The Art of Slowing Down: What Digital Photographers Could Learn from their Large Format Cousins

Introduction

Could it be that the very things that make digital capture so appealing also inhibit the creative process of image making? Could those who make images using dSLRs or compact digital cameras benefit from eschewing speed and fine-tuning through capture/instant review, in favour of a slower, more considered approach? (more similar to that of Large Format photographers such as Richard Childs, Joe Cornish and David Ward?)

My aim in this (series of) article(s) is to analyse the differences in the ‘in the field’ workflow between the two formats, and suggest situations where the digital landscape photographer might benefit from adopting an approach more similar to that of large format. Large format film photography may remain out of reach, undesirable to, or simply not meet the needs of many photographers (e.g. attempting sports or street photography with such cameras would not be wise!). However, in the realm of landscape photography there is a compelling argument that the workflows and techniques adopted by those who shoot large format film would be of benefit to a great many aspiring landscape photographers.

In wracking my brains as to how best to structure this series I came up with 4 key themes that I think bring out the major differences between the two workflows.

  • Bulk, Weight and General ‘Inconvenience’
  • Low-tech vs. High-tech
  • Uncertainty of Result (Time until Image Review)
  • Scarcity & Cost

In this article I’ll cover the first two themes. These address quite specific, literal technological differences and their potential impacts on workflow. The second article in the series will address the impact of uncertainty of result, and delayed review of images, which deals a little more with the psychology (in the loosest possible definition!) of image-making. Finally, I analyse the cross-cutting themes of scarcity and cost in relation to the two mediums.

Bulk, Weight and General ‘Inconvenience’

View cameras are large, heavy, and cumbersome to set up, especially in comparison to dSLRs. Some might say that even the most skilled of PR consultants couldn’t spin those characteristics into a set of advantages, but, taking a closer look at the impact that they might have on a photographer’s workflow reveals a compelling argument to the contrary.

The impact of the difference in format begins before the photographer even gets out into the field. By acknowledging the large bulk and weight of large format gear, yet continuing out into the field anyway, the large format photographer has made a positive decision to go out and make images. In contrast, while it is certainly common practice for many dSLR users to go out specifically to make images, there is always the temptation to simply bring the camera along ‘just in case’ and snap a few shots. Removing this temptation arguably forces the photographer to set aside time to concentrate solely on their photographic endeavours – a good mindset to get into. (… though, of course, could backfire and lead to ‘not finding time’ to get out with a camera!)

Finding the shot:

Once out in the field, the dSLR photographer is free to hand-hold their camera to set up a shot, and to make images hand-held if necessary. For the large format photographer, it is a not insignificant commitment to set up a view camera, both in terms of time and effort. The implication of this? The photographer looks for images without being able to hold the camera up to their eye (Commonly done through a finder, or alternatively, a simple piece of card with a rectangle in the correct proportions cut out of it (e.g. 5×4 or 3×2)). Having been through this process on a recent workshop with Richard Childs and David Ward, I can attest that it really does aid the creative process: Instead of getting ahead of yourself by worrying prematurely about the technical details, the kit bag goes down to the ground and you are free to roam and explore subjects as you will. Most importantly, following this process frees you to concentrate on one single part of the photographic process at a time – in this case, composition. Only once you have identified an emotive and evocative composition, is it time to get out the camera equipment and start setting up the shot.

Setting up your equipment:

Again, at this point, the two workflows diverge. For the large format photographer, equipment that is both large and heavy combines to necessitate a tripod, which is simply not the case if using a dSLR. However, out of this apparent constraint, something magical starts to occur once the camera is secured to the tripod: By removing the need to physically support the camera with your own frame, you allow yourself to truly concentrate on the image that is in the viewfinder (and most importantly, the emotion that it evokes in you). Without having to devote physical and mental effort to maintaining the same composition by keeping the camera balanced in exactly the same position, you can take the time to evaluate whether the nascent image has the same impact that had drawn you to it in the first place. Plus, you can make small and precise changes to simplify and fine-tune the composition to enhance its impact further.

Throughout this careful and deliberate process, you are looking and thinking photographically: concentrating fully on the landscape around you, and removed from the temptation to take a cursive look at your surroundings and skip to the next step without a second thought.

Low-tech vs. High-tech

In addition to their bulk and weight, large format cameras are distinctly manual (with a capital M!). Prime lenses, manual focus with bellows, manual adjustment of the aperture, spot metering with a hand-held meter and manual adjustment of the many possible movements. Electronics – what electronics? Even the shutter release is timed manually.

Compare and contrast this to the wonder of modern engineering that constitutes a dSLR. At your fingertips are autofocus, zoom lenses, multiple metering modes, automatically timed shutters that go down to 1/5000 of a second or less. Single or multi-shot modes, LCDs on which you can immediately review your image and histograms to tell you whether your exposure is over or under… and that is just scratching the surface!

