On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Zos Xavius <[email protected]> wrote: > > Does slowing down and taking less pictures make your pictures better? > I'd argue no, because you actually have less opportunities with film. > Shots you might not have taken because you only have 10 exposures left > might have been keepers in the end.
I have personal examples supporting both Yes and No. I suggest that the answer depends on the subject matter and your own style of working. When I'm doing strictly documentary recording I can get the shot in a single frame. I setup the subject, eg artwork I'm recording, setup my lights in a config I've used before, camera on tripod, meter the light, set the camera in M mode according to the meter reading -- click. Done. The shot is perfect because I've paid attention to all the technical details. I know I could do that with a landscape too, although my confidence in my own framing/composing ability is not good so I take multiple individual viewpoint shots for evaluation later. Other end of the spectrum, shooting a model: it's more like a dance between us. I glue my eye to the viewfinder, direct & encourage the model, and I shoot rapidly as I see her pause (and I hear the strobe recharge beeps). I simply cannot stop to address all the possible lighting variables, adjust a tripod, etc. As soon as you stop and fiddle, the model starts to lose interest and the energy disappears. I'm sure there are different situations where you can pose the model statically, adjust lights and tripod, then take one frame, but I haven't gotten great results working in that way. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
