Nice video CW... Insightful. Thanks for posting the link. One of the few of your links I am glad I clicked on.

Bob, I think you are close, but not on the money with what the video was saying. Ansel had the completed shot already in his mind before he snapped the shot. Then the camera and all post work where just tools to achieve that final work of art. Where as I feel you are saying that post processing is as important as getting it right in camera.

At one time I erroneously felt that if one gets it right in camera, then there is no need for post processing. The problem with that logic, is every shot is slightly different and a camera does not have an infinite number of settings to truly capture anything truely wonderful in camera. The  limited capabilities and fixed ranges of any camera can only get a shot "in the ball park". Post processing is required to fine tune a shot from what the camera captures into something wonderful.

Spray and pray does not get a shot into the ballpark. Time and patience gets one in the ball park. Post processing makes it a fine shot. Artistic vision is the difference between a fine shot and a work of art.

I think where Ansel says (I'm paraphrasing) "if you have the skill and the craft, you can bring that visualization out" which I think is key.  There's a whole process after 'visualizing' that is difficult and time consuming.  (albeit very much worth it when you achieve what you want to)

It seems to me that a lot of the frustration new photographers feel is the inability to achieve their 'visualizations'.  That they have set ideas that they feel they can't achieve because of lack of gear, lack of talent, general lack of resources.

I know for me personally I've been spending a lot of time trying to figure out what does appeal to me as far as photography goes, and then shooting more and more hoping that the vision will become more clear.  That when I go to shoot, I have a distinct idea of what I want in my head.  Now the problem is turning that 'visualization' into a final product.

John Rayner wrote:

I must have misread your first response then Bob. I apologize if you took any offense.

I am not experienced enough to know what a shot will look like in the final print when I press the shutter. There is still a bit of praying done, although spraying and praying is not really my thing. I would rather take my time and compose the shot, then shoot. To just point the camera down range and hit the shutter release, does not appeal to me personally. It is just too stressed and rushed for me.

That might be why I really detest shooting weddings.

I wasn't upset at all, no need for any apology.

When I spray and pray, it's usually after I've lit the crap out of the scene, and I'm trying to get a certain expression or pose out of the talent. If I'm shooting abandoned buildings, I set my camera and shoot a bracket then move on. If I'm documenting some horrible natural disaster, I shoot until I drop.

I think spray and pray is pretty much relegated to shooting models, and everything else is just saturation techniques because it's fun to shoot a lot. At any rate, denigrating someone for using any particular kind of technique seems kind of petty and insecure (not accusing you of anything), and is usually found amongst the ass hats over at MM.

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

When I spray and pray, it's usually after I've lit the crap out of the scene, and I'm trying to get a certain expression or pose out of the talent. If I'm shooting abandoned buildings, I set my camera and shoot a bracket then move on. If I'm documenting some horrible natural disaster, I shoot until I drop.

I think spray and pray is pretty much relegated to shooting models, and everything else is just saturation techniques because it's fun to shoot a lot. At any rate, denigrating someone for using any particular kind of technique seems kind of petty and insecure (not accusing you of anything), and is usually found amongst the ass hats over at MM.

I have tried the spray and pray thing, it just wasn't my cup of tea. Too many shots to try and fix. It is better for me to take my time, light it, frame it, expose it correctly, then move on. Gives me less post work to do. I guess I am just lazy. The idea of retouching 500 shots for an hours shoot does not seem like much fun. Maybe if I was shooting the "adult" genre it might be more interesting to retouch so many shots. Then again, retouching 500 shots of a persons crotch would most likely get tiresome after a while also.

For what I typically shoot... a dozen or so shots is closer to my limit per look.

John Rayner wrote:

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

When I spray and pray, it's usually after I've lit the crap out of the scene, and I'm trying to get a certain expression or pose out of the talent. If I'm shooting abandoned buildings, I set my camera and shoot a bracket then move on. If I'm documenting some horrible natural disaster, I shoot until I drop.

