Author Topic: Photography on Channel 5 (Read 6131 times)

CarlRadford · « **on:** September 11, 2010, 09:04:58 PM »

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Channel-Five-How-To-Take-Stunning-Photos-14592

Late Developer · « **Reply #1 on:** September 12, 2010, 08:58:07 AM »

Thanks for the heads up Carl. Although, almost inevitably, it's going to be digital all the way, I will definitely set this to "record series" as I'm sure I can learn a lot. Even if it's not very good, it's got to be better than Eastenders......

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #2 on:** September 12, 2010, 07:55:30 PM »

Photography = digital. We just need to wake up and get with the program...sorry, I've just been out all day at the Thames Festival and it seems that one in five people there was wielding a huge DSLR with a REALLY big lens on the front. Several people had two. I swear I didn't see a single DSLR without a big lens. Don't those things come with primes? Maybe that's how it works. I know it's irrational and that I'm just being a git, but, damn, the whole thing wound me up. Late in the PM I saw one person with a trusty Pentax K1000 and almost hugged him. All I had was my phone which is so old it's stopped focusing, so I gave up taking photos altogether. Was on child-minding duties 90% of the time anyway.

(and rest........"Ommmmm")

Erm, so this program...I'll give it a go. Cheers for the heads-up, Carl.

Late Developer · « **Reply #3 on:** September 12, 2010, 08:51:43 PM »

Quote from: ed.wenn on September 12, 2010, 07:55:30 PM

Photography = digital. We just need to wake up and get with the program...sorry, I've just been out all day at the Thames Festival and it seems that one in five people there was wielding a huge DSLR with a REALLY big lens on the front. Several people had two. I swear I didn't see a single DSLR without a big lens. Don't those things come with primes? Maybe that's how it works. I know it's irrational and that I'm just being a git, but, damn, the whole thing wound me up. Late in the PM I saw one person with a trusty Pentax K1000 and almost hugged him. All I had was my phone which is so old it's stopped focusing, so I gave up taking photos altogether. Was on child-minding duties 90% of the time anyway.

(and rest........"Ommmmm")

Erm, so this program...I'll give it a go. Cheers for the heads-up, Carl.

Hi Ed.

Well, I must admit to being a devotee of both film and digital. I can see merit in both, especially if I'm pressed for time.

I know what you mean about big lenses but hope you take some comfort from the fact that the kit for my D700 comprises 24mm/f2.8, 35mm/f2, 50mm/f1.4 and 85mm/f1.8 (all Nikkor). I have a Tamron 90mm/f2.8 macro (which - like the other primes - fits nicely on the front of my F5).

The only zooms I have are a Nikkor 70-300mm/f4.5 VR and Nikkor 24-120mm non-VR. I do have a Nikkor 17-55mm/f2.8 - but that's for my D300 which is now used, almost exclusively, by my wife.

It drives me nuts when I see kids with high-end DSLRs (+/- long lenses) as I doubt they're learning anything. All power to them if they get good pictures but I'm convinced there's a widening skills gap as a result of reliance on auto-everything "scene" and Programme modes.

Funnily enough, when my wife and I were walking round Shoeburyness a couple of weekends ago, an older gentleman walked up to me, pointed at my Hasselblad and said something like, "I recognise this camera. You have a very fine piece of kit there". My wife nearly fainted as she is from an era which knew little of film and will only join in my photo days out of she can "chimp" over the images she takes, as she takes them...

(For those unfamiliar, "chimping" is the "oooh, oooh, oooh, aaah, aaah, aaah" noises made by digital devotees in self-congratulation having taken a half-decent photo.)

Paul.

Photo_Utopia · « **Reply #4 on:** September 12, 2010, 10:50:11 PM »

I went to a fete last week end there were several guys with DSLRs and long lenses. One was taking images of his kids from about 20 ft with what must have been at least a 400mm lens.
Lots of long zooms too, I had my '70's Nikkormat with 50mm F2- I don't own a zoom anyhow my longest lens is a 90mm for my M4P- I doubt if anyone noticed me

Francois · « **Reply #5 on:** September 12, 2010, 11:25:12 PM »

I have one big zoom lens for my 35mm... never used it in the last 6 to 7 years. I also have a 500mm... stays in the bag.

