is using "auto" cheating ?

[removed account4]

i have mostly all manual cameras. some focus automatically ( box cameras ) some require me to focus
( variety of 35mm and large format shutters ) and some have aperture or shutter priority and auto metering so
i don't really have to think much it does it for me. i have used p/s cameras that auto focus and expose things
correctly, some i have to do the dreaded zone focus which after i am not sure how many years i am
barely better at it than when i started ... i have one of those electronic nikons i can't mention here
that i can focus manually or use the auto focus mode. the auto focus is more of a PITA with that
even though it is sophisticated ( i guess it needs contrast ) but i tend to manually focus if it is something
critical i am photographing ... i used to love shooting my m3 on auto but i don't drive shotgun as much.
i like not having to think and just composing ... is that cheating?

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

It's not cheating if you know how to use the built-in meter and exposure compensation function. My old Olympus OM cameras I had a million years ago made it easy. I turned the compensation dial to zero and counted the clicks for compensation. Every click of the dial was 1/3 stop.

 

[Sirius Glass]

No, especially if you know what you are doing. Sometimes you just need the auto features to capture the photograph in time.

 

[Helios 1984]

Definitively cheating. You have to do it 100% manual 100% of the time and write down every step...I'M JOKING! Of course you're not cheating, the only rule is what works for you and if you like the shot or not.

 

[faberryman]

...is that cheating?

Can you define what you mean by "cheating" in this context? Normally cheating means to act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage. What would be dishonest or unfair in using auto focus or auto exposure?

 

[Rick A]

Is using a point and shoot cheating? How about a simple Brownie box camera with no way to set anything? Using what ever equipment you own to capture the image you want, that's photography. I don't think anything matters except the final outcome. Being as simple or as complicated and involved in the means is a personal choice.

 

[Helios 1984]

Is using a point and shoot cheating? How about a simple Brownie box camera with no way to set anything? Using what ever equipment you own to capture the image you want, that's photography. I don't think anything matters except the final outcome. Being as simple or as complicated and involved in the means is a personal choice.

+1
Amen to that.

 

[Sirius Glass]

So would chimpin' with a digital camera or phone be cheating?

 

[Cholentpot]

No.

First and foremost is getting the shot. No matter what medium or process. I know many many professionals who have no fear of the green square. I watched a landscape photographer frame her shot and then shoot it on full auto. Came out nicer than most all of my attempts.

So go ahead, lock it in the A and shoot!

(In the wee backs of my mind something niggles me that it's still cheating. NEVER MIND! Onward!)

 

[BrianShaw]

Cheating? Naaaaaah.

 

[summicron1]

short answer: No, of course not. Sheesh!

Long answer: When you use auto you know you are using a determination by the camera based on known perameters and you have pondered pondered the subject and decided that that will work, at least within the your equal skill at printing. So: No, of course not.

 

[faberryman]

Is it cheating to set the shutter speed at 125th/sec and then let the camera automatically expose the film at 125th/sec when you press the shutter release? Shouldn't you have to practice taking the lens cap off and putting it back on really quickly, so you can do it yourself? Reductio ad absurdum.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Long before my switch to MF (which I almost always expose in B mode with all exposures multispot metered!) my photography with an EOS 1N and 1NRS took place with the mode in Av.

Even with TTL flash, it was in Av or P+shift for re-balancing. On occasion I still swing with the EOS 1N, and it’s unfailingly set in Av. Or M (uncommon, but some conditions dictate it when full control must be handed over to me).

I don’t see auto as cheating really. For people with a limited understanding of photography, or those with a learning or a visual disability, involvement in photography can be, and is, a very stimulating and rewarding activity. It matters not then the how, why or wherefor of camera settings, other than recognising the potential of a scene to make an attractive photograph.

