film cameras, and primarily used the new to me autofocus, especially after I switched from film in a few months to a Nikon D70 which didn't work properly and fully with my numerous high quality manual lenses.<br>

I began visiting Europe and in doing so went to Ukraine, largely unexplored territory for Western Photographers, and there began to learn 'studio' with the most 'high class' and 'expensive' agency models at $50 per 6-hour day, and a studio at $35 for the same day, and was tutored briefly in the use of monolights by a man who (unwittingly and not knowing my name as he didn't speak English) became one of my greatest fans - also one of Ukraine's finest wedding photographers. The 'models' I used often were 'cover girls in big magazines in parts of the world outside the USA, from Japan, to Turkey to Europe.<br>

There I was, in Odessa, Ukraine some times, shooting 'street' and at time shooting models for practice, then returning to the USA, and shooting anything and everything that interested me, including some scenic wonders (Oregon Coast, Heceta Head, Bryce Canyon, Utah, etc.) and a lot of 'street portraits'. <br>

I developed an ability to 'choose backgrounds' and wrote a huge 'presentation' on that, using hundreds of my works to illustrate that (it could be published some day and may after reworking).<br>

I was referred by a member here of some prominence in the film and still photographic industries (somewhat retired or out of the business at least) eventually to a Lucie Award winning critic/printer who mentored me and also curated my work, distilling a half million of my digital works, and began preparing me for museums and galleries. (his request, not mine and his treat, not mine and his aim, not mine - I was largely in disbelief).<br>

It's a quest which I am about to finish now. I hope to meet him again in a week and a half to work out final details.<br>

(I got sick for much of last year -- very sick, but recovered entirely).<br>

I still shoot a lot of 'street', and some think that's all I shoot.<br>

I also shoot nudes, portraits, scenics, landscapes and had a huge inventory of nature/bird shots taken along the California coast (prior to a car burglary in which almost all equipment and unbacked up nature captures were stolen. I had backed up all else, but those were never intended to be 'shown' and were to be 'backed up later' (to my regret).<br>

In short, I have wide ranging interests, and I'll shoot just about anything, even if I don't post it or post it here. It may vary from frame to frame, depending on what I 'see', and it seems with almost every few steps I 'see' something 'new and interesting' to photograph (mostly).<br>

I have been assured by my Lucie Award winning mentor some of my work is 'fine art' and belongs in top level 'ART' galleries. Other in top level PHOTO galleries.<br>

He makes prints that sell for other, 'name' photographers that retail for up to $40,000 per, so although I disbelieved him at first, I have learned to trust him.<br>

I divide my time between the USA and abroad, following my muse all on a small shoestring.<br>

Your question 'what do I shoot' was asked by my first pupil, my last USA stay.<br>

This highly talented older student who wanted to learn 'street' engaged me to lead him through an introduction to 'street shooting' over two days in the LA area.<br>

I am sure he feels he got his money's worth. (he told me so, and wrote me also).<br>

Later, as he searched for a specific outlet for his 'art' he wondered if he should seek to find his photographic muse in a specific style . . . to which my response was basically . . . you have just begun to overcome some inner shyness about approaching people.<br>

'You're doing it now very successfully, and you're ambitious about choosing a style to follow, but to find the sort of shots you're looking you might find them few and far between . . . and it might get boring.<br>

"I'm never bored (as he had seen) and I think as I walk along a street of a way in the USA or elsewhere that street great Garry Winogrand had little on me. He was said to take a roll a block or more, and shake hands with many as he went along. When I'm in good form, I do the same, as a close friend with mine saw yesterday as I shot in Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine - a city where I once spent some major time. . . . during its first warm day since fall - even this morning, if truth be told.<br>

Walk, talk, take a photo or two, shake hands, exchange info or names, and walk on (often showing a subject his/her photo if nearby and not hostile).<br>

