| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/11/2010 09:57:38 PM · #51 |
 Bear_Music and chromeydome you guys are right on.
I love the discipline imposed upon me by shooting in Manual mode. I have a tendency to get excited and addle-brained when I think I have the "perfect" shot - Manual mode requires me to slow down. It forces me to think it all through and make damn sure I get what I want and need in a shot (pay no attention to my DPC scores!) I haven't shot anything else but manual mode for years.
I do understand Covert_Oddity regarding his point about having a camera capable of doing stuff that you used to "have" to know. But the points Bear and Chromey are making is that, like any computer-driven task, the human being can still outperform a computer in many complicated situations. The key is knowing when those situations are occurring and why they are occurring and why and how the human can out-perform the computer.
Great discussion.
|
|
|
|
02/11/2010 10:05:11 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Well, your 'camera snobbery" comment is a bit out of line, seeing as your OP suggested that manual was only good for learning, implying that once you know all you need to know, you don't need manual anymore.
So, if your question was legitimately asking what the value of the manual setting is (as opposed to just arguing a position that it is unnecessary), then you got some useful answers here. |
The "camera snobbery" wasn't directed at all responses on the thread, as has been pointed out, there are situations where manual mode is better, and to be honest, after listening to all the responses I am tempted to go back out and try manual mode all over again just in case I am in fact missing something. The comment was directed more at those who were of the attitude, "you're not a true photographer unless you're using manual mode", and while I know no one outright said that here, I have seen it implied many times in many places, and you have to admit, some of the responses here came across a bit like that as well.
Thanks to all those who have given me good reason to go try it over again, perhaps now that I've been shooting a few years I might find it more useful, back when I was using my D70s, I think my judgment of a good photo was one that was correctly exposed and in focus! |
|
|
|
02/11/2010 10:13:28 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by Covert_Oddity:
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Well, your 'camera snobbery" comment is a bit out of line, seeing as your OP suggested that manual was only good for learning, implying that once you know all you need to know, you don't need manual anymore.
So, if your question was legitimately asking what the value of the manual setting is (as opposed to just arguing a position that it is unnecessary), then you got some useful answers here. |
The "camera snobbery" wasn't directed at all responses on the thread, as has been pointed out, there are situations where manual mode is better, and to be honest, after listening to all the responses I am tempted to go back out and try manual mode all over again just in case I am in fact missing something. The comment was directed more at those who were of the attitude, "you're not a true photographer unless you're using manual mode", and while I know no one outright said that here, I have seen it implied many times in many places, and you have to admit, some of the responses here came across a bit like that as well.
Thanks to all those who have given me good reason to go try it over again, perhaps now that I've been shooting a few years I might find it more useful, back when I was using my D70s, I think my judgment of a good photo was one that was correctly exposed and in focus! |
Not sure if I lent any to the 'camera snobbery' so I will add to my previous comment that manual isn't the be all and end all. Its just another tool to use. I'd also like to add that my car analogy really can't be stretched too far as pointed out. :) |
|
|
|
02/11/2010 10:19:08 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by jjstager2:
But the points Bear and Chromey are making is that, like any computer-driven task, the human being can still outperform a computer in many complicated situations. The key is knowing when those situations are occurring and why they are occurring and why and how the human can out-perform the computer. |
The computer does what you tell it to do, as does your camera. With the computer in the camera, same deal......let it do the mundane, but also let it handle some of the more difficult tasks if it can be programmed to do it your way.
If you have all the time in the world, by all means, do it to the nth degree, with your settings locked in......but I can flat guarantee that there are an awful lot of situations where I wouldn't have gotten the shot at all had I needed to take the time to change my settings before I took a shot.
|
|
|
|
02/11/2010 10:28:46 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Well, I'm a total hack, so all you experts can just stop reading right here.
I shoot sort of fully automatic, but the settings/limits are based on how I shoot, whaty I shoot, when I shoot, and the limitatiomns of my own skills and the camera's shortcomings.
I shot full manual for about a year so that I could figure out what I was doing and get familiar with my camera. I learned how it does things, and I learned how certain functions accomplished certain tasks, so that once I was much more familiar with what I wanted, and what the camera did in a given situation, I tailored the settings to an automatic menu that works just terrific for me. My camera goes with me everywhere, every day, and quite often I just pull it up and shoot, most of the time in a situation where I don't have the luxury of doinking settings. Yeah, if I'm in a completely controlled environment, sure, I'll take the time to go for the optimal settings, but I rarely have that.
Cameras today have serious processors with a myriad of ways to set them for your specific needs. I figure I know enough what I'm doing, how my camera does things, and what I want, so that I *am* able to get the shot I want, the way I want, most of the time with my own auto configuration.
