Is Technology Killing Photography (You're Not Gonna Like This One)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 พ.ค. 2024
- Is technology destroying wildife and bird photography?
Warning - you might not like what I have to say.
In this short video, I'll share my perspective on technology and wildlife / bird photography - and why I believe many view technology as a challenge. I'll discuss our past, our future, and what I believe is truly unfolding. I'll also touch on the kind of person I believe will dominate the future of wildlife photography, and it might not be what you expect. I'm eager to hear your thoughts - I think :)
Links To All My Other Stuff!
backcountry-gallery.aweb.page...
Only thing to kill photography is allowing Digital ART continue to be labeled as a photo!
well said..
but that is in the hands of the viewer not the photographer .
My camera is an 8 years old DSLR but I still enjoy MY results, don't do much editing except cropping. But what I love is being outdoors and able to observe nature in all its wonderous glory.
I'm a sports photographer, but I have a similar history. In 1986, when I was a fledgling photojournalist on the sidelines of a college football game, I was happy to walk away with two, maybe three sharp action images from a game in which I went through 10 rolls of Tri-X film (360 frames). I had only manual focus and my camera only shot about five frames per second. Now, I come away with hundreds of sharp, useable images from any game with a camera that can shoot 120fps and will pick out a player's eyes from 50 yards away. My biggest problem now is picking out the best of the 4,000 images I have to cull through.
As someone that has been shooting since 1974, there are things that my digital can do we never dreamed of in 1974.
I hear you. The other day I picked by SLR from 2000 and realized it can't do faster than 1/2000s. And then outdoor indoor with the fixed ISO of the loaded roll of film...
In 2000 I spent 6 weeks in the jungle of Costa Rica. It was an amazing trip BUT the film was a very limiting factor. 800 ASA was simply not fast enough for most situations in the light available under the canopy. Digital has changed all that, and for the better. I was hesitant at first, but I look at my Z8 now with amazement on how advanced the tech has become in such a short period of time. Steve is right, this technology will allow us to be more creative/artistic than ever before.
I still have my large format, medium format and 35mm film cameras, with film for all of them kept frozen. However, I'm doubting that they will ever be used again except as museum pieces. 😉
Agree - I began in 1967, shortly after the wheel was invented - I embraced all the new tech while learning the old - Light & Light & Light. I still shoot in manual mode but not really like the normal manual of yesterday. It's the AI creating pics that are bits and pieces of other photographers work, that troubles me. I've been lucky to travel the world - the journey and challenge to get a "Wallhanger " were much of the trip.
@@gkassociates7112 I began my photography journey in 1964, just before the wheel was invented.... 🙂
I started in the mid 2000s and we never dried of AF being this fast.
Well said, Steve! Love the line, "The future belongs to the artists"
The fact is I've never seen so many below average or bad photos since this boom in technology. Anyone is now a "photographer"
I agree that the future belongs to the artist! The only twist is that the photographer also needs to be thinking like an artist with a creative mind and not just a camera owner. Good topic Steve ❤❤
A lot of people who think they are photographers are just people who bought a camera and a lens. They see a bird and they snap a photo, then keep walking, not thinking about anything else.
Also to the patient and thoughtful person who gets shots not seen or thought of before.
I'm not going to disagree with most of this vid, but I think there are some counter arguments. Yes the increased technology is great IF (a) one can use it and (b) one does not have to fight it to get what is wanted. For me, many of the bells and whistles on expensive DSLR's are not required. For me what makes a good photo is the photographers eye (and lens quality). The idea that if you spend vast amounts on your kit it will make you a good photographer is wrong in my view.
Your essay on technology got me thinking about Jim Brandenburg's photo of the artic wolf jumping from one ice floe to the next. Looking at that photo you immediately recognize the skill it took for him to capture the animal in the perfect pose; in mid-air, it's shadow exactly inbetween the two pieces of ice, dark shadow against white clouds reflected on the dark water. Depending on his camera, he probably had 3-5 fps max, no af. So he had one chance to get the "decisive moment" (Henri Cartier-Bresson). And, he probably shot it on Velvia 50 or 100, a slow slide film with very limited dymanic range. How many photographers of his day could have pulled that off? Maybe a handful at most. Now, take your average Joe or Jill today with their Sony A9iii or Z9; how many of them could capture a similar shot. Most probably. But, they would be spending more time searching for the one "decisive moment" out of the 60-120 frames they shot than they would have spent getting the shot. Technology isn't killing photography. It's just making it less satisfying and giving me a smaller sense of accomplishment.
