Real photographers don't use Program...

[blockend]

Auto focus is a greater moral vice than program. For street work that really is chancing to fate. The only trick I've never used is auto bracketing - who the hell came up with that one?

 

[blockend]

One of the best compromises between manual and automation is the Canon AV-1. Aperture priority only, plus one and a half stop override with a push button at the side of the lens. For working on the hoof simply hit the button when the camera swings into backlight. No confusing dials or fancy logarithm programs. Not perfect but better than most systems for the street.

 

[perkeleellinen]

I've missed a candid moment more than once by fiddling with the camera's settings.

I've messed up a few scenic shots by leaving the settings on auto.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Auto focus is a greater moral vice than program. For street work that really is chancing to fate. The only trick I've never used is auto bracketing - who the hell came up with that one?

Oh dear....:confused:

 

[perkeleellinen]

Years ago I remember watching a boxing match on TV and the press photographer at the ring side was shooting with flash in bursts of three, at the time I remember thinking aha - auto bracketing.

 

[blockend]

Oh dear....:confused:

Just speaking personally

I've taken many printable negs that are a stop or two out. An AF shot focussed on the building 300 yards away instead of the people 5ft from the camera is irretrievable.

 

[perkeleellinen]

I've taken many printable negs that are a stop or two out.

Have you been able to project a slide that's a stop or two out? That may be the benefit of auto-bracketing.

 

[blockend]

Have you been able to project a slide that's a stop or two out? That may be the benefit of auto-bracketing.

Indeed, but you're reducing a 36 exposure roll to a twelve shot one (or fewer if you multi-bracket) when some intelligent light metering or a grey card can give you the same result.

Downtime re-loading film seems to do away with any speed advantage multi-bracketing brings, unless you're using a 250 exposure back of course. I just find it a conceptually weird override to apply. The 'decisive moment' will have shifted between shots anyway and sod's law dictates the best image will be the one with the worst exposure. If you bracket for a single shot surely turning the ASA dial is quicker than programing and de-programing a function? I'm sure there are situations where auto-bracketing has its uses but they seem to be ones where still life allows more time to determine exposure anyway.
Or is there something I've missed?

 

[perkeleellinen]

I suspect the auto-bracket feature was used by press photographers who didn't have the luxury of considering the light in detail or metering off grey cards. With some of the very fast 8fps cameras a three-shot auto-bracket would take less than half a second. I also suspect that most of them would carry a few bodies so they could rewind and load film during quiet spells. Some of the auto-bracket features allowed the photographer to choose the amount of bracket - 1/3 stop, 1/2 stop, whole stop etc. I think this was a useful feature for a press photographer.

 

[Fotoguy20d]

MY first camera was a Leica IIIc so I learned to shoot with auto nothing. The next was a Canon A-1 - I used Program mode very often, occassionally Av. With my modern Canon SLRs - Elan 7, EOS digitals - they usually live on Program mode (not to be confused with Auto, which does weird things) and occassionally Av (maybe 20-30% of the time). For flash, I prefer Av or Manual. In Program, you can always over-ride the exposure setting with the quick control dial (which is why I'd never buy a Rebel).

Dan

 

[removed account4]

i just find it rather amusing to think that full control of a camera will allow for full creativity.
point and shoot box cameras, were auto exposure, auto focus, push-the-button
and they rendered some of the most interesting photographs i have ever seen.


it seems to me that people are so hung up on equipment, and perfection of exposure and fiddling around
with their camera that they make photographs that lack "the stuff" that photographs are
supposed to have to make them interesting.

 

[blockend]

i just find it rather amusing to think that full control of a camera will allow for full creativity.
point and shoot box cameras, were auto exposure, auto focus, push-the-button
and they rendered some of the most interesting photographs i have ever seen.


it seems to me that people are so hung up on equipment, and perfection of exposure and fiddling around
with their camera that they make photographs that lack "the stuff" that photographs are
supposed to have to make them interesting.

I agree absolutely.

 

[Moopheus]

i just find it rather amusing to think that full control of a camera will allow for full creativity.
point and shoot box cameras, were auto exposure, auto focus, push-the-button
and they rendered some of the most interesting photographs i have ever seen.

There is some difference. An auto or program mode is supposed to produce the "correct" exposure for any situation. A box camera usually has only one or two settings, and you either have to trust pure luck or learn to work with that. Getting a good result with a simple camera still requires engaging Mr. Brain.

 

[tkamiya]

I don't know why people think program mode will get them better or worse exposure. At least on my Nikon, program mode is nothing more than aperture/shutter speed priority - except this time, neither one is fixed. If you wanted to tweak it, you'll have to compensate just as if you would in any other priority modes. Matrix metering; on the other hand, will get you different metering - which could change exposure.

