Can a new photographer start with a large format camera)

[dcstep]

<p>If you're going to end up being a film photographer, then the idea of starting with film (whether LF, 35mm or MF) makes tons of sense; however, if you're going to be a digital photographer, then exposure is different, as is conversion and post processing.</p>

<p>I think that composition is best learned by studying the work of others, reading some theory and then taking pix and having others critique them. One is just as likely to take a poorly composed image with a LF camera as with a Canon Rebel. Camera clubs and online critique forums are a much more efficient way to learn about the weaknesses in one's composition. Shooting a small number of prints in LF is just going to slow the process.</p>

<p>Unless you're going to be a film photographer, learning to load film, expose film, process film, scan film, etc. are all archaic to digital photography and can lead to improper digital exposures. Understanding the differences is useful for posting to forums, but will have no positive impact on one's ability to expose digitally, convert digitially, post process digitally and prepare for printing digitally.</p>

<p>Frank said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Everything one <strong>should be thinking about </strong>when ... making exposures with a camera of any format (2.25, 35mm, etc. and et al), digital or film, is included in making an exposure with large format equipment.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't think that this is true. The dynamic range differences between film and digital and techniques required to maximize Raw file data are different for digital and film. Many digital photographers will expose to the right, creating a Raw file that looks washed out prior to correction. OTOH, with color film, particularly positive film, you'll be trying to nail the exposure such that the original film looks good without correction. Black and white is a whole different art between digital and film. In both film and digital, you might expose to create a negative that you intend to manipulate later, but the manipulations may be entirely different for film vs. digital.</p>

<p>Rationing of exposures is a fact of life in film photography. This does, indeed, lead to more careful planning and attempted timing of each shot, but it's not the only way to learn to plan and time our shots. It also leads to missed shots. Every photographer should be striving to capture the peak of action, when there's action. When the light is ideal for the photographer should try to capture the peak moment. More power to you if you can do it in one shot, but having three or four shots before and after a light peak is nothing to apologize for. Moving the camera around and changing focal lengths on the same scene is nothing to apologize for. Because we can, we digital photographers will almost always take more images than we did when we were shooting film.</p>

[dhbebb]

<p><em>Everything one <strong>should be thinking about</strong><strong> </strong>when composing and making exposures with a camera of any format … is included in making an exposure with large format equipment.</em><em><br /> The key is the thought process of taking the picture. … 35mm and digital, in my mind, encourages sloppiness and laziness - the old timers had to make that one shot count. Quantity does not equate to quality.</em><em> </em><br>

Clearly based on limited experience of the different genres of photography. In all cases where time is available for contemplation, measurements and making camera settings, and the bulk and weight of equipment are not relevant, large format equipment will deliver a technically superior and artistically valid result. As soon as speed and spontaneity become important (press and photojournalism, even landscape under fast-changing conditions), LF will cause you to miss the “decisive moment” by a mile, leaving you with pictures which are technically of high quality but artistically sterile. In these cases, photographers should not be consciously thinking at all but working on an intuitive conditioned-reflex level. </p>

[gary_leonard3]

<p>Most LF cameras are big, bare-bones and stupid. That is good. Many people who learn to drive a car with an automatic transmission never learn to drive a stick shift. A LF will be without all the bells and whistles -- auto focus, auto-exposure, auto-decisive moment. That is good.<br>

It will be harder to start on a LF than with a mindless camera that does your thinking for you but the idea is to L-E-A-R-N, not just spray the world with images the first time out.<br>

You need to ask yourself if you really want big time knowledge. Do you want to learn about hyperfocal distances and circles of confusion and developing by inspection?<br>

And don't worry about bokeh. There's an app for that.</p>