Exactly!
Back in the day you needed to known something about photography and learn how to operate a camera. Today everyone with a cell phone or a digital camera can snap away at everything, do tons of photoshop manipulations and then proclaim their snapshots rival the work done by Ansel Adams.
@@jb-xc4oh What seems to have been lost in these troubled and troubling times is an appreciation for "process." The act of learning to so something difficult well is the very essence of "craft" whereas a blind dependence upon technology to make things easy/peasey is the coin of the realm these days. It all started with auto focus, which at the time seemed pretty cool, and then progressed through auto this and auto that. Then folks discovered Photoshop and super saturated color became the end/all, be/all, solution to all problems. At that point myself and others started to say that what was really required was a development freeing the photographer from having to be there to press the shutter button. Apparently someone at Adobe was listening and so now we have Photoshop Ai which will allow the untalented to fake their photos. as the naturalist/philosopher Edward Abbey once pointed out "Growth for growth sake is the ideology of the cancer cell?" Is the disease of technology going to kill off creative activity and skill…it will depend upon how we either blindly accept it or reject it. Speaking for myself I'm stickling with Lightroom 6.14 and what talent I have in using it responsibly.
One-hundred percent agree. My sister-in-law was a mathematician at genius level. She was drawn to music for that reason. She may have technically been one of the best I've heard. She would practice over and over until she felt it was, again technically, perfect. The problem was there was no emotion or soul in her music. No art, if you will. So a technically perfect photograph, and that's all, isn't going to make much of a splash in today's world. Whether we like it or not. I'm a 75-yr-old beginning photographer (still after 5 yrs of trying) and I'm working hard to learn how to use my current Z6ii. I'm also working on learning how to best tell the story. It's a joy and a challenge.
I believe if you think of photography as a technical endeavour then technology is destroying it, however, if you think of photography as a creative art then technology is just one of the many tools that we have in our creative tool box.
Agree 100%! As a family professional photographer for 30 years I have welcomed each new advancement, but first I had to embrace it and walk that scary unknown territory of not understanding it.
If there is one thing I value the most in this journey it’s educating myself constantly on the new offerings! Thank you for all you do for education!!!! ❤
I think the “biggest” thing we need to worry about as a photographer is not so much the equipment it’s AI
Just take a look at the latest beta of Photoshop one can start with blank canvas and create something that is in some cases quite amazing and it’s only getting better every day
I will agree with this whole heartedly. As camera technology improves, you are still the one who decides when to take the photo and how. With AI. who is the photographer???
I agree, they're already creating images that are hard or impossible to discern between Ai generated and real images, and as you said, it's only the beginning.
First of all, I'm not a wildlife photographer and I'm very pleased to see you are able to pursue your passion. However, I have been shooting professionally for over 50 years everything from 8x10 " to the current digital stuff. I shoot whatever format suits the job. Unfortunately, in the world I work in, commercial photography, architectural etc. I find lack of craftsmanship often produces lousy results from younger photographers, no matter how much they try to fix it after the shoot. Photography on many levels is far inferior than it was in the 1930's thru 1950's and there is no excuse for it.
Unfortunately, with the ease of A. I. corporations with be perfectly happy to steal our images and create whatever they need without the photographer. I have sued companies to obtain the royalties they owed, for stealing an image or part of one and publishing it without my permission. I don't see it getting any better.
I am an old man, I've been a photography enthusiast for over fifty years. I still shoot 8x10 and 4x5 among others and I agree that a lot of modern digital photography sucks.
Thought provoking. In the end the technology allows us to routinely get great shots. But the truly artistic fabulous shots are still a vision that the photographer brings to light.
The question is : how many of those numerous great shots do you really like and want to share with passion ?
I agree with pretty much everything you said Steve regarding the advancements in camera technology. AI is different though. With all the generative AI features in post processing software you really can seemingly take bad photos and turn them into shots that can match many pros. At that point I don’t consider it photography or being a photographer anymore. A digital artist perhaps, but not a photographer since the final image in many cases isn’t remotely close to what was actually experienced and captured.
I agree with that comment
I agree to you comment regarding AI usage. I think this new technology, which is only at it's beginning step, will change the possibilities for post processing completely, LrC already tells us some stories. Whereas I am not against the usage I still think that there is an urgent need to inform the consumer about how the content of information (pictures, videos, text) was modified with the help of AI. I still do not see too much activity in this respect.
This is AI art, not photography, although it may resemble photography.