Thing with DSLR's is since they have a smaller sensor than film, they need lenses with wider apertures to compensate for their large depth of field. Large aperture always means big glass. And more expensive filters, expensive lenses, need for image stabilizers and all the such... I call it a conspiracy theory designed to get people spending more...

Pete_R · « **Reply #6 on:** September 13, 2010, 08:58:08 AM »

http://www3.five.tv/stunning_pictures/

Check out the picture of the girl holding a gas mask and sat with the rabbit headed, wellie wearing partner. What sort of program is this supposed to be?

Pete_R · « **Reply #7 on:** September 13, 2010, 09:20:51 AM »

And then there's the picture of the judge and the ballet dancer. This is looking wierd.

Miller · « **Reply #8 on:** September 13, 2010, 11:53:47 AM »

Will put it on series link but the format is not my cup of tea and as for Suzy Perry.... How does she land these roles. I remember her travelling the world as the face of BBC's MotoGP coverage while knowing nothing about prototype racing motorcycles. Here we go again methinks...

Ed, was at the Festival on Saturday with Holga on me chest and did spot a gent giving out free hugs!

Rgds

Mlr

Late Developer · « **Reply #9 on:** September 13, 2010, 01:24:44 PM »

Quote from: Peter R on September 13, 2010, 08:58:08 AM

http://www3.five.tv/stunning_pictures/

Check out the picture of the girl holding a gas mask and sat with the rabbit headed, wellie wearing partner. What sort of program is this supposed to be?

Bl**dy hell, it looks like the loonies have taken over the asylum....!! What is all that about?? In a funny sort of way, I'm now really looking forward to this series as it looks hilarious.

Hopefully, it won't be an extension of the exceedingly cringeworthy "Gadget Show" comparison of digital to film photography (no guesses required which medium "won") where the test was blowing up photos to posters the size of a four storey factory, or the other so-called scientific tests of which compact camera can cope with being fried using a flame-thrower and then run over by a tank.

Suzy Perry may be quite a bubbly / attractive "face" and effective in getting viewing figures up but I couldn't care a fig for any product / technique recommendation she might come up with. I'm just hoping that the special guests like Charlie Waite take centre stage.....

Francois · « **Reply #10 on:** September 13, 2010, 03:28:28 PM »

All I worry about is people starting to roam around dressed as the Cadbury Easter Bunny thinking they will make everybody's pictures more sensational

gregor · « **Reply #11 on:** September 13, 2010, 04:29:33 PM »

Apparently Tautou is an avid Leica user (albeit digital) with an M8 and is admittedly an snapshot shooter only. But, hey, so is most everyone these days. I bought a Leica D-lux 4, slapping a cheap old viewfinder on it so it felt more 'real' (who can frame a shot in an LCD window?). I bought it for my last trip without thinking beyond that. Now that I'm back I haven't had an inclination at all to use it - though my spouse - an avid cell phone diarist - uses it. But I have to say that Leica, in the M8 & 8 models is doing a decent job of replicating the analogue experience in a digital format - although Photoshop/Lightroom will never replace a wet darkroom.

In commercial work, I've also shot with a leaf system on a hassy for product photography a few years back when they first came out. nothing miraculous there - just everyone thinks the turn around time is faster when in fact it's not.

I recall being on vacation with friends, one of which had a DSLR with huge telephoto lenses. I took a shot of the other side of a (smaller sized) lake. Upon return someone said, "That's a beautiful shot, how was it there?" I said, I didn't know because I was on the other side of the lake...

But, when all is said is done, film is going by the wayside slowly but surely. In our lifetime it will likely be as archaic as wet plate is now. Let's enjoy film while we can still easily get it!

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #12 on:** September 13, 2010, 04:35:40 PM »

Quote from: Late Developer on September 12, 2010, 08:51:43 PM

My wife nearly fainted as she is from an era which knew little of film....

Paul: ignore this question if you feel it's innappropriate, but just how old IS your wife? By my reckoning, digital didn't go mainstream until around 1999-2000....

Miller: I was there on Sunday, not the Saturday. Did you go to the feast on the bridge?

Miller · « **Reply #13 on:** September 13, 2010, 05:11:39 PM »

Feast - bridge...? Naw missed that one but met and had me piccie taken with the legendary breakdancer B-Boy Junior from France who some say is the greatest ever. Take my word or You Tube him...

