Are we losing our focus?

Out of Focus, Richmond, Virginia
Out of focus | Richmond, Virginia | Sep 2008

Canon finally gave the Internet what it had been waiting for by announcing the 5D MKII a couple weeks ago. Search for “Canon 5D rumors,” “Canon 5D replacement,” “Canon 5D review” or other variants on Google and you’ll find a ton of thoughts, fakes, speculations, hopes, dreams and wishes from the devoted fans of the venerable 5D, a camera that delivered full-frame digital to the masses.

Then, Vincent Laforet added fuel to the fire with his breathless review of a pre-production model and, of course, his video.

And so it started.

  • When I first saw Vincent’s sneak preview of the camera and his enthusiasm about the video, I was almost sick to my stomach. Ryan Booth and I exchanged messages over Twitter about our uneasiness, although neither of us really knew at the time. As I reiterated “the camera does not make a photographer, it’s the mind and the eye, not the tool”, Ryan pointed out that “it has always been about ideas (gear just helps bring it to life). Gear seems to be pushing us towards a one man show”.

    Not sure what to think about it, I sat on it for a couple days. And then the reviews, news and thoughts started pouring in.

  • Obviously, a lot of people are focusing on the video capabilities. Rob Haggart gave it the big “so what?” Read through the comments, it’s worth it to gauge the community’s division about this camera.
  • I’m staying out of the debate about the film. Vincent is a great photographer. The intent of the film was to test the 5D MKII’s video capability, and Vincent did a great job showing what the camera could do, especially in low light. Whether or not the “film” is good is beside the point, and I doubt it was ever Vincent’s goal to create a good film in a couple days. (Edited: I’m sure Vincent wanted to create a good film; but the intent wasn’t to create an award-winning film…)
  • Although I expect the pre-order lists got pretty busy pretty quickly, not everyone is happy about this camera; including, for one thing, Canon 1Ds MKIII owners…
  • A lot of the talk about the future of the photography business has centered over the need for photographers to tell stories using multimedia rather than just static images. While I see the need to add the ability to create multimedia to add to one’s stories, I don’t see multimedia as a replacement.

    “The medium is the message”; multimedia and video communicate differently than static images simply because of the medium used. Not all stories can be told the same way.

  • And not all mediums can be processed, edited, distributed and viewed the same way. Do photographers now need to learn how to process, edit, store and distribute video? Getting back to the “film” debate, there is a big difference between being able to shoot video and being able to tell a story with a video. Can photographers really learn how to think like videographers? Will it be necessary for anyone behind a camera to be able to think visually in two fundamentally different ways?

    While cameras that blur the line between technically brilliant static and moving images make it possible to take both video and pictures at the same time, it will take a bit more time for the minds and eyes to catch up. It’s a big leap. Many photographers have tried it over time, to varying degrees of success and failure.

  • A cynical view: will “taking a photo” someday be as simple as selecting which “decisive moment” to select from a video stream?

    I hope not.

  • Photographers are mostly approaching this from the “now I can shoot video!” perspective.

    What about all the videographers that are now thinking “now I can shoot pictures!” perspective?

  • If you’re a photographer, take a step back and think for a second: how will this change how I shoot? How will it change the quality of the images I produce? How will it change the quality of the stories I tell?

    We suffer from an obsession with “new” rather thinking about what’s “better”.

    Maybe this camera will change your images and stories, maybe it will change how you communicate, but it all depends on you. Don’t lose the focus on what you’re creating.

What do you think?

I’ve been mentioning a series of posts about how photographers can develop new business models. Coming right up…




Viewing 2 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    i have another series for you, a review of good blog themes for photogs and artists .. yeah, i am lazy, you do it for me please ... my old and crappy art site is here http://www.gregorylent.com and i really need to update and upgrade it ...

    back to your post ... how do memories form in our mind? we don't know, but out of the entire stream of experience some one thing goes boink and clicks ... a still photo extracted from a stream of video seems similar, and given how cool serendipity can be, will result in some spectacular photos ...

    avoiding marketing messages is as true in photography as in any other walk of life, (sorry all you marketing guys, i only hate your profession, not you) but what really contributes to evolving one's artistic vision? suffering. loss. frustration. failure. and the gift of deeper perception that can result if one is lucky. and a whole lot of practice and the ability to not take your own work personally, just look at it without attachment ... and feeling how it feels to you. and then do more ..

    dang, what were we talking about again? anyway, nice post. do i want a canon super mark 5? not really.

    enjoy, gregory
    • ^
    • v
    You're lazy? Not a chance...

    Is it possible for an artist to look at their work without attachment? is it possible to create something without attaching yourself to it? I don't equate attachment with caring, or equate "looking without attachment" with "feeling, caring or believing in one's work"...

    Agreed: evolving one's artistic vision comes through experiencing life, not experiencing art.

    It's a problem for any creative soul in any medium (marketing included).

    And no, a camera doesn't change that.

    It's important to have the right tools to create what you create, but improving the tool does not necessarily equate with improving the results.

    Selecting a still from a stream of images is interesting: it seems more similar to how our minds interpret experiences. But the processes for the artist is so different, simply because of when you're selecting the right still to preserve. Do you throw away the rest of the stream? Is your judgment drastically different because you're existing in a different moment? (taking a picture in the moment v. reviewing the stream in a different moment) I don't know...
 

Trackbacks

(Trackback URL)

close Reblog this comment
blog comments powered by Disqus