>>>>> For the past couple of days, I seem to keep encountering references to >>>>>"stochastic" photography -- or "spray and pray" if you will, and it's >>>>>piqued my >>>>>interest. It's not that I'm considering actively pursuing the practice so >>>>>much >>>>>as I wonder how much my current style (method?) could actually be >>>>>considered >>>>>stochastic. Having never worked in the vicinity of another photographer >>>>>before, >>>>>my days out shooting with Ted Beilby were, as I said, educational. We >>>>>took >>>>>nearly diametrically opposed approaches. >>>>> >>>>> Clearly, Ted came out with better quality shots than I did. He was much >>>>> more >>>>>methodical and exacting and produce much more highly textured images than >>>>>I >>>>>did. At the same time, I came out with some images that, while not as >>>>>polished >>>>>as Ted's, did have some redeeming value -- at least I thought they did. I >>>>>was >>>>>so arrested by the sheer amount of potential subject matter that I felt I >>>>>had to >>>>>get as many different shots as I could in order to get a reasonable >>>>>account of >>>>>my experience, so I shot hand-held, almost exclusively. Knowing that I'd >>>>>have >>>>>at least several hundred shots to go through at the end of my trip (also, >>>>>due >>>>>to a relative lack of PC processing power and memory), I stuck to shooting >>>>>single exposures in jpeg. >>>>> >>>>> Some subjects, I chose to take three or four different shots from >>>>> different >>>>>perspectives and focal depths, while others I shot once or twice and moved >>>>>on. >>>>>And, that's typically the way I do things. A large part of the reason for >>>>>that >>>>>is that I simply don't trust what the camera shows me on its display to be >>>>>an >>>>>accurate depiction of what I'm going to see when I load it onto the >>>>>computer. >>>>>The same goes for my perception of any given scene at the time. I come >>>>>away >>>>>with rough approximation in my mind, and when I get home, I'm usually >>>>>"fairly"close, but never seemingly dead-on in my expectations. >>>>> >>>>> And, of course, a good bit of what I do shoot simply defies staging in >>>>> any >>>>>practical sense. I'm not going to be able to tell a butterfly how to hold >>>>>its >>>>>wings, or a bird where to position itself within my frame. So, I have to >>>>>make >>>>>snap judgments and several attempts. To the extent that I'm able to >>>>>dictate >>>>>composition, I do make a fairly diligent attempt at it. But, at the same >>>>>time, >>>>>I don't try to control every minute detail -- essentially because the vast >>>>>majority of the subjects I shoot are in an environment that simply defies >>>>>control. >>>>> >>>>> So, I was just curious as to the thoughts of the folks on the list as to >>>>> how >>>>>much my approach would be considered "spray and pray" by more seasoned >>>>>photographers, and how much it would benefit if it were less so. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for any input anyone has to offer. >>>>> >>>>> -- Walt
Walt, just a few comments on you post. I started shooting seriously more than 30 years ago and learned a different approach to shooting due to the fact that I was shooting film. Some of the people I go shooting with now would go through a roll of film in a matter of minutes if they were shooting film rather than digital. They truly are shooting and praying. When I was shooting weddings, I had to get the shot in one shot if possible. sometimes, like groups, I would shoot more than one shot because of blinkers, etc. but, for the most part, we had to get it right the first time. Plus, we were shooting medium format so there were only 12 shots per roll. I also am forced to using a tripod physically due to my shakiness. I did shoot at times without the tripod, as I am sure you remember, but my success rate is much lower when I do so. A tripod forces you to slow down, compose more carefully, and pay more attention to you exposure as well as improving overall image sharpness. This is a shooting style that takes effort to adopt but is worth it in the long run. It also means less time in post, culling and editing, and processing your results. The trust in your equipment comes with use and time. Slowing down and examining your settings and composition before you shoot helps you to learn what your equipment is going to reward you with. As far as staging, true, you can't tell a butterfly how to hold it's wings, but you can determine the "decisive moment" but that is a skill that everyone must develop. Be it a butterfly or a drag car launching, the photographer pushes the "little round thingy" to quote Doug. I am not saying what shooting style is best, only how I approach a shoot. You have to develop your own shooting style as well as your own visual style, and I do believe that they directly influence each other. Well, off the soap box and thanks for your patience. Ted -- 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.