Does anyone, other than you, care? If it looks good, and resonates with the viewer, that is what matters.
The AI implementations today rely upon a huge quantity of images taken by real photographers. It has shifted the trade, to be sure, but it has added another dimension.
Spot on; painters have always searched for the better brush to paint their masterpieces, so technology is just providing us with better brushes. I, for one, liked your message today‼️😊
I can't afford to be a photographer anymore. Taking up painting.
What would a painter appreciate if his brush had some kind of autotune correcting everything to keep it nice ? (some painters would certainly like it)
Really well articulated. I've had many of the same thoughts over the years - to the point that, at times, it was almost overwhelming. You eloquently put into words something I've wondered about and have inspired me to strive harder and harder to hit that mark.
You hit the nail on the head, I've been taking photos since the mid 60s, I love how the camera and technology has evolved. Great video
Hi Steve, what a great video and I am old. I have been a dabbling amature my whole life and have struggled with tech, but I have advanced with it. Back in the 80's I almost gave up on photography because I could not afford the processing and learning curve of film. Now I get to look at my pictures, adjust my techniques and even have several of my photo's blown up at the endoscopy center I run. It is so much fun focusing on the subject and composition, instead of realizing that I forgot to adjust my ISO or realize that the ISO of my film made the shot I wanted almost impossible. Thanks for all you do and for being honest, it is always greatly appreciated!!!
Was going through that same thought process myself when I was out doing bird photography just yesterday morning. 100% agree with your analysis and look forward to upping my game again. Thanks for sharing 😊
When I saw the headline for this video in my email, my first reaction was “where’s Steve gonna go with this”? Happy to say you largely went where I thought you would. That the quality of photographs could be debated on artistic merits is perhaps the strongest endorsement of the technology itself. Great video essay. Thanks.
Spot on! Among many other things, I don‘t miss a second of the days when I had to bring boxes full of slide film on a trip. Technology is supporting my creativity and my joy doing so, it‘s not replacing it.
As always Steve, You are “Spot-On”. I began my journey in 1976 and was drawn to photography because of the power of leveraging the proper blending of science and creative imagination is what delivers the most impactful images that will evoke emotions
100% agree. Well said. Thanks for the video, Steve. It's funny, I was just telling someone pretty much the same thing last night. Learning to use your camera is one thing but finding and creating your artistic style is something every good photographer needs to do.
Hands down one of the best video's I've seen in a long time! 6,5 minutes very well spend. Many don't get it, the ones that do are laughing! 💪 Thank you for making this video Steve!
Steve, you are the most well thought out, uplifting photographer out there, but beyond the artistic, the novel still catches the eye most easily.
I seriously hope it isn’t! I do feel more would get more enjoyment from photography if they studied the fundamentals of photography because they’re as important as ever!
the fundamentals of photography isn't turning a focus ring... the fundamentals are light and composition... which the camera can't do... advancements in technology just allow people who can't do useless stuff like turning a focus ring to also be able to realize their vision... and that's coming from someone who has been shooting his Leica M4 since he bought it in 1972 and never owned a digital camera
Yip, what a great listen. A pro who does not feel threatened by amateurs with expensive cameras. Wonderful, and congrats. Your take is so refreshing. Your art speaks for itself.
I follow this channel not because I do much wildlife photography, but because Steve is masterful at helping me understand the technical abilities of my camera. Watching this video, where he makes a powerful argument for the creative over the technical side of photography, I see one of my favorite technical resources take a stance that seems to flip my expectations on their head. Thanks, Steve - I have a small and diverse collection of TH-cam photography pros I follow and this notches you up in that elite (to me) group.
Very well said Steve. For me who has started on film and then eventually moved to mirrorless your words are every bit true. Nothing beats the light, the composition, the ability of the photographer to engage with the subject. Technology has helped us with taking more challenging shots some of which were a dream in manual focus film days, the keeper rates have gone up significantly, the artistic prowess has and will always remain with the photographer.
Back in the 80’s I was at a PPA meeting where a Kodak rep spoke of future changes in photography the things he spoke of made a lot of us poopoo his words. Change isn’t always accepted easily. I resisted every technology change through the years but after educating myself with each advancement I became a better photographer. Great topic and presentation Steve.
Steve, I totally agree. I am constantly trying to up my artist skills. Trying to make a connection between the image and the viewer. Thanks for you thoughts!
