Love digital photography ~ hate computers!!

[Matt Green]

Am I the only one who feels this way?

As much as I love the convenience and speed of digital photography I don't like the computer aspect of it, being something of a technophobe!!!

Photography (as I see it) has changed from the art of film and chemistry to computer files/downloads and photoshop...nothing really wrong with that as there are some incredible images being produced by these new technologies.

Matt

[Roy C]

I enjoy the processing side very much but I have been into computers from the 1980's so using a PC is second nature to me.

[Adey Baker]

I'd never touched a computer until I bought one for my son about 9 years ago. He showed me the basics of how to use it but I still only really 'know' what I've needed to learn along the way. At about the same time the photo magazines were giving step-by-step guides to the basics of photo image manipulation - the essentials such as Levels, USM, etc., so I kept these until I got firstly, a scanner and then a digital camera.

Provided you've got it 'about right' in the camera then you only need these few essentials to make a decent print. Everything else will come with time and experience and I've only touched a small part of Photoshop so far - part of the fun is finding new options along the way, either by chance or by reading articles, picking up tips here on WPF, etc.

Film/chemistry is all very well but it's a sight more inconvenient if you haven't got a permanent darkroom. For most of us, adapting another room temporarily was the only option and this causes problems with dust as you move things around (no matter how clean you think your house is!), plus all the wasted time blacking-out, moving stuff around, etc. 'Nearly' full black-out is acceptable at the printing stage and a safelight means you can see what you're doing, but with films you have to load them into the developing tank in complete darkness, so whether you use a changing bag or go under the bedsheets at night, you've got to do everything by 'feel.'

Black and White was more or less the order of the day as, without a proper set-up, colour-printing is far more difficult and not much fun (developing your first slide film is exciting when you first take the film out of the reel, though!).

Take a colour negative into half a dozen different shops and have a reprint made and you'll more than likely get 6 different prints back with varying exposure/colour balance - if they can't get it right with their expensive automatically set-up equipment what chance have you got fumbling around in the dark!

This is where digital scores - you can get it looking how you want before printing it and you only need to pay for those shots that you want to keep - no more fuzzy out-of-focus/badly-exposed shots to bore other people with. Every shot you show to your friends will be a good 'un and your reputation as a photographer will go up in leaps and bounds!

[andy153]

Hi there, I'm lucky because my house has a four room cellar - so creating a permanent darkroom wasn't a problem for me. I used to love the darkroom phase of creating prints, colour and B/W and slides. However it all came to an abrupt end in 1986 with a burglary that robbed me of all my photographic gear - 20 years of Nikon collecting disappeared in a couple of hours.

Outside factors then virtually stopped my serious photography and I just dabbled. But I did start on computers - Apple Macs. And work had me start on their computerization program - converting a paper record system to a computer one and liaising with a national database. On the side I started to dabble with Digital Photography to enable photographs to be added to the database, and scanners to add negatives as well.

As I approached retirement I started taking up serious photography again and once more got infected by NAS ( Nikon Acquisition Syndrome ).

I have found that programs such as Photoshop enable me to have as much fun on the computer as I used to have in the darkroom. Playing with the various filters and plugins enable me to see on screen, the effects I used to create on paper. They have the advantage however of being reversible and non-destructive to the original - something you can never do on paper in a darkroom - once you have exposed negative/paper to light for a length of time you cannot go backwards. In the computer you can - before you make the final print.

Technophobia may be a curse for some but it is worth while persevering as the results are most rewarding. There are several good books that can give instruction and also I would recommend www.lynda.com - This site is a collection of short video based demos which take you through the basics of many useful programs such as Photoshop, Lightroom, Mac OSX, Microsoft, Aperture etc.

Follow the online tutorials and see how much fun you can have.

May 2008 be a year of photographic joy to us all - God Bless.

[greypoint]

Never got into home processing with film so I really like being able to put my pictures onto my laptop and play around with them. As my photos are strictly amateur I've never felt the need to pay out vast sums for software - never spent time on tutorials or had a 'workflow'. If you try and get it right in camera then a few tweaks and a bit of cropping is probably all you need. I think the point is to do as much or as a little as you like - and if your main interest is in the taking of the photos don't waste your money on Photoshop but get a better lens instead!

[Vectis Birder]

I enjoy using computers and I do like the processing aspect of digital photography. I love it when a otherwise unimpressive photo suddenly springs to life with a few tweaks.

The two go together. Machines are not just dumb hardware - their designers give them very different characterists and part of the game is to find camera and software that were designed by folks with similar thought patterns to yourself. I thought I had done this pretty well with Canon 350D & Digital Photo Professional until I got Nikon D80 and Capture NX; now I know I have really arrived, tho no good pretending that NX interface has been translated well from its (assume) Japanese origin. Until recently mac computers have also made computer use painless, tho since OS 10.2 a policy of convergence with MS and/or catering for illiterate iPoders or something has steadily taken it downhill.

[Christine]

Matt in a way,I 100% agree with you.This pc stuff is very time consuming,but very rewarding when one has struggled with a certain technique,then suddenly it all starts to take shape.I have never before ,been able to make a Xmas card for the BF comp by adding birds to a card.This year I have sussed out the basics,and i have just spent the last couple of hrs,making my card for next year.Also,I have compiled my own website.
But yes,very little needed for image manipulation,as one can see at a glance if the shot is a keeper,and just needs the basic crop,enhancement,and re-size.A couple of years ago,I struggled to try to make all images keepers,but not any more.
But this pc stuff really is so very time consuming.I used to play Scrabble,do crosswords,read at least 2 books per week,but no more.Insufficient hrs in the day!!!

[Canis Vulpes]

Love computers and was exposed to them before many at an early age. I think we had a computer when I was about 7 years old (1980-ish). Then a computer represented fun with learning in the background. Now a computer represents work, migrating the home computers to Apple mac has relieved the situation a little. Photography on the other-hand forces the photographer to go out, experiment and try new things - fun with learning in the background all over again. The airshow photography I enjoy in Summer is processed mainly in Winter and can represent that work thing again. Not that I hate it but its more of a chore unless working on that magic photo you really think is your best.

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by Chris

The two go together. Machines are not just dumb hardware - their designers give them very different characterists and part of the game is to find camera and software that were designed by folks with similar thought patterns to yourself. I thought I had done this pretty well with Canon 350D & Digital Photo Professional until I got Nikon D80 and Capture NX; now I know I have really arrived, tho no good pretending that NX interface has been translated well from its (assume) Japanese origin. Until recently mac computers have also made computer use painless, tho since OS 10.2 a policy of convergence with MS and/or catering for illiterate iPoders or something has steadily taken it downhill.

I would not even consider DPP as a image editor Chris. It is however, a very good RAW converter. I would have thought that most people who use it would also use something like CS2 for the image editing. The sharperning, Noise reduction and shadows/highlights recovery is basic to say the least.
I personally use DPP to Crop and tweak the exposure before exporting to CS2 where the real editing begins.
If you have been using DPP as your main editor I can understand why you were dissapointed.