the further down the rabbit hole the more the devil is in the details

[Peter Schrager]

Large format and some alternate processes like platinum/palladium, gum bichromate, and carbon transfer, are hard work. It is natural that some people find it is not for them. There are many others who find it immensely satisfying. This is to be expected.

yes it's hard work but it still is the IMAGES in the end that count..NOT THE PROCESS!!

 

[faberryman]

yes it's hard work but it still is the IMAGES in the end that count..NOT THE PROCESS!!

Never said otherwise.

 

[removed account4]

yes it's hard work but it still is the IMAGES in the end that count..NOT THE PROCESS!!

couldn't agree more !

 

[eddie]

yes it's hard work but it still is the IMAGES in the end that count..NOT THE PROCESS!!

I agree, but think one needs to enjoy the process in order to make the effort to excel at it. Seeing process as just a means to an end disregards the journey.

 

[Luckless]

yes it's hard work but it still is the IMAGES in the end that count..NOT THE PROCESS!!

I would argue that this is actually a "It depends" factor.

I personally take great enjoyment out of the entire process of creating the image, and I enjoy having different workflows and equipment that feels different and distinct from my other gear. How the image looks is of course a big factor in what I choose to pick when I go to take a photo (and is a big part of why I haven't bothered adding a film camera for 35mm to my collection yet, and instead opt for 6x6 medium format) but there is still the entire process at hand that factors into things.

At some point I would like to have the spare time and money on hand to explore wet plate photography, and my desire to do so is as much based in the personal enjoyment of the entire process as it is in the end product that I can make with it. I'm a geek, and I like chemistry. (I also like computers along with the general science of optics, so I'm really rather happy playing around with nearly anything in the photographic world. I've been talking with a few friends about schemes to combine radio telescope technologies with analog film printing techniques just to see what we can produce. Why? Because I'm a geek.)


If I'm going out birding then 9 times out of 10 I'm going to pack my digital gear and a long telephoto lens. Why? Because those are the tools that I prefer for that task. I think I would have to be up against some rather lousy or very new photographers to win any kind of award for my wildlife photography, regardless of medium I'm using, but frankly I'm rather more worried about the fact that I got out of the office and had a good little hike, saw some wildlife, and enjoyed using my camera. Now and then I even get a few photos that I actually like, which to me seems like a rather nice bonus. (I will use my 6x6 fully manual camera without a meter or any kind of modern focus aid and a mere 180mm lens for wildlife shots, but the overall experience is completely different different. I find it to be great fun and very enjoyable, but I just generally prefer working with my other gear for such subject matter.)


If I'm going to take photos for something simple, such as posting an item on a local online sales site, or quickly taking some basic reference photos to show a basic layout of something, then I'm probably going to reach for the phone in my pocket, press the main button twice to turn the camera on, point, shoot, and move on, all in about probably less time as I would spend unwrapping and loading a roll of 120.


When I'm documenting something that changes and is in motion - sports, wildlife, etc - then I like my "modern*" Canon SLRs - Right hand with a thumb wheel and index finger wheel for quickly and reliably adjusting settings, left hand bumping focus or adjusting zoom. Powerful controls all packed into a tiny little package with everything at my fingertips, and zero thoughts or worries about how many frames I've taken or have left. - Every time I press the shutter button I can rely on a photo being taken, and if I have something like a sports scene in front of me where two players are closing and coming together, then I can take the next shot an 1/8th of a second later, and the next an 1/8th after that, and so on, and it keeps taking them. I can position myself somewhere I expect to have good framing, point my camera at 'the interesting thing' I expect to happen, press the shutter to capture a series of images, and then later decide which specific frame, if any, I go with long after the fact while I'm sitting in a comfortable chair and get all the time in the world to make a choice.
- If all I have from the moment is one single frame where a player suddenly made an awkward or unflattering face? Well, then my options are kind of limited. And if something interesting happens while I'm midway through changing a roll of film, or even mid way through turning the crank to the next frame? Well, not much to be done of it at that point.

(*Modern as compared to other gear I own. As much as I would love the truly latest and greatest in tech, I have better things to spend money on rather than upgrading from perfectly serviceable cameras to newer bodies just for the sake of a few boosts to some 'stats'. I have glass, film, and other things that, strictly speaking, I really don't need.)

If I am photographing something that is stable, and I'm in complete control of when I can take the photo with plenty of time to think and carefully explore a scene in detail, then I'm far more likely to reach for film if I don't have a pressing need to do otherwise. - I get to spend the time before taking the frame to consider all aspects in detail, double check elements of framing, and can be confident well in advance that This is the exact moment in time that I want the photo.
- Mountains and trees have a habit of not doing much that is terribly different from day to day, let alone second to second. Humans on the other hand have a very annoying habit of doing things like pulling awkward 'derp-faces' at the very last moment when trying to bodycheck each other, and often choose to do so in the time between when you begin to squeeze the shutter release and the photo actually being taken. Photographically humans are kind of jerks in that regard, and have zero respect for the needs of photographers if they're trying to do something completely unrelated at the time.


But I should add that I have shot multiple sporting events in the last year with my Mamiya C330, and love the images I can get out of it. And at some point I'm going to do some with a 4x5 press camera. Why? Because the look, feel, and complete process is totally different. I like options and choices. Using one camera and one style of shooting all the time is like eating potatoes with every single dinner all your life. Sure what is in front of you can change, and you can have baked potatoes, boiled, mashed, or in a stew of some kind, but rice is still damn tasty too.


Long and short of it is, if I didn't care about the process, the road I take to create the image, then I would be buying framed photos from photographers rather than buying cameras, film, papers, chemistry, etc and being a photographer myself.
-Without care or worry of the process then to hell with how it was created, I guess the only thing I would have to worry about if that were the case is whether or not I like how it looks on my wall? And that kind of sounds rather boring and lifeless to me.