Computers and Photography

thebaz

I know a few (good) photographers , who have a huge fear of computers and the whole digital age , a bit like dj's who just like vinyl.
I know many here work in Computers , is photography just an escape from the tech world of coding , testing or whatever , or is there a link ?

I wonder are professional photographers , required , now to to be pretty advanced technology wise, web site maintenace , photoshop etc . (i would think that is the case now, for anyone starting out) .

Just curious , where its all going !

I do a bit of computer work myself, although i never warmed to it as a way to earn my crust

PixelTrawler

I'm a full time web application developer with a big US company - so photography and photo software appeal straight away as you tend to work with images and graphics in the job.

Its creative which is appealing but in a different way to web work.

I also can't draw a straight line so this is a nice way for me to create "art" (if you can call it that!). Also I'm into tech & gadgets and cameras are an interesting cross over between art, science and engineering (you gotta love the engineering that goes into a lens).

I would imagine most photographers need a grasp of photo software and web maintenance/knowledge to the point of using something like flickr - but not necessary to actually code anything.

Borderfox

There is nothing stopping you shooting JPEG and printing straight to a compatible printer with no computer in between, that is it reduced in its esscence. Thats what happens most weekends when I shoot events (bar of course showing people the shots on a computer, but that could be done with printed proofs)

I am a mechanical engineer by trade and have no formal computer training and I havent worked on computers at all. I do know what you mean in terms of breaks from coding for some people but I think that oversimplifies it.

I suppose in the future it will probably remain the same in terms of what I have mentioned above if you want it to be.

stcstc

it does amaze me sometimes how little so many pro photographers know about computers

although i understand they could get by without it. I think its almost a fundamental tool in the arsenal or a photographer, almost as much as knowing about their camera kit details.

With ever decreasing budgets and work, I think the wise photographer needs to work clever and smart using all the tools they can. I think computers are one of those.

BUT, i have started offering a service to busy pros, to process and print proofs for them, so they dont have to worry about it and can just keep shooting.

thebaz

Keith , my post is probably a bit all over the place

But Solyad, kind of answered what i was looking for.
I was into film stuff years ago, and got back into photography through the advent of digital camera's.
Most of my work has been in the boring end of computers , where there is more work , but little job satisfaction , i studied computers and liked that , but working with them was/is completly different. I think the dullness of my job (s) pushed me more into photography.
but there are more interesting and creative aspects to I.T. such as Web Design , which i might look into.

Dragan

I think accessibility to both the means to create and inspiration to do so is much higher over the last decade or so. The internet is now available to a lot of people and with it comes every influence you could want.

I don't know that many people who have one "thing" anymore. Not a single photographer i know is simple a photographer. They are writers, painters, sculptures, graffiti artists, musicians...whatever. You don't really need to pick a discipline anymore and we are getting a lot of highly talented, multi faceted people making their work known.

Add a booming population,some social upheavals and a ready availability of technology and times ahead are very interesting.

As such, i don't think photographers in general are non into technology, i just think and old type of photographer is generating a new one that is more technologically based.

If any of that makes any sense.

PixelTrawler

Of course a modern digital camera is just a computer with an optical device attached when you think about it. And some are quite high powered just in a very specialised way.

Think of a 1Ds churning out 5*20 MP shots in 1 sec - thats pretty amazing.

Perhaps if they thought about it this way they'd have less fear of the computer on the desk, seeing as they comfortably use one in their hands (the digital guys anyway)

sunny2004

thebaz wrote: »

I wonder are professional photographers , required , now to to be pretty advanced technology wise, web site maintenace , photoshop etc . (i would think that is the case now, for anyone starting out) .

Not at all, If you are any good as a professional photographer you can charge more and if you charge more you can pay someone to look after the tech end of things...

Easy example, in film days very few pros printed themselves..

ThOnda

Well, computer is only a tool, like a camera or darkroom.

You don't have to know a lot about computers. Computer is more likely only a piece of hardware. However you should learn something about software and colour management.
Colour management is the same as knowledge of film types and filters - white ballance, saturation, grain size, gradation... - equivalent to analogue printing.
Software is equivalent of the darkroom - you had to learn how to do basics and the more complicated processing in the darkroom. So you just have to learn how to do it in some software.

The best thing is to have support of somebody good in computers (mostly the kids) and focus only on processing.

Covey

stcstc wrote: »

it does amaze me sometimes how little so many pro photographers know about computers

although i understand they could get by without it. I think its almost a fundamental tool in the arsenal or a photographer, almost as much as knowing about their camera kit details.