It’s silly to spend any amount of money on a camera and not avail yourself to the full-auto or green square mode: at the very least, the results will tell you how the camera interprets the scene and how it manages scenes with ordinary and challenging extremes of of contrast. It will also throw up the occasional pointed question: “Can I do better than the camera?” And, “how would the photograph have turned out if I had full manual control?” These questions are a natural progression of learning photography and becoming an independent thinker away from the camera’s level of taken-for-granted automation. You don’t see full-auto on a Linhof 4x5, do you? No, because that camera is for the thinking photographer. But any thinking photographer can completely bypass camera automation to create the scene he envisages, with any camera at all.

There is also the matter of being prepared for circumstances and have the camera ready e.g. in street genre photography; obviously you risk under- or overexposure if you’re shooting suddenly set to Av, Tv or M and not caring much to make adjustments (or forgetting them!). Full auto gains the upper hand in these circumstances, unless of course the photographer is adept at making on-the-fly adjustments in e.g. manual or another mode. Personal preference, as well as circumstance.

Is full-auto restrictive? Yes! The camera is taking control of all exposure considerations. A photographer is foolhardy to claim credit for an outstanding photograph if he shot it using full auto (as is so blindingly obvious with the digital fanbois). The camera made the decisions on exposure and adjustments, the photographer only aimed the lens and perhaps changed the zoom setting! This is why digital is so popular: the very high level of automation and instant feedback on duds/keepers has made creating a beautiful photograph very easy to people with limited to no understanding of the foundation principles of exposure or photography.

 

[MattKing]

Only if you said you were doing something different.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

No, it's not "cheating". Use of the word "cheating" presupposes that the only "proper" way to make a photo is all-manual focus, shutter speed, and aperture. What about using a meter? What about buying commercially manufactured film? No: it's all about making the image you want.

I've even manipulated Polaroid photos.

That said, many of my cameras are fully manual because I like their simplicity and reliability.

 

[Element 6]

So would chimpin' with a digital camera or phone be cheating?

Yes, if that iPhone pic was a snap of an original print which was taken with a film camera and was hanging on the wall.

 

[Bill Burk]

I find it harder to get a good picture with a camera that automatically focuses or exposes.

A few trips ago I used the Kodak 35 and reveled in the long exposures... Then a couple trips ago I was frustrated by the A-1 automatically choosing a very short shutter speed because the background was too bright... To its credit, even though the rain and humidity were intense... its battery lasted the weekend and the camera never malfunctioned.

 

[Helios 1984]

Yes, if that iPhone pic was a snap of an original print which was taken with a film camera and was hanging on the wall.

Remember me of something I've seen at Walmart, not so long ago. I was there to purchase rechargeable batteries when I noticed a guy doing snaps of framed pictures with his Iphone : /

 

[Ko.Fe.]

My wife takes better portraits in Auto comparing to me in M...

 

[Dwayne Martin]

When I use my Mamiya6 and I'm in a hurry I'll sometimes follow the in camera meter but I always feel like I'm cheating myself a little because its rarely correct and I can do so much better with my spot meter.

 

[Helios 1984]

I can do so much better with my spot meter.

That's cheating too. The only true way to meter light is with your judgement and the sunny 16...I'm joking

 

[Pioneer]

Absolutely...

...who is auto?

 

[bdial]

There are times I wish my Speed Graphic had auto exposure and focus.

 

[Luckless]

The only time using Auto anything in photography is 'cheating', is when you try to claim you didn't use it.

Do you get the images you want and take pleasure from the workflow used to produce it? - Congrats! You're doing photography 'right'. Best way to deal with any who say otherwise is to smile, nod, agree with them, and then promptly ignore them while you continue doing your thing. You aren't them, and another photographer's opinion on what is 'right' is only useful or worth anything when it actually helps you improve the quality of your work in your eyes.

There are times I wish my Speed Graphic had auto exposure and focus.

I've been toying with the idea of rebuilding or scratch-building a press camera as such. While I greatly enjoy using old fully mechanical cameras, I can still happily admit that there are times and conditions where newer tools would come in handy. Not sure how much I would actually use such a thing, but would still be a very neat thing bit of kit to have on hand.

 

[miha]

My cameras are always set to fully auto, I love autofocus, P mode etc,... though not many cameras I presently own have these features. I sometimes wish my Linhof was auto-winding