photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
David Mingay | all galleries >> Mynd Dagsins '15 >> Photo of the Day 2004 > May 24: What thumbs are for
previous | next
24-MAY-2004

May 24: What thumbs are for

I saw something interesting yesterday on TV. It interested me anyway. I was watching the Monaco Grand Prix, well worth watching, if only to see Herr Schumacher emerging from the tunnel driving a 3-wheel Ferrari. An incident made more amusing as it occurred behind the safety car! But that's not what this is about. After the race, won by Jarno Trulli in a Renault, the TV cameras zoomed in on the celebrations in his pit garage. Someone was taking photographs with a rangefinder camera with an accessory viewfinder, which suggests an extreme wide angle lens. There he was firing frame after frame winding on the film with the thumb lever between shots. That got me thinking. There's a good deal of truth that the instant feedback of digital is a great learning tool. But I think there's a lack of the right sort of digital camera on the market. Digital cameras all have too much automation. And that doesn't help the process of learning. It's almost too easy to get a good shot. Beginners these days seem to be worried about entirely the wrong things. As a result, the basic skills of photography become hidden behind 'scene modes', megapixel counts and power-up times. Sure an auto eveything wonder box is great for the casual snap shooter, but as soon as you reach the limits of the automation, if you haven't got the skills to get the shot you want, you don't get the shot.

Give a student an old Pentax K1000, a few rolls of film and some basic instructions, and he'll come back with some photographs. By the 5th roll he'll have got the hang of it and by the 10th probably be getting some good shots. There's only three controls on a K1000. Shutter speed, aperture and focus. If a picture turns out bad, it's because you did something bad. Simple as that. Learn those basic skills and you're set up for life. Rely on automation, and you're limited to what the automation can do.

The guy with his rangefinder in the Renault pit garage yesterday clearly knew what he was doing. I'm guessing he was using a Voigtlander Bessa. A completely manual camera. He'd have preset the exposure and focus was able to fire off five or six shots in half as many seconds. I'd love to see them. He must have captured some great images. The user of a similarly priced digital, say a Canon G5, would be lucky to have got a focus lock in that time.

The moral of all this? Learn the basics? Take control? Use film? Take photographs? Take your pic! (pun intended!)

This is me advancing the film on my battered, totally manual and mechanical Pentax MX. What thumbs were made for!

Canon EOS 300D Digital Rebel
3s f/11.0 at 100.0mm iso100 hide exif
Full EXIF Info
Date/Time24-May-2004 19:17:44
MakeCanon
ModelCanon EOS 300D DIGITAL
Flash UsedNo
Focal Length100 mm
Exposure Time3.20 sec
Aperturef/11
ISO Equivalent100
Exposure Bias
White Balance (-1)
Metering Modeaverage (1)
JPEG Quality (6)
Exposure Program
Focus Distance

other sizes: small medium original auto
comment | share
Greg Christie29-Apr-2007 01:33
Excellent story, great sentiment and fine photograph
Guest 13-Jun-2004 07:13
I’m in love with my Pentax MX (mine has a silver top though unlike your black top), if the batteries die all you loose is the integrated light meter not the whole unit, nothing is automatic about it so it brings out the true photographer.

Although now ive got alot to Canon EOS equipment they never seem to leave the manual modes (apart from focus, all my lenses are full time manuals so it works out) I’ve just recently purchased a Canon 10D coming from the D30, its very nice camera but after getting the EOS 30 so I could use all my lenses on a film body I must say makes photography alto more interesting and fun (also being the cheapest part in my canon kit).

Both Digital and Film have their pros and cons, but if your learning and want to be serious about it a fully manual single lens reflex is the only want to really get a grasp of what everything does. Other wise a pocket digital might be for you.
Guest 26-May-2004 17:30
I recognise that camera... I had one exactly the same back in 1977!!!

I do SO agree with you David. I studied photography at school (briefly) many moons ago, and was apparently quite good. Unfortunately my MX was stolen and I ended up replacing it with a point and press Pentax compact. I now have absolutely NO idea what I am doing, so have my camera set to Auto all the time. HOWEVER I have vowed that once my little chap is in full time school I will enrole in a photography course somewhere just for fun!