Just my $0.02 US..... |
Modern cameras are often times doing so much "behind the scenes" so to speak that it is hard to know what they are, in fact, doing. Kudo's for figuring yours out so well. I got nothing against the automatic settings at all, and hope I didn't imply that in anything I said. I see them as valuable assistance and use them when I need them. I find manual to be useful in exactly the situations you describe--and in those situations I do not want the camera "helping" me by automatically changing anything out from under me. But many an opportunistic shot has been saved by a quick spin of the command dial to Auto :-) |
|
|
|
02/11/2010 10:59:12 PM · #56 |
Have you noticed the people posting to this thread favor Manual Mode? And that they use the word "control" a lot?
How can a person get to the frame of mind that you only have 1 choice: control the camera or be controlled by it? why think of photography in terms of control?
Message edited by author 2010-02-12 19:25:21. |
|
|
|
02/11/2010 11:09:26 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
If you have all the time in the world, by all means, do it to the nth degree, with your settings locked in......but I can flat guarantee that there are an awful lot of situations where I wouldn't have gotten the shot at all had I needed to take the time to change my settings before I took a shot. |
this requires practice and good judgment. I shoot 95% time in manual mode and even in such situations i still trust my trusty manual mode.
here is one such photo,
shot in less time than the tear dropped from her eye. Read my notes about shot.
It was still manual mode. (not perfect but, it was so dark camera would have screwed it if it were not on manual mode). |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 01:03:24 AM · #58 |
I made sure my first point and shoot digital camera, Oly C5050Z, had a manual mode because I was nervous I would not like the camera without one. I would buy a manual only camera if one ever existed. I've been looking for a used 4x5 view camera that I used in college 25 years ago. I loved those cameras and still miss using them because you had to do everything manually, including using an off camera exposure meter.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2010 02:20:56 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by Covert_Oddity:
........"get your camera out of auto mode and use manual, it will make you so much better"...... |
I support the OP point of view.
Manual mode is there to overcome the situations that cannot be handled semi-automatically (read in fractions of a second) by aperture or shutter priority or when you purposely want to overide a 'correct' exposure. Some examples may be non-ttl flash photography, long exposure shots, etc.
Once you understand how exposure and DOF work (you may get there by playing and experimenting with your camera in manual mode or simply by studying and understanding the sunject)and once, for a given shot, you have decided whether you need a fast shutter speed or a given DOF, why in heavens would you want to waste precious time setting manually when your camera can find (and set) the second parameter a million times faster than you can? Does anybody really think that they are "beter photographers" because they waste time finding and setting the second parameter manually?
A 'Better Photographer' is not the one who sets manually but rather the one who plans (this could take a split second or much longer, depending on the talent and experience of the photographer) and implements the many exposure and DOF options to create a more interesting and compelling image, regardless of whether he sets the parameters manually or semi-automatically.
Message edited by author 2010-02-12 02:23:14. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 03:12:05 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by senor_kasper:
Originally posted by Covert_Oddity:
........"get your camera out of auto mode and use manual, it will make you so much better"...... |
I support the OP point of view.
Manual mode is there to overcome the situations that cannot be handled semi-automatically (read in fractions of a second) by aperture or shutter priority or when you purposely want to overide a 'correct' exposure. Some examples may be non-ttl flash photography, long exposure shots, etc.
Once you understand how exposure and DOF work (you may get there by playing and experimenting with your camera in manual mode or simply by studying and understanding the sunject)and once, for a given shot, you have decided whether you need a fast shutter speed or a given DOF, why in heavens would you want to waste precious time setting manually when your camera can find (and set) the second parameter a million times faster than you can? Does anybody really think that they are "beter photographers" because they waste time finding and setting the second parameter manually?
A 'Better Photographer' is not the one who sets manually but rather the one who plans (this could take a split second or much longer, depending on the talent and experience of the photographer) and implements the many exposure and DOF options to create a more interesting and compelling image, regardless of whether he sets the parameters manually or semi-automatically. |
A better X (X=photographer or expert of other trade) means the person who knows what he is doing. (A better X, knows how to produce he desire to produce.) Now if a person knows what he is doing, he can produce exceptional work with or without auto or manual mode.
I think those who say in favour of manual mode (including me) are saying so because using manual mode teaches. And thus makes you a person who knows what he is doing. And makes you efficacious.
Message edited by author 2010-02-12 03:13:16. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 07:36:39 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
I think those who say in favour of manual mode (including me) are saying so because using manual mode teaches. And thus makes you a person who knows what he is doing. |
So.....
Wouldn't it stand to reason that after learning your camera's particular strengths and weaknesses, and your own proclivities, it would be helpful to have a default auto setting that would encompass this knowledge for when you're not necessarily in a position to be able to manually set everything?
|
|
|
|
02/12/2010 07:42:49 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
If you have all the time in the world, by all means, do it to the nth degree, with your settings locked in......but I can flat guarantee that there are an awful lot of situations where I wouldn't have gotten the shot at all had I needed to take the time to change my settings before I took a shot. |
Originally posted by zxaar:
this requires practice and good judgment. |
What does? Missing a shot because your camera was set for a low key portrait you shot and you find yourself with bright offset light?
