Welcome to the AppalachianTrailCafe.net!
Take a moment and register and then join the conversation

REI classes

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • WOO -- I worked at DuPont's photo paper factory in Rochester, while a student at U of R. I was paid like a king, a good $5.50 an hour or so. I was rich. The building was ancient. My job was to document some of their electrical wiring... I got to walk around the place and crawl around in dark places tracing conduit and writing down info I found inside breaker panels.

      Don't quite agree about smartphones -- my S4 is at least as good as my Canon G2 from 2002. Yes of course you can get a better image from most digital cameras but given that a smartphone does so much more, it's nothing short of amazing. Given the portability, feature set, and ability to share images, it's a sensible choice for most hikers. If you're never going to make prints, the smart phone is more than enough -- the resolution exceeds most display screens by a large margin.

      Granted I just bought myself a fancy new camera... so yes, I understand its limits.

    • I quit carrying a camera since I got my Droid. I am a lousy photographer, so now I guess I can try to blame it on the phone. Actually even with an actual camera my pictures were not very good, so why add the weight.

      My biggest problem is my wife is a great photographer (even done some professionally) so I always just relied on her. When the children were young she took the pictures, while I did the video (a lot more forgiving).
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General

    • rafe wrote:

      WOO -- I worked at DuPont's photo paper factory in Rochester, while a student at U of R. I was paid like a king, a good $5.50 an hour or so. I was rich. The building was ancient. My job was to document some of their electrical wiring... I got to walk around the place and crawl around in dark places tracing conduit and writing down info I found inside breaker panels.


      Rafe, that sound like a really interesting job for a college student. Thanks for sharing it.
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General

    • WiseOldOwl wrote:

      Rafe the smart phone dropped the ball three weeks ago when I was taping John Oats at a "small concert" the phone failed due to poor lighting and whatever. I took pictures of Brian Williams... and was very disappointed.


      They have tiny sensors -- OK for daylight, not so great for indoor work. But in the context of hiking, daylight is mostly what matters. And they make up for it (somewhat) by being very, very portable and easy to use. If you're going to shoot video at a concert you have better options.

    • AnotherKevin wrote:

      I'll let you in on a secret.
      Everyone has to take dozens of pictures to get a good one.
      Why do you think the pros are going "snap... snap... snap..." all the time? They're trying to get that one good one!


      I suppose there is a good deal of truth to that but on the flip side...

      Great photographers (I'm thinking Ansel Adams, David Muench, Stephen Johnson) have carried huge, heavy cameras into deep backcountry. And these are the sort of cameras that don't easily go "snap snap snap." Each sheet of film is in its own separate holder that has to be loaded, in a darkroom, before the expedition. In Steve Johnson's case he used a view camera with a digital scanning back -- a mixture of high tech/low tech that yielded massive digital images from a conventional view camera.

      There is some luck involved in getting a great photograph. But luck comes to those who plan and prepare. It also involves a willingness to endure pain and discomfort. Some of the greatest photos are taken in the light of dawn or dusk and in horrific heat or cold or just plain awful weather. With regards to photos of people, good pictures involve getting to know the subject on a personal level, and the the right degree of "stealth" so as to capture that person in an un-self-conscious state, simply being themselves.

    • Rafe, you're right, too. Fortune favours the prepared. But certainly, needing to throw out thirty pictures to get the one you want to keep is (1) how you learn what made that one a keeper, (2) something that in the digital age, we all do, even Stephen Johnson. I never had a view camera, but I used a twin-lens back in the day, and that's nearly as inconvenient (only eight shots per roll of film, bulky and awkward, ...) Nowadays, I happily embrace the digital world. In any case, newbies need to be reassured that for even the best of us, only a small minority of photos are really good ones.

      Your statement about pain and discomfort, and your statement about knowing the subject, are BOTH summarized in Weegee's infamous statement about his photographic technique: 'f/8 and be there." You can't get the shot if you're not there when the shot is there. I wouldn't have this pano if I hadn't started my climb in the dark at about 0430, because the light wouldn't have been there. (Scrambling by headlamp on purpose. We're all nuts.)

      [IMG:https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3823/10282280345_9cfd585d3e_z.jpg]
      Wittenberg in the morning by ke9tv, on Flickr
      I'm not lost. I know where I am. I'm right here.

    • rafe wrote:

      AnotherKevin wrote:

      I'll let you in on a secret.
      Everyone has to take dozens of pictures to get a good one.
      Why do you think the pros are going "snap... snap... snap..." all the time? They're trying to get that one good one!


      I suppose there is a good deal of truth to that but on the flip side...

      Great photographers (I'm thinking Ansel Adams, David Muench, Stephen Johnson) have carried huge, heavy cameras into deep backcountry. And these are the sort of cameras that don't easily go "snap snap snap." Each sheet of film is in its own separate holder that has to be loaded, in a darkroom, before the expedition. In Steve Johnson's case he used a view camera with a digital scanning back -- a mixture of high tech/low tech that yielded massive digital images from a conventional view camera.

      There is some luck involved in getting a great photograph. But luck comes to those who plan and prepare. It also involves a willingness to endure pain and discomfort. Some of the greatest photos are taken in the light of dawn or dusk and in horrific heat or cold or just plain awful weather. With regards to photos of people, good pictures involve getting to know the subject on a personal level, and the the right degree of "stealth" so as to capture that person in an un-self-conscious state, simply being themselves.


      That is probably part of why they are great. :)
      The road to glory cannot be followed with much baggage.
      Richard Ewell, CSA General