Yeah, digital ruled the roost down there but folk were really up for a portrait with the ole Holga though.

Rgds

Mlr

Late Developer · « **Reply #14 on:** September 13, 2010, 09:22:57 PM »

Quote from: ed.wenn on September 13, 2010, 04:35:40 PM

Quote from: Late Developer on September 12, 2010, 08:51:43 PM
My wife nearly fainted as she is from an era which knew little of film....

Paul: ignore this question if you feel it's innappropriate, but just how old IS your wife? By my reckoning, digital didn't go mainstream until around 1999-2000....

Hi Ed.

Well, I'm no cradle-snatcher....!! My wife is in her "late thirties" and has a "significant" birthday to look forward to next year (....nuff said ) Mind you, I'm 10 years older and have an even more significant one, just before hers...

Lara's what's referred to as an "early adopter" when it comes to technology. Yes, she had a film point and shoot but found it a pain, even when there was no alternative. She has even less patience than me when push comes to shove (though she'd never admit as much). So, as soon as digital became available to a mass market (post Sony Mavica 'cos that was just too crap for words IMHO) she insisted I bought her a nice little Sony the size of a credit card.

The irony was that she took it on holiday (a safari to Kenya that year) and expected - despite advice to the contrary - to get world class wildlife images when what she actually got was elephants that took about 300 of the 5,000,000 pixels available and was duly mightily disappointed. Thankfully, I had a Nikon DSLR and some decent lenses with me - so I got some good shots. However, I also wish I'd had my original F5 with me as the film opportunities with the sunsets and sunrises - as well as the wildlife - were spectacular.

Lara, from that day onwards, coveted a DSLR. She now has my "old" D300 with a Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 on the front.

Having just seen Gregor's post, I feel like the guy who killed Bambi...! (Only joking) However, I truly believe that film and digital can co-exist perfectly well so long as people get rid of the mindset that it has to be one or the other. As Gregor so rightly says, we need to use as much as we can 'cos if you don't use it, you'll lose it...

Miles · « **Reply #15 on:** September 14, 2010, 05:12:01 PM »

Just to pick up on the comment from Ed about DSLR's and primes ... As you know I have a 5D (mark1, very old skool for DSLR's

). There's a good cheap 50mm f1.8 that I use on it, cool for low light etc as the ISO setting can go to 3200. The thing is though, and I quote my father here "It's men's jewellery". Buying a good DSLR is a big investment so you want your "phat" lens on all the time, then there's the "deals" that the photo shops do that draw people in. If you try to explain to a DSLR only user what a prime lens is ... They will look at you blankly, and why not. They cannot see the point, if you start off with crazy zoom it's difficult to wean yourself off.

I only "came back to film" after scanning in old 35mm negs I'd taken and the penny dropped that the restrictions that film gave me (can't change colour and ISO mid "film" and I didn't have anything other than primes) meant that I took sooooooo much more care over the composition with film. Then there's the fact that I'm tight and every frame costs and the fact that the hardware involved gets me lightheaded.

Computer with Glass on the front can't do that, even if they are brilliant.

Waiting for my Fed Micron to arrive from the bay ... It's great to be passionate and shallow at the same time I find !

Miles ...

Alan · « **Reply #16 on:** September 14, 2010, 05:23:10 PM »

I have a 5D MK1 too!

Hav'nt switched it on in . . . about 6 weeks not since
my last paying interior photo shoot.

I used to have all L series zoom lenses and still a lot of the
photographers i meet are solely into L series zooms.

I dont have any Canon ef lenses, I use 2 lenses for my interiors
and 3 zuiko's for landscaping.

I think there is an illusion out there with younger photographers
that L lenses are the be all and end all and that you dont have
to pay too much attention to the theory, any mistakes or adjustments
can be made in Photoshop and just HDR it!

of course there are exceptions . . .

Heather · « **Reply #17 on:** September 14, 2010, 08:17:18 PM »

I think this show is merely something for me to SHOUT AT THE TELLY!

Mind you, these people aren't half bad. I've certainly seen much worse elsewhere on photography forums.

Mike (happyforest) · « **Reply #18 on:** September 14, 2010, 08:26:48 PM »

Episode 1 Portraits

Superficial!

Don't think I'd bother with the rest.