Absolutely spot on. No tec or AL can produce the story. Because that story is about you the person the photographer, no one ever asks me what camera or lens I use they are not interested, it's the image and your relationship with it and your viewer.
I think you're spot on. I feel a bit anxious about the technology because I won't be able to as esily impress my audience with crisp, detailed shots of birds and animals but at the same time - it has always been the composition, the light, the story that my shots conveyed that really impressed - and now i will simply need to, and be able to focus more on the art and less on the technical. It will still require the effort, dedication, and passion to be in the right place, at the right time, and envision the shot in your mind's eye to separate great shots from snapshots.
Very interesting video. I've been behind a Nikon since the mid 70's and to this day go back to the basics I learned from a mentor like composition, lighting and most of all opening the creativity part of my mind. A camera is nothing more than a tool. As years go by tools get better enabling us to achieve our goals with more success. The better the tools the deeper in my mind I have to go to stay creative. Like you said, anyone who spends enough time can get proficient with a camera. Photography is an art that is learned through experience and vision. Thanks for a very different presentation Steve!
All prior innovations were aimed at improving photography and make it better and easier, AI however will eliminate photography. That is the difference.
Absolutely correct, Steve. I am an amateur photographer and can take many great sharp photos with my state of the art cameras and lenses. But, taking images that can tell stories and making people inspired is completely different. I really like your photos because yours do that. Thank you.
Steve, you are spot on! The modern cameras make it easier to focus etc but don’t make a difference to composition and an artistic eye.
As always (and particularly, as of late), exceptionally well done and concise. It's been my observation, and this is not unique to photography (cell phone, computers, music), that the more senior one is, the more difficult it may be to accept the changes that inevitably will come. I've seen this, as you have, already in photography. The advances never stop, so you can embrace them and be at the front, or complain and watch them go by - or just enjoy where you are. The unfortunate part is that it "costs" significant amounts of purse to be able to take advantage of the newer, ever faster changes in AF, AI, and capture/precapture/autocapture technology - and learning new software techniques to advance your creativity. Yes, artistic vision is perhaps more important than ever, but I believe those that lament the rapid changes also have a gripe that they have to wait for it to become more affordable before taking advantage of it. Great job as always, Steve.
A timely video Steve, as today I got my bucket list shot of an Osprey diving towards me with talons out. I'm shooting a Nikon D500/500PF combo, but know that eye AF on a mirrorless camera would have given me an advantage in sharpness, so I totally agree with your viewpoint. Technical advantages are great, but one still needs to be an "artist". Cheers.
agree 100% great video Steve .the Zebra in the rain stunning , contest entry for sure. up here in Canada we have learned a lot from your videos
I enjoy photography as a hobby and don't have the new and advanced equipment (or the funds to begin with) but looking at the new technology, nice to have ... but it's still the photographer's knowledge, artistic creativity, hands and eyes ... etc that are needed to do a lot of the other work other than just a sharp pic because the camera has the technology to make that happen much easier. So, definitely agree with Steve. Thanks Steve! and I am looking forward to getting some good books of knowledge and wisdom on photography from your website. I enjoy your videos and it has helped me a lot! 😀
I appreciate your up front warning that I may not like what you have to say about the new technology in photography. But it was unnecessary. You perfectly described what I feel is needed in a world of ever changing technical marvels: leverage it to make yourself better. A better photographer, a better artist, and a better person. Thank you Steve for addressing this issue.
Excellent Steve, The camera is a tool that most anyone could learn to use. It takes an artist's vision and sensibility to make a good or great image. Giving Rembrandt and the Average Joe the same tool, like a pencil, to create a drawing, Rembrandt would most likely come up with a more beautiful and compelling image.
As always, a clear view of the present but more important, the future!... Thank you Steve!
Being open minded and focused is the essence of creativity. Technology will keep changing around us. I like your take. Love your videos.
I totally agree with your points! I shot sports in those days (early 1970s) when it required hand eye coordination. When the first 300 mm f2.8 fluorite lenses came out we were blown away and those photographers got the jobs. The best photographers in the past from Ansel Adam’s to Henri Cartier-Bresson used the best technology of their time for what they were trying to achieve and I believe they would be celebrating today’s technology as well. In the end it’s about the final image that counts and I believe each to their own on how they “make” that image!
Thanks for spot-on analysis. Amazing the things one sees at 55fps that have never been seen before.