With ever decreasing budgets and work, I think the wise photographer needs to work clever and smart using all the tools they can. I think computers are one of those.

BUT, i have started offering a service to busy pros, to process and print proofs for them, so they dont have to worry about it and can just keep shooting.

I think, Steve, as software becomes ever more complex, this type of service will become ever more in demand.

Digital is really still in it's infancy and a lot of people are coming round to the idea that being invloved in all aspects of the process ( shutter to print ) is maybe not the most effective way to to do the job. And lets face it, very few did this with analogue anyway.

I think the demand for this type of service will rocket as soon as the industry realises it and price accordingly.

T.

stcstc

covey

I agree, knowing how to process photos in photoshop is only a small part of it.

Colour management, resolution, workflow type stuff is a whole other ball game. Pros that i deal with now, who have been around photoshop and digital cameras for years really still struggle with anything more than producing an image to send to the lab and even do that in either an inefficient or incorrect way all the time.

things i just take for granted like aspect ratios, people really do struggle with.

not that i am suggestion every pro is like this, but you would be sooooo surprised how many are

thebaz

Personally , if i had the money i would like to use a service , like you offer Steve .
On the other hand i think its good to know whats going on, and not be reliant on a 3rd party.
So my battle with photoshop continues, hopefully by the end of the year , i may be moderate at it, as it is struggle for me to learn it, it doesn't come natutally , maybe practise will make perfect (hopefully) , as its nice to have complete control .

smash

A consultant for Adobe told me last year that Photographers now are like graphic designers were 8/9 years ago... by that he meant that they're an easy target to sell software to and they'll jump on anything that might slightly improve a photo. At that stage he reckoned that adobe could release another version of photoshop with 1 extra feature only, and photographers would jump all over it whereas designers wouldn't be bothered.

stcstc

Barry

I do agree people do need to have some form of understanding.


the idea behind the service is kind of two fold:

1. means the photog doesnt need to understand all of the details

2. means they get to shoot more, for example wedding photogs could shoot more weddings or portraits etc

thebaz

stcstc wrote: »

Barry


the idea behind the service is kind of two fold:

1. means the photog doesnt need to understand all of the details

2. means they get to shoot more, for example wedding photogs could shoot more weddings or portraits etc

Great idea, and if i get swaped with things as often happens , i might be in touch , good to have contact with a good pp'er.

ThOnda

Sounds like good idea. I am going to start studying PS3 in the evening :-)

PixelTrawler

steve06 wrote: »

A consultant for Adobe told me last year that Photographers now are like graphic designers were 8/9 years ago... by that he meant that they're an easy target to sell software to and they'll jump on anything that might slightly improve a photo. At that stage he reckoned that adobe could release another version of photoshop with 1 extra feature only, and photographers would jump all over it whereas designers wouldn't be bothered.

Thats true. I still use PS7 for web design as CS3 offers almost nothing I can't live without. Would be nice for photos maybe but even then I can live without.

Paulw

I'm one of those who works with computers. I work in high end technical support. It can be manic at times, since the systems I support are real-time charging solutions in a telecoms environment which require a 99.9% service uptime. So, when there are problems, it's crucial we get the system running again as soon as possible.

For me, photography has nothing to do with my work (aside from the fact that my work pays me enough to support my habit, I mean hobby).

Photography, for me, is for fun and for relaxation. I do it purely for the enjoyment that I get from it. I do a bit of photography work, but I do it in my own way. I don't take assignments with tight deadlines, because I have enough pressure and stress in work.

I do as little as possible with my photos on the computer. Enough to process them and then ready for web/print usage. I'm probably not nearly as technical as many here who produce great images with their post processing (not saying the images weren't great to start with). But some you know that the person has made a great effort to process it to the best of their ability.

I like to try things, play with settings, and just see what happens. I find that Lightroom limits me a little there, and that's a good thing. But, when I do bring an image in to Photoshop I have scope to play and experiment more.

Calina

I work with high end computers also. But it has little to do with the photography side other than providing tools I didn't have when I was 11 years old that allow me to do all sorts of things that I couldn't do then.

Additionally, I got corrupted. I'm fascinated now by how you can manipulate images, or lay them out. The best things I do now is if someone comes to me and says they want a composite poster, for example.

