12.09.2020

A few more black and white street shots which once again pose the question: Are any of the advancements in camera operation really critical?


People have an understandable tendency toward avoiding engagement with strangers. But it's exactly the engagement, or the willingness to engage if needed, that are critical to making good work. If you have armed yourself with the latest tools but have not armored yourself against potential rejection, or even abuse, then all the great camera gear in the world will have no good effect for your work. 

When I walk through the streets to take my photographs I go with the idea that I might embarrass myself, be the victim of someone's outrage at them having been photographed, and I'm further bolstered to accept that all the shots I take might be abject failures. Unsalvageable by even hours of arduous and expert post production. 

All that seems to really matter is having the will to go out time and time again, to smile as graciously as possible and just react (don't think!) to what you see in front of you. Instinct and reflex being the magic beans.


I love this early evening photo of a group of older Italians on the sidewalks in Siena. The light was dropping fast and the group and handshake was fleeting. I was using an old, fully manual Hasselblad, with a 100mm f3.5 Planar lens. I focused by looking at the focusing ring and setting it to an approximate distance based on previous experience. I didn't have time to meter but guessed that the exposure was something like f5.6 at 1/15th of a second. I'd been watching the light fall and was aware of the range. I tugged down on the the neck strap to stabilize the camera and then, composing through the dim waist level viewfinder, I clicked off two frames. Only one of which caught the handshake.

Everything happened quickly. You can see by looking at the woman just to the back of and to the right of the man in the light colored suit how slow the shutter speed was. Her face was blurred by her quick movement during the exposure.

Would a modern camera make a better shot? It might make a sharper or more noise free shot but at what cost? I think the motion and softness of the image, as well as the two-and-a-quarter inch, square format's trademark depth of field, is at least as important as those other parameters. But the essential piece of the puzzle is always just to be present with your camera and to keep your attention on the swirl of life around you. Nothing else really matters. 


4 comments:

Bill Langford said...

Hmm..... 100mm Planar on 2 1/4, much like the view of 65mm f/2 Sigma. The times they are a' changing ?

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Not as much as we might think...

Anonymous said...

Yeah .hit the nail on the head there.

I'd even argue that the modern shot might be worse. Spontenaity lost in trying to freeze the motion, shoot for ultimate sharpness or get lost in a spray of fire and forget.

Of course it doesn't need to be... That said,it often is...

Lovely shot
Mark

John Miller said...

Outstanding image! I think photographers get hung up on all the technical stuff and not seeing the picture as it unfolds.

Nobody cares what you shot it on, all the viewer cares about is the picture.

Just make you wear good running shoes when you're out...you never know running might be handy.