I also think an advantage of all of the improvements in technology it brings more people into the hobby / profession which I would suggest for majority of camera owners it is a hobby. It allows the beginner / average photographer to get better results which builds on the excitement of taking photos and the more you are excited about something, the more you do it. The artistry aspect is always something to improve on and learn. Photography and golf are alike. You can always get better but you can never be perfect:) I think most people will agree with you on this topic Steve. I know I do.
GREAT video, Steve! Beautifully written and I agree with you entirely! I smiled when I saw you bringing up the old breakthrough cameras of the past, particularly the Nikon FA.
I recently had an exchange with Art Morris on his blog. He wrote:
>> Suddenly, 120 FPS is a must have, making 20-30 fps positively archaic. > Just wait until 1,000 FPS is available. Then, no one will want an α9-iii. > I will sell you mine 🙂
ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON!!!
I am a SONY user but still...... I LOVE U!!!!!
Thanks for sharing your point of view!!! Thanks for your work!!!!! 👏👏👏👏👏 you inspire me a LOT!!!! many blessings to you!!!!!🙏🙏🙏
100% SPOT ON! To cut to the chase, the potential for great art has moved from the few to virtually everyone. Now that it's common it's less appreciated.
Totally understand where you are coming from. My first camera - well, actually, my mother's, was a Kodak Box Brownie taking 620 reel film back inm 1957. Since then i have used a steady progression of cameras - Zenith EM, Olympus OM-10, Nikonus, until switching to digital in the mid '90s. I switched to Nikon in 2011 with a D7000 and today use a Nikon Z9 & a Z8. As a keen wildlife photographer - especially birds in flight, I love the modern technology and know I wouldn't get more than 1 or 2% of the keepers I get today if it wasn't for the amazing bird eye detection and super fast burst-mode shooting. However, last week I bought an Olympus OM-1(N) 35mm film camera for just £109 and am enjoying the challenge of going out and taking some photos tptally manually with everything down to me for better or worst!!!
Well said, Steve. The advance of technology will never cease, but blending this with artistic skills will create awesome photography ..
Totally Agree ! Thank you for always providing honest and knowledgable insights. Your videos have made me a better photographer 10 fold !
Steve, I agree with you. Especially for birds in flight photos, the technology allows us to capture many more shots in focus. To win a competition or sell a print in a gallery, we all need to up the artistic merit.
Good points well made. My contribution to this thread would be that the latest technology can be very expensive. I do my best with what kit I have and am always delighted when everything comes together in a memorable shot. I’m probably my own worst critic but will keep reading the manual and watching TH-cam tutorials to make those small steps to better, whatever and wherever that is 🥴
Well done. As nostalgic as I am for the good old days of manual focus and bricks of Kodachrome, we are in a new age. The commercial value of even a stellar image is worth only a tiny fraction of what it once was. It has been a long time since anyone, anywhere, is really able to make a living selling nature and wildlife images. The future is AI, and photographers will only be supplying raw material for the digital artists, and that will become less and less important over time. That said, I hope I never lose the thrill of capturing a good image, and will never tire of the experience of being outdoors and observing nature. Every outing with your camera is a treasure hunt!
Great video and thoughts Steve. I agree completely. Cheers.
I am in complete agreement with you. I started taking photos with a Soviet-made Zenit 122 and now I own a Z9. Yes, technology helps to push the creative boundaries, there is nothing to be afraid of; unless one's capabilities are devoid of any artistic vision. Thank you so much for your videos. Please keep them coming.
Spot on! Bringing up the point that yes, not only has technology advanced and changed but so has the requirements for great photography. And for me, it is always about artistic merit. Sometimes you can't plan a shot but when you can it is great! It is also important to always be learning and honing your skills. The one thing I am not crazy about is A1. When I see people saying "what a great shot" and it is so obvious to us as photographers that it has been created by A1, it is a little depressing. But if you use some of the tools in PS or LR you too are using some A1.
Agreed ! In fact I think it is much harder to upskill in the artistic side of things than the technical !
25 years I've been shooting and I still have no artistic vision. But at 70, I've given up thinking it'll happen
Thanks for making this one. I think the great thing about the technology is that great photography is now in my hands. My average bird outing now, would have 40 years ago required three cameras, two assistants, $400 in film, lots of good luck, and months in a high-end dark room. Now, I take 500 exposures, and process my 12 best in a few hours. I produce photos I like, and that's all I care about.
Spot on Steve. You have to be there and get the shot whatever kit you have, new tech may get you more keepers but the skill in finding the best photo and location is where the best images are created.
Absolutely agree…I don’t yet a mirrorless. Good man Steve
I love the new technologies, which allow me to focus on compositions.