I didn't used to do very much post processing for two main reasons a) i was bad atit and b) film psycho purist background. Mainly I got PSE for black and white conversions and for cropping purposes. Then I discovered you could use it to fix under exposure problems in certain cases, and after that, other bits and pieces took off for me. I used PSE for a long time until Adobe did a marketing whizz for PSE users about 6 months ago and flogged CS3 to me for half price. I have a lot of fun with it from time to time and now, my photographs vary between "no work" and "lots of work". I also have to say that one of my big tricks, the stop motion shots of the kitesurfers, I would never have tried if one of them had not pushed me to give it a shot with a 350D which was far from suited to the purpose....Now...however.

I think, if I were finishing school now and looking for a college course, I'd be aiming towards the graphic design field which is ironic because I never showed much artistic skill at school. I can remember a guy telling me at music school that he loved things like Cubase and being able to move music around with a mouse because - he'd been trained as a violinist and his keyboard skills were minimal...and most of what you put into computer music at the time went in via a keyboard.

I see computer related tools for photography a little like that. I'm a lousy artist with a pen and paper, but with a computer, and a camera and some software, there are so many options open to me, I can't quite get my head around them. And I have years to explore.

Roen

Oddly enough I actually studied photography full time and ended up in IT by accident.
As a result I've got a pretty good handle on the current state of things in both fields.

I'm still re-learning a lot of photographic techniques as I took an awfully long break from snapping and to be very honest my full time job now is a sys admin, which is one of the biggest time stealers ever....I'm surprised I get out to take a shot at all.

I think lack of motivation and having about a hundred other interests is the real barrier for me.

On the subject of the whole marriage of technology and photography I do think that there has been a massive increase in the workload of certain photographers.

In addition to actually capturing the image the digital photographer needs to be able to juggle colour-management, web-dev and web-admin in certain cases, data management and disaster recovery, be pretty au-fait with a range of software suites and printing technologies.

It is no wonder that some of the more established photogs out there choose to out source some of this. There's just too bloody much work in it!

deRanged

I'd be of much the same opinion of Paulw I think. I use photography as an escape from my day job in computers, and a means to pay for kit.
I really don't like spending time on the computer bar cropping and resizing, or being stressed or worried about photos.

I went into a camera shop this morning to price a job for someone;
depending on what I decide to buy that's what I'll charge

Very occasionally I'll get a graphic design type project and then I find I approach it totally differently. I'll happily spend hours working on the project, way more than I'd be interested in for one of my hobbies.

CraggyIslander

I work with computers all day long as well and after staring at computer screens for the whole day I just dont feel like doing anything more than the minimal post processing I should do more as some pics would deffo improve.. just havent got the will or oompf left

Doesnt help either that I've started doing a masters course which means I'm behind the PC even more than just work already.

Same as Roen, I dont get enough time to do the snapping.... an afternoon out with the camera is pure relaxation for me.

As the post processing tools are the replacement for the traditional photo lab, I can definitely see a service as stcstc is describing working. The photographer will have to have some idea as to what's possible tho and give the 'lab' instructions, even if its that he/she wants sepia or b/w conversions, etc

Phototoxin

I have to say that the best pics I've taken didn't 'require' photoshoppery. To me that says something in itself. It is useful for cropping however and yes sometimes funky effects are in order. However really we dont NEED it.

Second I'd rather a slightly less snazzy photo rather than a crappily photoshopped one. I've seen 'professional' photos before that were photoshopped to death.

AnCatDubh

I'm of the opinion that of course you don't have to be into tech to be into photography ( or the other way around ) but if you begin with an interest / profession in tech i think you are naturally curious and achieve some personal satisfaction from the challenge of settings, configuration, specification, things gone wrong, applying corrective action. You hit a point with tech where..... meh, its more of the same ole same ole - same problems maybe a different guise but the challenge isn't quite the same. Then you get a camera in your hands and probably start with auto mode, and find out that a camera is much like a computer in many ways - it has settings, configurations, specifications, things that go wrong, and the application of corrective actions. The corrective actions are in camera but you then learn to align your capacity in tech and software with corrective actions. It may then spurn a creative side to you (minor or major as it might be) that you can see possibilities. If you are any good at tech i believe that you are a person that sees the possibilities rather than the problems. Problems are only a minor detail. This is deep. You also look at an image and see the possibility. Align your technical capacity with your available software and your newly found creativity and bingo! - you are into the satisfaction that you first found in tech. So they all basically come together i think is what i'm trying to say. I'm not sure if it would work the other way around though - if you first were into photography, it may not be the same mix that 'floats your boat'. maybe that accounts for those photographers that dislike the computer side of the business.

Just a thought on the subject.