It's great fun, and when not taking photos of those near (or known) I found after an absence of over a year or a year and a half I'm recognized by many; In between the close-up or wide-angle shots which required being close-in, I also took many a tele and zoom captures far away, even street portraits of unknowing people walking by (with 'S' focusing zoom tele).<br>

I mix and match, and frankly I never know from one capture to the next what I'll take.<br>

One minute it might be humor, the next a portrait and the next an attempt at fine art or fashion. I could just as easily walk into a studio in the same frame of mind and shoot 'nudes' with no transition. It's all basically the same to me. Just take the best photo you can, using the best technique you can for the genre you are aiming at (that may mean best reproduction, image quality for one genre and just capturing a fleeting moment at highest ISO for another -- and hanging out hours for the right light for another and varying exposures while doing significant bracketing as light changes dramatically, if doing a landscape or any other capture where light changes or is variable.<br>

I might shoot 'high key' one shot, then 'low key' another.<br>

One shot might be 'wheelchairs full of patients in a bright hallway looking as they are going to heaven' <br>

Another 'low key' might be these same people looking poor and gritty.<br>

You never know. The more skills and interests you have the more you can do.<br>

If you're not getting paid to do it, so much the better at being 'free' as I am.<br>

If I were being paid, I'd still shoot the same things, but only show the client what he/she had hired me for.<br>

If I had models, it might be shooting models (and soon will be I think -- it's on my list once again, and my mono lights are already on their stands and 'hot lights' are on the floor ready for assembly on stands.<br>

As I advised my first (very, very talented pupil - literally a masters class in a new genre for him as he is already a successful shooter and a fine arts graduate), 'If you can shoot anything and everything in an artful way, life can be really lots of fun and you'll never be bored.'<br>

'Just go on the street with a camera, and open your senses.'<br>

'The more you shoot and see good results the more you'll see the next time and eventually if you do it long enough and steadily enough it may grow exponentially . . . as it has with me.'<br>

'In a few minutes to a few hours, you can take great photos . . . in so many genres, you might be amazed.'<br>

They don't all have to be 'street' either.<br>

(Oh, I also do architecture, I have one or two 'macro' insect photos and flower photos posted and so on, it's a list I hope never ends. <br>

I've had tens of millions of 'views' and more recently 'clicked views' - since the change over in the system count.<br>

Many think of me as a 'street shooter' because that's my first love, but I'm much more (except a photoshopper).<br>

Three weeks or so ago I advised my able masters' level student the following - 'You have just begun to see your horizons expand . . . and if you choose a style now and start pursuing it now with it fixed in mind, you might just never take the photo or series of photos that may open your mind to something that may end up your ultimate 'style or one of your 'styles' or 'genres'.<br>

And, many famous artists/photographers had more than one 'genre' which didn't conflict, if presented correctly. Our top glamour photographer here on PN, Jon Peri, also loves 'street' as well as shooting children (if my information is correct) but feels posting the latter will conflict with his being seen as a 'glamour' photographer . . . . with ultimate perceptual difficulties by his viewing public (write me Jon if this misrepresents you).<br>

I told my masters' level pupil: "you want to be a gallery/museum level shooter and published. What are you going to tell your publisher if you give him/her all your output, it is published, sells out (but you got a very small advance and little money as first books make no one any money), then the publisher then implores 'what else have you got? for a followup book?<br>

It pays to have more than one interest.<br>

Elliott Erwitt, famed street shooter, news and assignment shooter, three times president of Magnum Agency, also published a number of books on 'man's best friend' for which he is also famous.<br>

If you limit yourself, you may also not only limit your fun, but obscure some field in which you may be very good to unique at which you thought you were nothing.<br>

Here is a story, I have been told I believe is true:<br>

Famed studio nude photographer Herb Ritts had achieved stardom photographing women in his unique style.<br>

He believed he would like to go to Africa, shoot there, and have a gallery showing of his African work. <br>