That's the most important part... turning the focus ring was never what made a photographer good. Composition, light and inspiration is what is important... the camera taking away all the annoying bits that keeps people from not being able to realize their vision is one of the greatest advances we have made in photography if not the greatest
Hey Steve, I totally agree. Even taking photos to record changes in my garden, I'm using me to frame it nicely, close in on the insect or bird and ensure the light works well. And that's just in my yard.
definitely a 'glass half full' man, Steve. I'm glad to say. love your work
No, technology is not killing photography. One still has to compose a photo, know how to use the technology, and get the shot. In my mind the most significant element affecting photography these days are these editing programs that can literally do anything with a photo no matter how bad it was when the photo was taken. Even amateurs like me can and do use them to produce a significantly better end result than the one with which we started out. To me the editing is where the "cheating" takes place. Modern editing programs don't kill photography but they sure do allow us to put out a photo far better than the one in the camera. Love your channel. Thanks for discussing this subject.
Great post Steve, many thanks for dealing with this head on! For me, I've gone back to using my 16 year old D700, and 12 year old D4, why, quite simply because they still produce outstanding images, just as they did then. I don't need the latest mirrorless (let's get on the bandwagon, just because) or 16 million AF points etc etc...At the end of the day, the skills lie with the photographer and how they use light, composition, angles, timing and so on.
This is a very good topic to discuss, i personally thought that the revolutionary of technology is making photography less difficult to do, it does lower the threshold of it, and maybe the cost to make a photo, people might not need to learn the manual focus, with the aid of photoshop or similar software, people won't really need a really accurate exposure value in certain time, but the foundation of photography still there, we just getting more chance to get a good photo, thinking about more on composition/artistic work.
Your spot on Steve and I agree "The Future belongs with the artists."
Quite well observed and expressed! Agree with you. Being an artist since my childhood I always prefer as little as possible technological complications and as much as possible artistic freedom 😊. This is what the new technology gives us. With the newest gear I am able to express and manifest my creative ideas and visions with much greater ease and effectiveness 😊
100%, Steve! And I love your images which accompany the video. Thank you for all your content.
Very well said Steve. I totally agree with you. Not only does it give us the chance to improve artistically, I think the way AI is improving all the time, some may need to think about morals and integrity when exhibiting their work.
I couldn't agree more. I look forward to the new improvements in cameras and post processing apps.
I totally agree Steve. Technological advances allow us to expand our artistic creativity way beyond anything imaginable in the past. Those who criticise these developments still think the earth is flat!
The process is what I have always enjoyed. And so, among many other things, I always keep my camera on 'single shot' mode.
Great comments Steve. Thanks!
Many excellent points Steve - as you say, you can't stop the advancements in technology, including digital cameras and photo processing software. However, the caveat is, with all these advancements - the veracity of the image is lost as photographers and retouchers use spot removal, sky replacements, generative AI, generative fill, HDR, composite imagery and more to make the viewer wonder - is it real... or fake?
After many years, I quit a couple of camera clubs here in Montreal, after members clamoring for the top prizes and trophies used every PS trick to create stunning... and ultimately fake imagery. When I challenged one member's winning night photo taken from an airplane window with streaking meteors as being impossible, she became hostile claiming it was her artistic choice. She had added the streaks in PS!
I enjoy your imagery and videos because you do the hard work, going out in all kinds of light and conditions, to capture fabulous imagery using the technology in your hands to photograph the scene in front of you, while detailing how you accomplished them to your followers. In my books, keeping it real is what it's all about.
And as a freelance photojournalist, the veracity and truthfulness of an image... is paramount!
Cheers from Montréal.
Well said. My first 35mm was a Zenith-E. It felt like you were assembling the camera for every shot and if you held your tongue just right you might get a keeper if your subject was a rock. A stationary rock. 40 plus years and several cameras later and I've spoiled myself with a Z8. It's like comparing a poorly made hammer to a mind-reading fully automated robotic welder. I wouldn't trade my initial experience on that rig. It was a brutal but fair teacher on the interrelationships between every setting on a camera, but I never want to go back. The bird photography that I enjoy today is simply not possible on that Soviet hunk of iron, or any other manual mechanical cameras from not that long ago.
