« Riding Lesson | Main | Colin in Used Bookstore »

July 17, 2004

It's Not Even 9:00/On Photography





Yet my mom's already emailed to ask why I haven't updated.





*~*



I've been thinking about the things that I like to do.



Photography has long been an interest of mine, from before Dad got me my first 35mm camera the year I turned 15 (this camera is on the short list of things I'd grab if I ever had to flee my burning apartment, right after my cat). When I moved to Virginia, I bought a Nikon N70 and an new lens. That camera gave me autofocus, and works with the lens from my old manual 35mm. My photography improved, but not because I had a 'better' camera - if anything, after spending that much money, I realized a fancy, expensive autofocus couldn't teach me anything my old camera couldn't. No, I think my photography improved because I took more pictures.



Then I bought a digital Canon G3 with a 512MB storage card, and if I took more photos with the N70, I've taken ten times that with the digital. The most obvious reason is the immediate feedback, and I think the chance to photo edit on my computer - I can look at the results in more detail now. Digital cameras aren't cheaper (you pay for the 'film' upfront rather than as you process it), and aren't as good (Ken Rockwell, who takes some of the most beautiful landscape photography I've seen, has a good article on why digital still can't touch film in terms of resolution; and even an excellent high end point and shoot like the G3 has at times unacceptable shutter lag), but I take far more photos that I used to. I've also noticed that what I want to photograph has changed. Instead of trying to take 'artistic' shots, I try to take photos to try to show others what things matter to me, and so that I can better remember things myself. Because my photos feel more personal than they did four or five years ago, I suspect some people will think less of the results. While I'd be lying if I said it didn't make me happy to hear if someone likes one of my pictures, I'm also a little surprised to realize that I don't really care if they do. I want to like what I keep; I think that's what matters.



Nikon just came out with an under-$1000 digital version of my N70. I'll probably have it one day (hopefully once the price has dropped), but I'm still learning so much with the digital I have. I think I'm also ready to try film again - there's a beautiful farm here in town that won't be here in a year, and I want to at least attempt to do it justice.



Anyway, I thought maybe I should explain why I'm taking close up shots of brooms and kitty cat paws. And I should stop rambling and go take some pictures.

Posted by Kristin at July 17, 2004 8:29 AM

Comments

I found this really interesting to read, as I've been exposed to a lot of photography stuff over the last several years as my father has set off on his photography road. He's had people from magazines and universities solicit his work, and I keep telling him he can really sell this stuff (and himself), but will he listen? Noooo... he just insists on playing around with bugs. :) (Though I have to admit his macro photography of the little buggers (no pun intended, gah) blows my mind, even if I find them rather creepy.) Anyway, I mention this because he now works exclusively with digital cameras, and swears up and down that digital is worlds better than film. I understand this is a hotly contested issue in the photography world, (we have plenty of familiarity with those sorts of online debates, don't we? :) ) and I freely admit that I don't know much myself - but a while back when he was hot on this issue, he sent me some links to articles which do comparisons much like the one you linked. They're full of technical lingo that I don't understand, but I like looking at the pretty pictures. :) Here are the ones I could find in my email, in case you're interested: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d30/d30_vs_film.shtmlhttp://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/not-polaroid.shtmlhttp://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/d60/d60.shtmlI know that my dad's most common complaint about these comparisons is that digital photography has advanced by leaps and bounds in the last two years, and that most comparisons don't take into account the latest top-of-the-line. But as I said, *I* don't really know, I just know what I overhear. :) And I know that he used to order strange lenses from Russia and all around the world and change things inside the cameras and use bizarre filters and just do all around baffling things that somehow produce amazing results. It's like some magic photography Fung Shui... is that how you spell Fung Shui? I don't even know... Also, I've been meaning for a long time to give you these links, just in case you haven't seen them before: http://www.photosig.com/go/mainhttp://www.photopoints.com/main/My dad is a critquer at photosig, and has some of his pictures up at photopoints, under Ruben Campos. (That's how I found the sites, obviously.) I don't really spend much time at either site, but every once in a while I check and people share some really amazing pictures. You should start up an account and post some of your pictures too! I'd love to have someplace to see a variety of Kristin Masterpieces archived for posterity. :) I checked out the gallery of the photographer you linked, and particularly liked his pictures of Zion, and the one of Coyote Buttes. Talk about colors!

Posted by: Anonymous at July 17, 2004 5:41 PM

That last anonymous post was me, btw. Duh. ~Lisa the Spammer

Posted by: Anonymous at July 17, 2004 5:42 PM

Lisa and I were talking about this stuff a while ago, and she showed me some of her dad's pictures, they are cool. But, afterward I looked up a lot of stuff online when I wanted a digital camera. I tried to buy something that I could get my feet wet with - I know it's pretty comprable to the one you have now as far as features and all, and I probably would have got that one if the gateway one we bought wasn't on super sale. I won't weigh in on which I think is better - I've seen amazing pictures from both film and digital - because I don't really have an opinion right now. It's interesting to read about each, though. I still want my dad to give me his Canon A-1 and all his lenses. He never uses it anymore! To think it was always a struggle to get him to let me use it. Oh, and now I remember where I was going with this! Developing. I was always taking pictures in middle school and highschool - mostly because I was on yearbook staff - but I think some of the differences come from developing. I actually think it's easier to develop film as opposed to tweaking your pictures on Photoshop (or in my case PaintShop - Photoshop's cheap younger brother). When you develop film (which I did when I was a kid - it's so much fun! I wish I had stuff to do it now. You should totally get stuff and make a darkroom, Kristin! I will come play!) you only have to deal with the human eye. Digital, you have to deal with what looks good on your monitor, vs. all the other monitors. And you need a good printer to get a good print, obviously. OMG, I'm going on and on...this is like Lisa Lenght! alskfjd;alsfjd Anyway, when are you coming up here? We can talk and take pictures when we go to Philly!

Posted by: Maureen at July 19, 2004 11:50 PM