The artistic process differs from medium to medium and is of course a never-ending learning process. As an artist working in the medium of photography, I cannot help but compare my medium and process to others. I find it both helpful in understanding my own medium but also in growing with it. And although I have been working in digital format for almost 10 years, the medium still feels new to me.
There is one aspect of working in digital format that may be more important than any other. Unlike working with film, having immediate feedback on the camera’s LCD means being able to respond both to the scene in front of me and to the image I just created. And so as in painting, sculpture, or even composing music, I can analyse the result and adjust the process to do things differently.
Mostly, people think of that feedback as a way of checking that the camera is working correctly and that the image reflects what was desired. That is helpful, but maybe even more important is that the image itself becomes a new thing to which I can respond. Just as a painter lays down a brush stroke and then responds to how that brush stroke changes their feeling about where to lay down the next brush stroke, the photographer can respond to an LCD display of an image to determine what next direction to take.
In the image below that I made in Acadia National Park this past August, I was able to respond to the image I made as separate from the scene in which I was working. The image I made then could send me in a different direction than the scene itself would have. As a result I could respond by changing focal length, perspective, polarization, exposure, composition, and if I chose to, also white-balance and application of a variety of other camera-based controls. The immediate feedback offered by the camera’s LCD allows me to be more creative in the field and ultimately with the final print.
This image was made with a Panasonic GH2 with an Olympus 9-18mm m4/3 lens at 18mm hand-held.
Cloud and Grasses, (c) 2012 Paul Grecian
**************************************************************
The image, distinct from the reality of the subject, is such an important way to understand what art photographers are about, Paul. This is, yet another, well-crafted post. Thank you.
Good post. While the original impulse to stop & photograph any scene or thing is from something ephemeral inside our heads, even a tiny external display of the image confirms if the camera-capture matches our inner expectation or not. It’s not always just adjusting something “technical” (as you noted above), & may require looking at/anlyzing the scene/thing again. Or as you also noted it may “send me in a different direction.” But the review process requires external data.
Photography ulitmately (for me) has been a process of merging the ephemeral inner world we all have to some portion of the external world we all share.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Marty! As always, I find them stimulating. I don’t know that I would always consider the impulse to photograph a scene as ephemeral as I often go to a particular location (especially ones I know well) with a certain kind of image in mind already.
Even though I have been shooting digital for awhile now, I still think back to the film days and how instant feedback has really allowed me to grow a bit more with my images. There was nothing more frustrating than getting rolls back from a trip and thinking “I should have done this another way.”
The significance of having the LCD display and immediate feedback is vastly underrated and minimally discussed compared to its impact on the development of the quality of imagery in the last 10-15 years. It makes all the difference for me to be able to compose just a little higher, lower, or change equipment combinations as you mention, on the spot, rather than after I get home.
I really love the LCD compared to the OVF. I seriously do not understand why so many people still love the OVF. I really do not see much benefit over LCD. Anyway – maybe it is just me who only love the LCD.
Well put, and a nice read. I find very little use for the LCD screen when shooting mainly because of being used to what I am used to and not liking to steer from what seems to be working. I do however like using live view for shooting video. I think the difference may be because I do not want to bump or touch the camera when shooting video, that’s about it.
Hey Jason,
Thanks for the visit. In any situation where making the image is happening fast, the LCD is useful for me just to make sure the camera is working. You make an important point though, if you’re confident in your process, the LCD can only lead you astray. Hope you come back.
Yeah, very true about using the LCD to make sure the camera is working I do the same at times and as a wedding photographer it’s always happening fast it seems. A slow wedding would be like the signs I see for ,”Slow Children”. I always think about how fast children actually are.