Interesting video Steve. I only have to think back a few years and how my own wildlife photography has changed. It's now much more about capturing the animal in its environment, capturing a rare moment or using the light and conditions to add atmosphere. While there's still a place for good portrait shots, they sure don't have the impact they used to have. The other significant area is in processing technology. Great photographers (think Ansell Adams) have always had the ability to extract the most from an image, and while the technology has gone ahead in leaps and bounds, it still requires considerable skill and an intimate knowledge of the subject to get the most out of an image.
Excellent video Steve and all the points very well made. I agree totally it's all about the artistry. The next natural question (which you did touch on), is how far that is taken in post, expeciially with AI features in Photoshop and Topaz and the like. They have gone from correction to creation with these advances. It's trivial to add a new sky, or introduce new elements. For example I just took a picture of a plane against a blue sky - it's a boring image, but using photoshop I can add a dramatic sky to make it half decent. Personally I am uneasy with that because I am a sky I didn't photograph as really the most interesting part of the image. A better exaample maybe a picture of a bird on the ground that is a crisp and interesting image, but in which I feel the surroundings are uninteresting or distracting - they can be changed completely to fit my original artistic vision, but the bird is still the main focus - this feels more acceptable to me, but it's a fine line for sure. Would love a video on your thoughts around this.
Yes I agree, I know in my earlier days I felt that what I was getting was not as good as what I wanted but now it is achievable
I agree, and you've expressed it well.
Another aspect, though, is that smartphones are changing the eyes of viewers. They're not comparing your photos to what they see through their eyes in the world, but what they see through their phones. This isn't a big factor yet for wildlife photographers, but I do think it has changed how we view images of people. Probably akin to the change that happened when film became fast enough that subjects no longer had to sit still for a photo.
So true and agree completely. Long time ago with my first Nikon film camera F80, I really had to be careful about f stop, shutter speed etc, working on manual mode to get the correct exposure, forget about BIF. Now with my mirrorless Z8 the technical part takes less time, I can work on composition and different scenarios to make a photo.
I retired several years ago, I can only imagine the shots I would have attained with my Z9's and glass of today. I think the technology AI will replace the need for a Getty Images or individual photographer in the very near future if not already in progress. I have several friends in the Tech/IT field as well as family. They have shown me tidbits of what is in the pipeline, its crazy, companies will only need a graphics dept which many have and create any image needed. No fuss - no muss - copyrights are of yesterday.
I was explaining a scenario that you could explain that you wanted a photo of a leopard drinking out of a pond of water to AI and it would be produced in seconds. The young person I was talking to is about 12 was doing something on his phone and right after I stopped talking he turned his phone around and showed me that photo on his phone.
It's still going to be cheaper for a company to buy stock photos vs hiring someone and paying him salary to create photos with AI.
Good video Steve and I concur with all your points. Exceptional photos require an artistic skill that no camera, even now with AI can imagine. Furthermore, post production editing (PPE) is also a an art form. Early on people criticized PPE saying that it was cheating. Sure there’s AI and other applications that can be used to enhance images. But exceptional PPE has become an art form. You can learn how to use every single function of a PPE application, but it takes an artist to use those functions to create a masterpiece as opposed to a just a sharp, saturated, and exaggerated image.
I agree with what you are saying Steve. As a young photographer standing where you are today getting great wildlife shots did require technical skills which the engineer in me loved. Safaris were all about tracking and getting the best photos, the pleasure came from knowing my subject and my gear. Forty years on, I would still love the tracking, but I know that I don't have the eyesight and reflexes of a twenty something!
Looking back I do have a lot of technically excellent but artistically dull images that I wouldn't take today because my focus would be the composition and not the technicalities.
Great perspective! The learning curve on these new technology advances is still pretty steep. Most who buy "pro-level" gear won't put in the time to truly learn all the capabilities. That leaves the "P for Professional" mode still able to get great imagery but not to the level that a true pro can get. That's my $0.02.
Omg soooo true! I was thinking this the other day when a technical bird photography friend lamented that everyone can take a good photo these days - because they relied on being good at the traditional technical photography (in standard light) they feel more challenged by the advances, whereas I prefer more artistic shots (which to do well, by the way, still require you to be technically good - so people who think artistic shots are just an excuse for bad photography this is fundamentally not true, to do artistic well, you need to first master the technical side) I don't feel challenged by the technology at all - I am excited by what I can do!!! Especially birds in flight in unique lighting situations etc.
Agreed. I'm a 70 year young techno geek, and have seen it all in the photo world. I love what can be done with my modern day camera that ASSIST me in getting the image I want. A newbie just can't go out and buy the best equipment and expect to capture an amazing critter or bird in flight. One MUST put in the time. There is so much more to just getting the shot. Like maybe learning wildlife and where to go, not scaring them etc etc etc. Cheers!