Originally posted by zxaar:
I shoot 95% time in manual mode and even in such situations i still trust my trusty manual mode. |
My point for my applications is simply that I have a specific setting that is my default semi-auto profile in my camera so that no matter where I am, if I don't have time to dink around, I stand a VERY good chance of getting a quite decent image.
To me, that's the value of the sophisticated piece of equipment that I have and I take advantage of its capabilities.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2010 08:34:10 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by zxaar:
I think those who say in favour of manual mode (including me) are saying so because using manual mode teaches. And thus makes you a person who knows what he is doing. |
So.....
Wouldn't it stand to reason that after learning your camera's particular strengths and weaknesses, and your own proclivities, it would be helpful to have a default auto setting that would encompass this knowledge for when you're not necessarily in a position to be able to manually set everything? |
there is another way of looking at things. Almost every camera has automode. It takes few turns to set it automode. And yet there thousands of people trying to learn - how to take photos. Why isn't that these people are getting these well balanced photos everytime they click.
After learning your camera, you only learn what to do in certain situations. In some auto is good choice in some it is not.
I still think manual mode is good for learning. After that i think people use manual because they are habitual of it.
Message edited by author 2010-02-12 08:35:06. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 08:44:00 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
there is another way of looking at things. Almost every camera has automode. It takes few turns to set it automode. And yet there thousands of people trying to learn - how to take photos. Why isn't that these people are getting these well balanced photos everytime they click.
After learning your camera, you only learn what to do in certain situations. In some auto is good choice in some it is not.
I still think manual mode is good for learning. After that i think people use manual because they are habitual of it. |
I'm somewhat confused by your sentence structure.....it's not making sense to me.
Here's the thing......please read what I have stated a couple of times in the thread. I am *NOT* referring to putting the camera in full automatic mode.
I set the parameters for a default, semi-automatic mode based on my needs, experience, and the capabilities, and quirks of my camera. I leave it in that mode as a walk-around setting that I can grab the camera, pull it up and shoot instantaneously.
That is strictly how it works for me, and is simply offered up as that. I think there are too many people who it doesn't occur to them that there are in fact a lot of different ways to tailor a mode that encompasses much of their shooting, allowing them the convenience of being able to shoot quickly, and unhesitatingly at those times where time is paramount. I don't think for one second that the manufacturers of the higher end cameras that we have ever entertained the idea that we would shoot with them solely on full auto.
Call me crazy, but I have the wild idea that all those parameters are there for me to set it like I want it. I did.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2010 12:10:58 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
...I still think manual mode is good for learning. After that i think people use manual because they are habitual of it. |
Nobody is disputing that manual mode is good for learning, of course it is. Tho OP questioned whether using manual mode translated into being a 'better photographer' and the answer to that is clearly 'NO'. It is true that manual mode may help you learn the workings of exposure and DOF and, by doing that, ultimately may help you to become a better photographer. However, once you have learned such workings and it is time to make use of the options at your disposal, the quality of your photography will depend of how you took advantage of such options and not whether you set them manually or semi-automatically. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 12:57:15 PM · #66 |
| I'm going to sneak in here with all you exalted photographers and just say that since I visited Antelope Canyon's last July I've been in manual mode ever since and if I hadn't been in manual mode for those shots I wouldn't have gotten near the quality of shots from that day. And I really do feel that my pictures are improving since last July with alot of the credit going to using the manual mode...now I will just sneak right on out of here... |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 04:32:30 PM · #67 |
| Just a thought, most lenses have a auto-focus and of course a manual focus. Why?? Because sometimes being automatic doesn't create the desired effect that manual will. I think the same is true with your camera modes. I like to use manual mode when I want total control over what aperture and shutter speed combination I want to use. Av and Tv won't give me the control of both at the same time for certain effects. Plus my camera is not fancy enough to have a programmed mode(as far as I know). Anyway, just my take on the post... |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 05:21:59 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by kleski:
Just a thought, most lenses have a auto-focus and of course a manual focus. Why?? Because sometimes being automatic doesn't create the desired effect that manual will. I think the same is true with your camera modes. I like to use manual mode when I want total control over what aperture and shutter speed combination I want to use. Av and Tv won't give me the control of both at the same time for certain effects. Plus my camera is not fancy enough to have a programmed mode(as far as I know). Anyway, just my take on the post... |
Your camera has all the mentioned modes, I used to have one!