I don't use program but maybe it'll come in handy when getting a usable shot is more important than getting it perfectly in fast paced environment. (such as weddings and such) I'll try it for with flash in future.

 

[Dave Martiny]

I almost always use Program as the default setting on my cameras. If I'm presented with a very brief window of opportunity to take a great photo, I can focus my attention on the composition and on anticipating any changes in the scene, rather than on how the camera is set. When the situation allows, I will slow down a bit and use other modes or go completely manual.

I also use autofocus most of the time. My eyesight just isn't so great, and for better or worse, the focusing screen in my EOS 3 is optimized for overall brightness, with no split image center or other devise that makes manual focusing easier. Besided, I find the autofocus on that camera to be extremely fast and accurate, both in full auto focus and for user selected focus points.

I find that none of this hinders my creativity as a photographer.

Regards,

Dave

 

[blockend]

There is some difference. An auto or program mode is supposed to produce the "correct" exposure for any situation. A box camera usually has only one or two settings, and you either have to trust pure luck or learn to work with that. Getting a good result with a simple camera still requires engaging Mr. Brain.

Agree with that too. Garry Winogrand made many astute observations and one of the best (I paraphrase) was 'everyone knows what a good photograph looks like, that isn't my interest'. I'd respectfully suggest that any image that came out exactly as the photographer pre-visualised, at least on a 35mm camera, is a failure. Great photographs are intention plus a dusting of magic by the medium.

 

[Thingy]

I use the Program button for photographing planes, boats and anything moving quickly (in combination with the exposure compensation dial), and Aperture Priority for macro and manual (with LF) for landscape & architecture and been doing so for more years than I care to remember!

 

[BrianL]

Few of my cameras have any automatic functions so for the most part, not an issue. Where they have auto functions such as AE, Program, SP I have no problem using these functions when they are a benefit. However, there are some cameras I have that after every shot return to a pre-program mode and I have to reset the functions to what I want. Finally simply throw these in a collection box as it is too frustrating. A true purist of course would stop with a camera with no built in metering, no instant return mirror, no automatic stop down. Include any of these and we now invade the auto function world.

 

[blockend]

Matrix metering was the point where I became uncertain about automation. Until that point centre weighting or spot metering gave a fair impression of the scene being monitored. Matrix divided the image into panels and attributed varying degrees of importance to them, all of which was outside the photographer's intentions - or at least this photographer's. Do we override the sky and if so by how much?
Needle metering was pretty sophisticated once the user became familiar with what angle of the needle represented a half stop, one stop and so on.

 

[okto]

I use Program for snapshots. Things I will never enlarge past 5x7 or so, that serve only as memory aids for an experience.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

The only time 'I' use program is to let someone else use the camera.

Jeff

 

[MaximusM3]

Matrix metering was the point where I became uncertain about automation. Until that point centre weighting or spot metering gave a fair impression of the scene being monitored. Matrix divided the image into panels and attributed varying degrees of importance to them, all of which was outside the photographer's intentions - or at least this photographer's. Do we override the sky and if so by how much?
Needle metering was pretty sophisticated once the user became familiar with what angle of the needle represented a half stop, one stop and so on.

I've never used "P" on my Nikons BUT, when it comes to Matrix metering and my F6, I still have to find a better way to expose transparencies. For me, and that camera, it is 99.999% of the times right on the money. If I feel really anal, or using grads on top of warming filters, I will obviously use my Pentax spot meter but otherwise Matrix is incredibly accurate on the F6.

 

[thegman]

Tend not to use it as my regular cameras don't have it, My Lomo does of course, and it's great to just scale focus it and shoot.

 

[dnjl]

Program mode is for the weak!
Just kidding. I use Av or Tv all the time though, haven't shot a single frame in P. Not because I feel too awesome to use it, but simply because I haven't been in a situation yet that required using it. On a side note, I find it very irritating that, on my Elan7, the P comes before the Tv and Av. That way, I have to do two clicks

 

[blockend]

I've never used "P" on my Nikons BUT, when it comes to Matrix metering and my F6, I still have to find a better way to expose transparencies. For me, and that camera, it is 99.999% of the times right on the money. If I feel really anal, or using grads on top of warming filters, I will obviously use my Pentax spot meter but otherwise Matrix is incredibly accurate on the F6.

I began using Nikon matrix exposure in the early 90s and found 30-40% of transparencies underexposed by 1/3 - 2/3 of a stop, especially if back lit. Slides require the whole image to look 'about right' and sacrifice skin tone and other nuances that would be burnt in or held back in a print, to the overall image.