Well said! Sometimes we forget we are only humans and the choice is up to us if we want to evolve with new technologies and LEARN from it on a daily basis. Thank you.
so true Steve, todays imaging possibilities are enormous, however there is still a lot of magic in seeing one of my students develop a print in an old fashioned darkroom. I think there is still room for both film and technology.
I've been doing photography, both personal and commercially, for about fifty years. Yeah, I'm old. I agree with all you've said. I can appreciate anything that makes getting the shot I want easier. Which is why I keep upgrading cameras every few years. Still photographing and enjoying more, all the time.
I still am working on mastering my equipment, so I look forward to developing the artistic part of the craft as technical skills improve. Great comments...
I think we've all become like heroin addicts, always needing a stronger and stronger dose to reach higher highs. Why does every pleasing or artistic photo need to be like "ooooo" or "ahhhhh" moments. We are setting ourselves up for disappointment when a nice photo comes along and someone says, "oh so what I took that 10 years ago." I do photography as an enjoyable hobby for myself, not so I can print photos to hang in a gallery for viewers to drool over. There's a photo channel here, I won't mention his name, but he takes photo submissions for critique. Many of his critiques are valid, and funny too, but he will sometimes dis a shot such as a landscape shot, because he is not getting excited, as he would from two birds in mid air sharing a worm. That's what I'm talking about, the photography heroin shot. After a while we need stronger and stronger doses, reaching a point where no photo with artistic or aesthetic merit will be appreciated. That's the danger with "raising the bar".
Well said!
Hello. I think you do a good job here and, as far as the admissible premises go (the paradigm the argument is constrained by), the argument is solid and persuasive. My response is to say 'True... but what you've admitted to the discussion is only a part of the story.' Photography is not just the image and the means employed to secure it. Photography has personal and social consequences as well. This is where the counter-arguments to your case primarily reside. One avenue here is 'deskilling' - both of the individual and society in a broader sense... the trajectory of technological advances that takes the hard won skills of the practitioner and incorporates them in some device or process that renders personal expertise obsolete. This may be more 'efficient' in terms of production - it may increase output at a given standard - but it also diminishes the expression of competency and the satisfaction available to practitioners. And because technological implementation has never been complete - it has always failed to entirely encapsulate the knowledge and skill of the artist or artisan or craftsperson or surgeon - it's adoption has a tendency to suppress the creative process and support a drift toward homogeneity of output. Ok - it's a big topic that goes on and on, so i won't, but i trust you get the drift. Specifically then, is this good or bad for photography? The answer is, very much, that it depends.... My 'politics' - i use the term broadly - holds that advances in the technology of photography have been a boon for wildlife photography, but specifically because it has enabled a far more detailed presentation of this aspect of the natural world... an important thing to bring to the public (who are generally and variously alienated from this world) when wildlife is under huge pressures from multiple sources. Authentic but magical images of critters matter, and the greater the 'Wow-factor' the better. But this does not hold across all genres of photography... in some the balance swings the other way and the potential for personal and collective harms is immense and real. You're a wildlife photographer - i appreciate your work and i appreciated this video. I can understand why your perspective is as it is, and that you're of an age to have a baseline that references an era when a particular skill-set, and all of the personal benefits that came from its development, was fundamental to any sort of quality performance. Have a good one and all the best. Cheers.
Hi Sir, I just want your opinion on something as I have always found your tips and tricks and techniques very useful since Dslr days.
I currently own the Nikon Z8 + Z 400 f4.5 and the Z 70-200 f2.8. But I want a bit more background separation and a bit more reach so that it's easier to get eye level from a safari vehicle like in Maasai Mara, Serengeti and also here in India (very dense forest unlike Africa). I don't do birding trips separately.
So, I am thinking of exchanging my 400 f4.5 for a 500mm F4E FL ED + FTZ II for around 1650 USD, used condition for 2.2 years.
I can't find any 600mm f4 or 400 f2.8 used and I can't afford the new Z or F mount ones.
Will it be worth it, changing to AFS 500mm F4E from Z 400 f4.5 or should I keep my 400mm f4.5 & get a Z 180-600mm alongside it for the reach.
I mostly rent another body for my trips.
Thank You 🙏
There are some very genuine points raised in this video !
Also tech is getting cheaper, which means the talent who are not so well off can to a degree compete with top pro's, who in turn need to up there game to stay ahead !