I use all the modes on my camera except Auto. I think in these days of modern technology, my camera can do and think quicker than I can in most situations. I use autofocus on the lenses and think nothing of it, it's what the lens was designed for. Equally, the camera can perform most functions better than I can. Why would I buy a modern camera if I want full manual on everything? I had a Zenith E and an Oly OM10, and an Oly OM20 using film for that, now I would rather let the camera do the thinking.
I check what I take and if it isn't how I want it, I adjust the mode I am using. AV, P, SP, M...they all do the same job in different ways. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 05:38:27 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
"...for when you're not necessarily in a position to be able to manually set everything?" |
Jeb, that line struck me because I can't think of a single instance where I wasn't in a position to manually set everything. It barely takes a second and the images come out much better. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 05:43:29 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by zxaar:
there is another way of looking at things. Almost every camera has automode. It takes few turns to set it automode. And yet there thousands of people trying to learn - how to take photos. Why isn't that these people are getting these well balanced photos everytime they click.
After learning your camera, you only learn what to do in certain situations. In some auto is good choice in some it is not.
I still think manual mode is good for learning. After that i think people use manual because they are habitual of it. |
I'm somewhat confused by your sentence structure.....it's not making sense to me.
|
This is not the first time. :-D.
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I set the parameters for a default, semi-automatic mode based on my needs, experience, and the capabilities, and quirks of my camera. I leave it in that mode as a walk-around setting that I can grab the camera, pull it up and shoot instantaneously.
|
this is why what i said do not make sense to you.
Now read it again:
"I set the parameters for a default, semi-automatic mode based on my needs"
so you set the camera to some settings.
Then you say this:
"I leave it in that mode as a walk-around setting that I can grab the camera, pull it up and shoot instantaneously."
So now tell me, which mode other than manual mode, does not change the parameters you set for default. If you set TV aperture would change, if you set AV shutter would change. If you used fully auto , everything would change based on what you are shooting.
So other than manual you can not set fixed settings based on quirks of your camera. All the other modes camera is making decisions for you based on situation and what you are shooting. And here is the problem, camera can make mistakes. For example if you set AV, you might end up in a situation where light is low and camera keep throwing you in higher isos because of it , but the same thing you might have shot with lower iso higher shutter and slightly steady hands. (Or keep giving you crappy shutter speeds those could be avoided by using higher isos).
you can understand your camera's quirks but understanding quirks does not guarantee that camera would shoot well balanced photo in semi-automatic settings (as you put it) because it is changing parameters of shooting.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2010 05:57:29 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
... I can't think of a single instance where I wasn't in a position to manually set everything. It barely takes a second and the images come out much better. |
I would have had some lovely rainbow pictures approaching the Caldecott Tunnel, but they were all over-exposed because I couldn't change the settings while driving.
 |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 06:03:34 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
For example if you set AV, you might end up in a situation where light is low and camera keep throwing you in higher isos because of it , but the same thing you might have shot with lower iso higher shutter and slightly steady hands. (Or keep giving you crappy shutter speeds those could be avoided by using higher isos). |
Nope -- on my camera at least, in Av mode the ISO and aperture are fixed -- the only thing the camera sets is the shutter speed. For a "walking around mode" I'll often set it to Tv mode, with a fast enough shutter speed to eliminate most blur issues, and let the camera set the aperture.
Now, I've been using Manual mode mostly of late, but there are times (see my previous post) where a "semi-automatic" mode would have served better, e.g. a quick landscape where DOF is irrelevant Tv mode would have been a good choice.
Message edited by author 2010-02-12 18:04:03. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 06:17:36 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by zxaar:
For example if you set AV, you might end up in a situation where light is low and camera keep throwing you in higher isos because of it , but the same thing you might have shot with lower iso higher shutter and slightly steady hands. (Or keep giving you crappy shutter speeds those could be avoided by using higher isos). |
Nope -- on my camera at least, in Av mode the ISO and aperture are fixed -- the only thing the camera sets is the shutter speed. For a "walking around mode" I'll often set it to Tv mode, with a fast enough shutter speed to eliminate most blur issues, and let the camera set the aperture.
Now, I've been using Manual mode mostly of late, but there are times (see my previous post) where a "semi-automatic" mode would have served better, e.g. a quick landscape where DOF is irrelevant Tv mode would have been a good choice. |
well on my camera they are not fixed. Yesterday only because of all this talk of auto mode i tried putting my cam to av mode and it keep throwing me into iso 3200 range.
(though i must admit i could control auto iso range of my camera, but setting that is manual interruption. Isn't it).
Even with shutter change only, there are times when you can go wrong. Specially when there is too much variation of light in scene.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2010 06:36:21 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
... I can't think of a single instance where I wasn't in a position to manually set everything. It barely takes a second and the images come out much better. |
"... couldn't change the settings while driving."
|
You got me there. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 06:36:36 PM · #75 |
|
