I studied photography at university. While there I completed some units in "moving image" theory, "Film" studies as in movies. I wasn't really interested in being a cinematographer but was just curious. What I came away with was an understanding of how a movie gets made. From concept through the numerous planning and production stages to the final result. The exact opposite of going for a walkabout with a stills camera and shooting from the hip. Oh boy! However.. When I apply what I learned about movie production to a stills shoot everything usually goes like clockwork and I nearly always wind up with what I'd imagined before the get go. All the creativity happens before you even pick up a camera. The shoot is mostly about nailing what you'd dreamt of days before.
My approach to landscape photography is that I need to be totally focussed on it, with no distractions. I was recently on a trip in one of my favorite locations in Alberta, on a fishing trip with my wife, and we totally focussed on that. I could not focus on any photography at all, since we had an agenda in mind. I will return to the same area later just to do photography and be able to give it my 100%.
On your point about lighting, another way to think about it is to conceive of the subject of your image not as an object or group of objects, but the light itself. I know that this will sound abstract, even confusing at first to many. It contradicts a notion that is so fundamental in our culture that we don't even think about it -- the notion that objects are the basis of all reality, even though there is a great deal in our scientific knowledge, from biology to astrophysics, that says otherwise. Why bring all this up in a comment on photography? Because reality is what we photograph. But how do we view it? If we think about the light -- or lighting -- as being primary, it opens up and coheres with a number of the points you made here. Cheers.
@@thomastuorto9929 Well, I wouldn't suggest that, whether the light or the subject were good. I meant that conceiving of the light as primary shifts one's attention to how the subject is presented to us by the light.
I shoot a few different Ilford films. Pan F Plus 50 (I love this film), Delta 100 (the easy button of film), FP4, and HP5 come to mind. You mentioned FP4 provided a nice contrast on a dull overcast day. That made me wonder, is there a "guide" for which of the 4 films I listed (or Tri-X and any other black and white film) works best in various lighting conditions?
@@MichaelLloyd Hey Michael, I can only speak to what I have used and I find Hp5 the most forgiving and pleasant to use for me. (I believe Tr- ix would be similar but not sure… been a while since I shot it) I have heard HP5 referred to as a bit lower contrast. For Zone System it can be hard to get a lot of contrast out of though. FP4 seems to build contrast faster and Pan F even more so. So if you had a real flat scene you might be better off with Pan F or FP4 and develop accordingly. The other thing is once you start developing HP5 for 20 min the grain can become an issue depending. I keep trying FP4 but it’s hit or miss for me. These I tried in Rodinal and have mixed feelings.
Love your videos and all of the content you produce, however, I really don’t like the approach you’re taking with your thumbnails and titles. I get the reasoning on why you shifted but I at least think it’s short sited bc people will want to click to know what exactly you’re showing but you’re existing base (me included) will find it very frustrating over time. Just tell people what the video is about… don’t give in to what everyone else does and become a click bait
Appreciate the feedback, thanks! These are actually being chosen from 3 thumbnails... TH-cam now has a split test option. So I have not changed my approach at all. I just make three thumbnails now and the one that does the best gets chosen...
I studied photography at university. While there I completed some units in "moving image" theory, "Film" studies as in movies. I wasn't really interested in being a cinematographer but was just curious. What I came away with was an understanding of how a movie gets made. From concept through the numerous planning and production stages to the final result. The exact opposite of going for a walkabout with a stills camera and shooting from the hip. Oh boy!
However.. When I apply what I learned about movie production to a stills shoot everything usually goes like clockwork and I nearly always wind up with what I'd imagined before the get go.
All the creativity happens before you even pick up a camera. The shoot is mostly about nailing what you'd dreamt of days before.
That is so cool. A lot to be said about how much creative planning goes into film. And always more to learn for me 👍
My approach to landscape photography is that I need to be totally focussed on it, with no distractions. I was recently on a trip in one of my favorite locations in Alberta, on a fishing trip with my wife, and we totally focussed on that. I could not focus on any photography at all, since we had an agenda in mind. I will return to the same area later just to do photography and be able to give it my 100%.
Think that is a very solid approach 👍
On your point about lighting, another way to think about it is to conceive of the subject of your image not as an object or group of objects, but the light itself. I know that this will sound abstract, even confusing at first to many. It contradicts a notion that is so fundamental in our culture that we don't even think about it -- the notion that objects are the basis of all reality, even though there is a great deal in our scientific knowledge, from biology to astrophysics, that says otherwise. Why bring all this up in a comment on photography? Because reality is what we photograph. But how do we view it? If we think about the light -- or lighting -- as being primary, it opens up and coheres with a number of the points you made here. Cheers.
Gonna have to ponder this for a bit… thanks Phillip 🙏
Are you saying, if there is good light, shoot it no matter what?
@@thomastuorto9929 Well, I wouldn't suggest that, whether the light or the subject were good. I meant that conceiving of the light as primary shifts one's attention to how the subject is presented to us by the light.
@@philipu150 Thank you for that explanation!
its the same with painting, at least in my experience. think not in form but in values of light, for that is how we learn of any form.
I shoot a few different Ilford films. Pan F Plus 50 (I love this film), Delta 100 (the easy button of film), FP4, and HP5 come to mind. You mentioned FP4 provided a nice contrast on a dull overcast day. That made me wonder, is there a "guide" for which of the 4 films I listed (or Tri-X and any other black and white film) works best in various lighting conditions?
@@MichaelLloyd Hey Michael, I can only speak to what I have used and I find Hp5 the most forgiving and pleasant to use for me. (I believe Tr- ix would be similar but not sure… been a while since I shot it) I have heard HP5 referred to as a bit lower contrast. For Zone System it can be hard to get a lot of contrast out of though. FP4 seems to build contrast faster and Pan F even more so.
So if you had a real flat scene you might be better off with Pan F or FP4 and develop accordingly. The other thing is once you start developing HP5 for 20 min the grain can become an issue depending.
I keep trying FP4 but it’s hit or miss for me. These I tried in Rodinal and have mixed feelings.
Well said.
Thank you!
At this moment, I am still learning how to shoot properly on film at all… All images that have a recognizable subject are good ;-)
😂 Keep it up!
👍
👍👍👍
Love your videos and all of the content you produce, however, I really don’t like the approach you’re taking with your thumbnails and titles.
I get the reasoning on why you shifted but I at least think it’s short sited bc people will want to click to know what exactly you’re showing but you’re existing base (me included) will find it very frustrating over time.
Just tell people what the video is about… don’t give in to what everyone else does and become a click bait
Appreciate the feedback, thanks! These are actually being chosen from 3 thumbnails... TH-cam now has a split test option. So I have not changed my approach at all. I just make three thumbnails now and the one that does the best gets chosen...