Mike

euge... · « **Reply #19 on:** September 14, 2010, 10:26:00 PM »

I liked it .

Pete_R · « **Reply #20 on:** September 14, 2010, 10:44:19 PM »

I was reaching for the fast forward button after four minutes. But was better than I expected. Might watch the Charlie Waite one but will probably pass on the rest.

euge... · « **Reply #21 on:** September 14, 2010, 11:15:50 PM »

It was a photography programme on Tv.It was on at a pretty prime time slot. On channel 5.

All of these things are pluses.

It was directed at people probably dont step outside the all auto settings on their digital cameras.But

if it gets more people inspired ,then there is always the possibility that some might explore some of the

alternatives or just revive the old slr in the attic.

The 'mentors' ,Harry Borden tonight,Martin Parr and Charlie Waite coming up are not unreasonable people

to have on the telly . The advice tonight ,consider the background,all of the elements of the image/scene

whether they add or subtract from the image.Use the available light ,note its direction.The subject doesnt

need to smile or look at the the camera.Why a particular image worked because of the rule of thirds.I know These things ,but

most of the people I know who take photos, but have lives/hobbies outside of it, dont.

Mike (happyforest) · « **Reply #22 on:** September 15, 2010, 07:46:25 PM »

euge...

My expectations were different. Goodness knows why. Perhaps it was because of the reputations of the mentors.

You are right the points made would be useful to somebody trying improve from the auto everything position.

Harry's comment about keep taking picture until you get the one you want, did make my daughter think about trying a film camera to slow things down and to try and get a good picture first time.

Mike

edthened · « **Reply #23 on:** September 15, 2010, 08:01:05 PM »

Och tae bee honest, a thawt it w's awfie shallow stuff.................an a reelie expected rat "expert" tae sae sumthin like "yooz re viewfinder tae compose yer fotis, so ther

euge... · « **Reply #24 on:** September 15, 2010, 11:22:52 PM »

I'm at home recuperating after a cardiac procedure.If a gadget show presenter had appeared saying ".....later

we'll deal with bellows repair ,coating your own glass plates and platinum printing.But first Ralph Eugene

Meatyard...." it may have finished me off.So shallow is good!

Did anybody catch the BBC4 program on Sirkka-Liisa Konttinen,a Finish photographer who shot the Byker area

of Newcastle in the early 70's and returned in the noughties to see the difference?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00tr1gh

I like these time travel type revisitations eg the Daniel Meadows Photobus series.

http://www.photobus.co.uk/index.php?id=6&movie=the_bus.flv

Phil Bebbington · « **Reply #25 on:** September 15, 2010, 11:31:42 PM »

I watched the Byker program. I really enjoyed it.

edthened · « **Reply #26 on:** September 15, 2010, 11:43:43 PM »

Och a watched re BBC4 program an foond it awfie enjoyable tae !!

harragan · « **Reply #27 on:** September 18, 2010, 08:31:39 AM »

After reading the comments here my expectations were set low as I watched it on the five Player (or whatever it's called) and I was pleasantly surprised. Yes, it was aimed at those who don't know their way around a camera other than turning it on and putting it on auto. So, it was basic. so the only cameras used were digital. But I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a great portrait photographer and there were things there that made me think, "I'll take a few portraits this weekend." I'll do the bulk of my learning through practice rather than simply watching the show but what the programme has done is spur me on to give something different a try. I hope the rest of the series does the same. I like to think I can learn something, anything, from all experiences.

Late Developer · « **Reply #28 on:** September 18, 2010, 04:57:00 PM »

To be fair, it was better than I expected.

The chap who was taking photos of the injured soldier seemed to cotton onto the fact that portraits are about a connection between the photographer and the subject and capturing something of the subject's real "self". The other chap might as well have used shop window mannequins dressed as a ballerina and a judge for all the intimacy and connection he created.

I've got it series linked and will watch what's recorded when I get back in a couple of weeks. Like Harragan, I'm always open to learning something new at any level.

Miller · « **Reply #29 on:** September 18, 2010, 08:49:33 PM »

It was obvious they were at different levels from the outset... The ex-soldier (dude A) had more than dabbled at photography with a compact zoom imo. I found out a couple of days ago that Steve (dude B) and I have a mutual friend so hopefully I'll get the starting prices on what really went down behind the scenes...

Rgds

Mlr