He went to Africa, shot up a huge storm, with numerous assistants and attendant expense, returned only to have his famous gallery owner(s) turn him down for a gallery showing (we can't sell you work!).<br>

Undeterred, he went back, shot a second time, and got his showing.<br>

One, he didn't give up.<br>

Two, he believed and proved his skills as a photographer were transferable from one genre to the next (as often is the case with the very best.)<br>

<br />I shot nudes of friend/model Rita for all of about ten minutes one day during a photo session in my flat in Ukraine -- just to work with lights for practice with her and her friend Alona . . . . and in those unscheduled totally nude shots of Rita, posted as 'fine art', a member who shot nudes for much of his life, whose career is in its twilight, has remarked he thinks 'nudes are my best work'. (Go figure, and all for ten minutes shooting).<br>

(All quotes are really paraphrases, but I am quite sure are accurate -- if not the interested parties will set me straight promptly, and I will do the same.)<br>

Bobby McFerrin:<br>

'Don't Worry! <br>

Be Happy'<br>

(Interestingly enough Mr. McFerrin is a highly talented musician with some very highly developed and top-level skills who just happened to write a catchy ditty, then record it.<br>

The quote from his now older and very famous song is NOT representative of his high level work. You see, just like many others of high skill, he has more than one strength.<br>

Pinkas Zuckerman, famed violinist, when not playing for famous philharmonics worldwide also plays Klezmer Music -- joyous, celebratory Yiddish folk music . . . continually evolving.<br>

He's got 22 Grammy nominations, two Grammy awards, directs philharmonics, and still plays Klezmer . . . . and, and he has a grand old time. For a long time he also was married to movie star Tuesday Weld . . . . a pretty good life for a guy born in 1948, confined to crutches (except when soaring on his violin)<br>

So, why paint yourself into a corner?<br>

Shoot whatever interests you so long as you try to do it well.<br>

(You can choose what you want to post - there's no requirement you post it all, or even anything more than what you wish.)<br>

Unless you're a pro with a reputation resting on 'scores' in the ratings engine, why not have 'tons of fun' shooting -- those tons can make megatons later as they cascade and your skills increase . . . . and you might even become famous (whether at the local county fair or the Museum of Modern Art or the Gugenheim, no one can know until you start shooting seriously).<br>

And don't sweat low ratings unless they're always low and you yourself don't value your work. <br>

Even so, remember this, many of the great gallery photographers of the world would get 3/3s and 4/4s here with their works, as they cannot be understood by many here . . . . who lack insight into certain sorts of valued and highly skilled work.<br>

Don't let ratings or approval (or lack thereof) govern your ego; let this be a fun thing and not competitive. Your personal worth is not measured by the worth of your photography (at least not always).<br>

Enjoy!<br>

John (Crosley) </p>

[johncrosley]

<p>Above comment of John Crosley © 2010, All rights reserved, by the author.

 

<br>

John (Crosley)</p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>I shoot professionally and for me the answer is: whatever gets the job done. If I have time to mess around I generally shoot manually. The vast majority of the time things go down so fast that there's only time to react though and then we're talking A, or occasionally even P.<br /> <br /> If I had a choice I'd shoot manually all the time every time but that's just not how it works for me. I also shoot RAW which gives me a lot of leeway for editing and post.</p>

[russ_butner___portland__or]

<p> Neopan 400 threaded into the rig, usually aperture priority or manual.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Film, manual. I start with a sunny 16 estimate of exposure and then check with a hand held meter (I measure what I think is an average scene, and measure the palm of my hand, sometimes take an incident reading). I try to pick a film speed that will give me a middling aperture and shutter speed in the expected conditions</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>That is more or less what I do to. I seem to sub-consciously choose a film which gives me an exposure of f8 at 1/125 most of the time.</p>

[gejza_cepela]

<p>mostly aperture priority - around f 5.6 - f 8 , <br>

center w. metering, <br>

with D80 EV - 0.3</p>