Maybe then I will consider myself good enough and have enough time to join the PotD Gang!
DeMorcan26-May-2004 00:17
I was this was in the forum so we could discuss it. It is an interesting subject. For me it was when I put away the rangefinder and old manuals SLRs that I learned to take photos. I built a large format field camera. No rolls of film or winders. It was one photo at a time. And at $10 a slide 20 some years ago, I did not bracket. But what really taught me was the fresnel and loupe. When you look at the center and corners of the focus with a loupe it makes you see more. Then putting in 1 sheet of film and taking one photo makes you analyze things before the photo. I love my digicam. But I looked at my pads. I did not find any scenics that I would have taken with my field camera. It is like I forgot to make sure all 5 elements were there. It is just to easy to push a button, takes a few photos and hope you have a good one. Hope for a good one was not in my vocabulary with the field camera. :) However I think newcomers learn better with the digital cameras. There were those of us who learned the old ways and became photographers. But many people did not make it. There were cameras in boxes, closets, and dressers all over the world. The just gave up and did not bother with them. There were also many who took snapshots all of their life and never learned photography. With digicams, people have fun. They keep taking photos instead of putting the camera away. So more learn. Also with digicams, it is not a box of photos to go through when one of the kids gets engaged. It is pbase and other sites where one gets feed back, appreciation, and sees other photos. I think today a larger percentage of people who try photography end up taking quality photos. It may take them awhile, but they enjoy the learning. And the more people using and buying cameras and lens, the bigger the market and the more products for us to chose from. I know many people will never hold an 8X10 slide in their hand and know what a camera is really capable of. They will never experiment in high school darkrooms with different papers, etc. So, it will take them a long time to understand all the papers and ink combinations for printers today and how to utliize each. Many will never print anything. But they will be sharing the world they see around them. Which is what photographers have done for ages. The other loss may be history though. Today I can look at a mercury vapor print from the civil war and see all the detail of that time just as looked when "printed". I wonder 150 years from now, how much of our digital images will be left for our heirs to see how we lived. We have many of the revisions writers of the past went through because they were written out. We can learn from their process of creating. But word processors leave only the final product. We can no longer examine and learn from the process. Many photographers have left boxes of photos and we can see their developement as photographers, and also learn from their failures. Digital photographers do not leave their failures and often little of their learning process for others to learn from. Even if some one were to convert all the pbase photos to the format of 2104, would there be a path to show how great photographers became great. Would all of those unshared photos that made it on a harddrive be in a hardrive museum someplace. We build on what has gone before and most of us have favorite photographers from the past. But for the future we are leaving little or nothing. I regret that my great grandchildren have no chance to build on what I may do.
brother_mark25-May-2004 19:41
Oh for the simple days of few controls. ;) My Nikon D70 has so many manual features that I just have to leave some alone so I can concentrate on composition and exposure. It's enough to drive one crazy. But I love the histogram and the immediate feedback. I can change exposure comp. on the spot to get a better balance between highlights and shadows. With film, I'd surely have stopped after the first or second frame only to find I blew out the highlights. Funny, after loading my photos from Saturday and intending to check the accuracy of the autofocus, I discovered that I manually focused most of the pictures from the day! I guess I do that a lot with film, but the prints don't tell me that.
Lou Giroud25-May-2004 12:48
Never tried it with hitch hicking ....
Mike R25-May-2004 08:15
I noticed him too. He was not even looking through the viewfinder, just pointing in the general direction af the subject, must have been using a very wide angle lens. There is no reason why a digital compact/rangfinder could not be produced to work this way, and probably a big market for it amongst documentary photographers.
Cliff25-May-2004 04:49
Great nostalgic photo David - and I agree with your copy!
Guest 24-May-2004 23:41
I always loved my Pentax K1000, and now I'm feeling sad for neglecting it. But this PAD thing (which YOU started by the way) demands that I keep a digital camera in my hands at all times. It's all YOUR fault! ;)
Michael Todd Thorpe24-May-2004 22:48
Your dead on with that, David. My last camera was/is a Pentax K1000 I've had for twenty years. Moving to a Canon DigiRebel was quite a shock and took some getting used to. I still find myself caught off guard occassionally, and I've been using it almopst every day since March.... When I first started looking for a digital camera, I told some friends at work that (who also have K1000s) I wished someone would just make a digital plate to mount to the back in place of the film door.

Sad, really....
Guy Dube24-May-2004 21:55
Bonjour David,
I agree with you. I don't own a digital camera. All my pictures on Pbase, I took it with my Canon's cameras dated of the end of the seventies: Canon AE-1, Canon AE-1P, Canon T-50 and Canon T-70 with different lenses. Most of the people who owns digital cameras cannot change the lense except the people who bought very expensive cameras: Nikon D70, Canon EOS 1D, ...
With "Oldies", we have to take many shots with different apertures and different speeds to get the right picture. It is a good way to learn about photography and we know better our camera. And we are all the time anxious to see the results (a feeling we don't have with digital cams) when we develop the film.
I think the 35mm film will stay. We have to enjoy what we are doing, no matter about the equipment, it is a hobby (for me!)
Guy Dubé
Robin Reid24-May-2004 21:24
I totally agree with you views. Excellent image.
Si Kirk24-May-2004 20:47
nice image, this is the precise reason for my learning to shoot film as well as digital, i have just worked my way though my first roll of B+W, i will post the results when i get them developed.
Pall Gudjonsson24-May-2004 20:42
LOL - you forgot the 4th contol - ASA :-)
Tx for this text David - so right and true.
Lovely photo btw.
Joseph Tidwell24-May-2004 20:42
Nice story to go with a nice pic.
Guest 24-May-2004 20:35
Very well written prose, David, and of course perfect photo to accent.
Linda Alstead24-May-2004 20:25
glad to see your pressie is getting some use!