I think spray and pray is pretty much relegated to shooting models, and everything else is just saturation techniques because it's fun to shoot a lot. At any rate, denigrating someone for using any particular kind of technique seems kind of petty and insecure (not accusing you of anything), and is usually found amongst the ass hats over at MM.

I have tried the spray and pray thing, it just wasn't my cup of tea. Too many shots to try and fix. It is better for me to take my time, light it, frame it, expose it correctly, then move on. Gives me less post work to do. I guess I am just lazy. The idea of retouching 500 shots for an hours shoot does not seem like much fun. Maybe if I was shooting the "adult" genre it might be more interesting to retouch so many shots. Then again, retouching 500 shots of a persons crotch would most likely get tiresome after a while also.

For what I typically shoot... a dozen or so shots is closer to my limit per look.

I have to shoot tons of frames to meet the requirements of the client. Even then the client is sometimes forced to create frankensteins, utilizing parts of shots to make a composite image they can get behind for their layout. That's exactly what I'm doing tonight for an ad that's due next week. I don't retouch 500 images, I retouch the selects for the ad.

John Rayner wrote:

So you show the unretouched shots to the client? Must be nice... Doing TFCD... If I showed them all... they would want em all. Sometimes there is a goof or two...

Typically, I give all the images to the client in mid res form so they can select and rough composite on their own dime. When they make their final selects, I get to work retouching them. Since the only thing they care about is their ad, I don't get extraneous selects to work on.

John Rayner wrote:

Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:

When I spray and pray, it's usually after I've lit the crap out of the scene, and I'm trying to get a certain expression or pose out of the talent. If I'm shooting abandoned buildings, I set my camera and shoot a bracket then move on. If I'm documenting some horrible natural disaster, I shoot until I drop.

I think spray and pray is pretty much relegated to shooting models, and everything else is just saturation techniques because it's fun to shoot a lot. At any rate, denigrating someone for using any particular kind of technique seems kind of petty and insecure (not accusing you of anything), and is usually found amongst the ass hats over at MM.

I have tried the spray and pray thing, it just wasn't my cup of tea. Too many shots to try and fix. It is better for me to take my time, light it, frame it, expose it correctly, then move on. Gives me less post work to do. I guess I am just lazy. The idea of retouching 500 shots for an hours shoot does not seem like much fun. Maybe if I was shooting the "adult" genre it might be more interesting to retouch so many shots. Then again, retouching 500 shots of a persons crotch would most likely get tiresome after a while also.

For what I typically shoot... a dozen or so shots is closer to my limit per look.

I wouldn't say I 'spray and pray' but I tend to shoot a decent amount of shots, especially when it comes to portraiture.  The change in expression that can happen in the blink of an eye, literally, is amazing.  So to make sure that I capture that shot, I don't hesitate when I think it's about to happen, or is happening.  Any little bit of hesitation on my part very well means that I've lost that great look, and I may not get it back.

That doesn't mean I set my camera to 3 frames per second and hope I capture something, but it does mean that I may burn through quite a few images.

And at the end of the set, I only retouch the few stand out images.  Not all '500', but the ones that stand out from the pack.

I used to shoot portraits with an 8X10 view camera. The range and detail were astounding, but the speed and response of the shoots were abysmal. I remember shooting for over an hour and maybe burning up 10 sheets of film. I recall reading that Karsh had similar experiences with his subjects. I also believe that shooting in that manner might be the genesis of the get it right in camera crowd. I find it ironic that the people who espouse such an antiquated mantra, probably don't know how to use the equipment that fosters their identity as photographers.

I had a little bit of time today and shot 6, 2 of which I retouched and all of which I adjusted the WB/Exposure on. So I retouched 33% today so far. Although usually, I will just retouch the best shot of the look.

After all... until I figure out how to get my lens cap off... It is kind of a waste of time to do too much.

Deardorff Photography wrote:

Just saw this, Chris Carroll posted the link on FB.  THIS is "spray and pray" Battle at F-Stop Ridge

ROTFLMAO!

close enough for hand grenades and flashes!