counter customizable free hit
About This Website

This blog is intended to showcase my pictures or those of other photographers who have moved beyond the pretty picture and for whom photography is more than entertainment - photography that aims at being true, not at being beautiful because what is true is most often beautiful..

>>>> Comments, commentary and lively discussions, re: my writings or any topic germane to the medium and its apparatus, are vigorously encouraged.

Search this site
Recent Topics
Journal Categories
Archives by Month
Subscribe
listed

Photography Directory by PhotoLinks

Powered by Squarespace
Login
« civilized ku # 288 ~ small is beautiful pt. 2 | Main | ku # 665 ~ it's back (finally) »
Wednesday
Dec092009

civilized ku # 287 ~ small is beautiful

1044757-5014066-thumbnail.jpg
Simple Teasures Thrift Shop window ~ Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggen
I'm curious - does the camera that you currently use determine when and/or how you make pictures?

In the case of DSLRs, does size / bulk with your usual lens of choice, discourage picture making under some circumstances. Is it too cumbersome to have with you at all times?

Would a smaller camera encourage more picture making?

I am not particularly adversely dis-inclined to take both of my DSLRs just about everywhere I go but there are times when it is a bit awkward. As an example, when dining in a "fine" restaurant, there is often very little space on the table for even a single DSLR, much less 2. This situation mandates the use of a stand (for the wine bucket) which some restaurants don't have and 2 obviously very expense cameras on the table tends to make a server very nervous.

For me, a smaller camera would not encourage more picture making in as much as I already make pictures everywhere I go, but .... a smaller camera would most definitely be less socially awkward in many situations.

Reader Comments (8)

I went to a retirement party the other night and didn't want to bring the D90 so I took my Nikon P50 P&S. I usually use the camera for digiscoping and keep it in the car for quick outside shots. Yes it is nice and small to carry but I was very disappointed with the results of using it indoors.

December 9, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterDon

I have a nuts and bolts question: how do you carry your equipment?

As a rule, I don't carry all the time so to speak; but if I did, I would want to work out a method at least for when the DSLR was in the car. And further I'm not sure I want to spend on another camera at the moment.

December 9, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterDennis Allshouse

Most of my picturing is associated with driving and the road. I toss my tripod in the back of my CRV and my camera goes in a smallish plastic cooler with some other camera stuff in it is also in the back. I have thought about getting a pocket camera of some kind, not for picture making, but for collecting visual reference material for designing and lettering. I haven't had much interest in making other kinds of photos.

December 9, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterBill Gotz

In a word, yes. The camera I'm using does affect what I shoot. But a lot of it is simply that offered a moderate selection of cameras (two digitals and a number of film bodies) I select the camera based on what I'm planning on shooting.

A lot of it is obtrusiveness though. I shoot a lot more street with my Panasonic G1 or Bessa R than I do with my Mamiya 645, which has been known to scare people when the shutter is fired (A 645 SLR with a winder is LOUD). Some is simple size, if the intent of the excursion is not photography I'd much rather be hauling around a G1 or film RF than a much larger SLR.

December 10, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterAdam Maas

The smaller the better IMHO. I only use the Panasonic GF1 now. It's not perfect, but beats the bulk an weight of all my other camera systems.I wouldn't mind using a decent phone camera if there were one.

December 10, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterSvein-Frode

Why can't you just keep the cameras in a bag on the floor Mark? Is it just too much of a hassle to pull them out when inspiration strikes? Or do just shoot like you breathe? Constantly and naturally?

I wonder, does the wife ever get tired of the constant camera?

December 10, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterMary Dennis

As a hobby photography I require reasonable to good image quality, but it doesn't need to be first class. My subjects include landscape (vista and small-scale), street, architecture, people (posed) and "notes".

In 2007 I decided to get back into photography after a 10 year lapse (from SLR) and went compact digital. The convienence of a camera that is both compact and digital drove the decision.

My Canon SD880 does a good job for the subjects I'm interested in and the presentation methods I use (mainly screen-based, but I've made a few prints up to 21" x 28").

Previously with my SLR I photographed a few weddings for family and friends. I dare say, if asked, I'd photograph a "casual" outdoors wedding with a P&S but not a "full on" formal wedding. I imagine people would be concerned if the wedding photographer turned up with a P&S! Sometimes you need a big camera, flash and tripod to look the part, let alone do the job.

December 11, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterSven W

Mary:

I don't get tired of the constant camera, in part because I have a very strict "I am not a photo assistant" policy. Rarely will I touch any of the gear, because if i do, I will soon be carrying a spare camera or tripod 9(or both) all the time.

Last night, i made an exception to this rule, since Gravitas was taking photos i wanted.

Plus, as Gravitas noted, there are so many other things he does on a regular basis for me to be bothered by.

December 11, 2009 | Unregistered Commenterthe wife

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>