I especially like the kid shots. Unfortunately, my great-grandkids know
I always have a camera somewhere. Hard to catch them unaware.
On 3/10/20 5:57 PM, Moose wrote:
On 3/10/2020 12:19 PM, Philippe wrote:
Whatever the gear , IMHO, if you have to struggle, this gear is not
meant for your intents, whatever they are, and whatever the gear, or
Ah well, my experience differs. I think, for example, that the time I
spent getting to really know all the relevant functions of my GX9
bodies really paid off in photos I'd otherwise not have been able to
make last year.
I DO believe in communion between the photog and their gear.
As do I. Which is why I did a lot of shooting with Panny GX bodies
BEFORE taking them to Bhutan, Seattle, Utah, New England and Ireland.
And why I'm shooting a lot with the RX10 before the trip to NYC - that
now may not happen. :-(
Primarily, I’d focus on the connection between subject and photog, OF
Not so much so, for me. I just extracted most of the photos with
people in them, excluding costumed dancers, etc., already processed
and put in galleries from our two trips to Bhutan. That's 167 photos.
Of those, 22 had subjects that certainly knew I was photographing
them, and often were posing. There are several others where it would
be easy to think the subjects were aware of me, but remember, many
were shot at 800 mm eq. They had no idea I could get such close-ups,
or even that I was shooting aimed specifically at them.
That's 13% Lets say a couple of people more were aware I was shooting
them, for 15%. The rest, many of which I think are fabulous, are candids.
A couple of examples:
I know L.Dorje fairly well, but even if I didn't, I think this candid,
before he saw me, waved and smiled, is a far more interesting portrait
than this <https://photos.app.goo.gl/9CrvyeVp6yWUEXLCA>
Here's one of the old folks at "day care" in a temple shows the public
face the temple depends on for donations.
BTW, he doesn't know I'm shooting, but is posing for another of our
Here's what he looks like when unaware he's being photographed.
A more telling picture of what being in day care and one of those on
display may feel like. They are well fed and cared for, but no longer
relevant in the way they were when younger. (The adjacent day care for
kids is wonderful; gotta process some pix.)
So, no, I'm not, and don't aspire to be, a people photographer like
Tina. OTOH, I think it's possible to get great people shots by
specifically NOT making a connection with the subject(s) that often
say more about them than the other way. Different, not better or
Could I, or you, or Tina get these shot of kids by connecting with them?
There are lots more . . .
Even that moment when a person realizes what's happening, and before
more than facial reaction, can be pretty fine.
But gear is so irrelevant that it comes second, third or next,
sometimes last, depending ...
Again, yeah sort of. But it has to be gear that I know how to use
properly and that has the specific capabilities I want. Both my E-M5
IIs and GX9s do Focus Bracketing, which is really important to me.
Shots like this, and the framed shots of Dahlias in our house don't
happen otherwise. <https://photos.app.goo.gl/VgaSnCbEg9uqKbYC8>
OTOH, this shot doesn't happen with the Olys I had.
A lot of the above photos may or may be impressive to any individual.
But they are important to me, so gear that allows me to make them is
I DO agree than gear should "disappear" when in use.
Whatever this means after all
Sure I Don't Know Moose
Tullahoma, TN USA
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/