But yet again, having all these options so readily available often leads to the temptation to skip ahead – thereby failing to fully concentrate on each one in turn. By the time you’ve started setting up the composition, you’re already thinking about the exposure… and once you’re doing that (or letting the camera do it for you via matrix metering), you’re on to fiddling with ISO, white balance, shutter speed and… oh you might as well take the shot as a test anyway (just to see what it’s going to look like first). The emphasis is often on speed, ‘efficiency’ and multi-tasking. It makes it easy to ‘take photographs’, but not so easy to make evocative images. All along you are being tempted to cede responsibility for the image to the camera’s automated systems.

So where does this leave us?

Well, simply put, just because all that technology is tempting you to hurry up and take the shot in case you ‘miss the moment’, it doesn’t mean that you have to listen!

Adopting and adapting some of the large format workflow out in the field while continuing to use a dSLR can really benefit your landscape photography. Slow down: Look deeply at what surrounds you and find an inspirational composition. Then use the technology at your fingertips wisely and you’ll find that being deliberate and making careful and well-thought out use of the rich functionality available on dSLRs is definitely a path worth following.

2nd Article to cover:

Uncertainty of Result (Time until Image Review)

The inability to review the image immediately (and the reaction of therefore checking and re-checking every step of the technical and creative process that has gone before, rather than tripping the shutter, reviewing and tweaking).

Scarcity & Cost

Temporal distribution of cost in the workflow. Pay high and early (and relatively often in terms of camera body upgrades) for digital. vs. Pay per image for digital.
The psychology of cost per image. Immediacy.

Ben Stephenson is a photographer who draws his inspiration from the natural world. Specialising in landscape and abstract macro work, he sees photography as a way of interpreting and sharing the beauty he experiences day-to-day. His photographs distil the complexity of the world into artful compositions that exhibit clarity, intensity and graphic simplicity. You can see more of his work, along with the work of his co-conspirators at www.incphoto.com

25 Responses

  1. Some great advice in this that’s definitely worth passing around and, despite not being a fan of the 3×2 portrait format, there are some lovely photographs to accompany the article. I particularly like the door abstract.

    I presume the second article in the series will talk about simply taking less pictures with your DSLR?

    • Ben Stephenson

      Hi Tim,

      Thanks for the comment and the kind words. The door abstract was one of my favourites from that trip. As for the second article, yes, certainly making fewer images will certainly be a cross-cutting theme, in amongst the topics I’ve earmarked for inclusion above!

  2. I am glad to read about someone extollng the virtues of slowing down the picture making process in the digital age. I have been on workshops with David Ward and Richard Childs (on seperate occasions) and both have said my approach would suit LF!
    Looking forward to part two.

    Dave

    • Ben Stephenson

      Hi David,

      Thanks for your comment – glad you enjoyed the article. I think the constraints and simplicity of LF are one of the factors that may eventually draw me in that direction. David and Richard have a lot to answer for!

      Kind regards,

      Ben

  3. I’m sorry but I find this article a bit simplistic in its argument, and I do hope that the second one in the scenarios will prove me wrong. I don’t wish to offend, (or spend hours composing a reply) but having used both film and digital over many years I find focusing your argument on the process not the end result a bit simplistic. Surely good images are made by the person not the equipment and the more experienced thinker will naturally be reflecting and evolving their own style whatever equipment or workflow they choose to use.

    • Ben Stephenson

      Hi Jason,

      Thanks for taking the time to comment. I think that you have an interesting point that’s worthy of further discussion. I do, of course, agree that images are made by the person and not the equipment – it would be silly to suggest otherwise! However I think that the equipment that one uses does to a large extent define the ‘rules of the game’ when making images. The ‘constraints’ of LF do make one slow down and think in a way that would not necessarily be obvious to someone who had developed their photography using 35mm digital. As such, while I do believe that photography is a journey, and that all of us who are passionate photographers are continuously taking in new information and evolving our style, a particular person’s vision and style might evolve down different paths depending on the formats that they’re using and experimenting with.

      Kind regards,

      Ben

  4. Hi Ben
    Cheers for your considered and empathic response and refreshing openness to discussion.
    I still feel my problem here is about these self-imposed, commonly followed unquestionable ‘rules’. (LF approach is better, must get it right in camera, don’t blow the highlights, must be pin sharp, this or that aspect ratio is better and I even was criticised recently for using a nd filter because it was not ‘real’!)
    Anyway, it’s my view that many of these ‘rules’ are masked behind a general perception that due to their technical nature they cannot be questioned. And as you can guess by now, I don’t subscribe to this. All these ‘rules’ are personal preference alone, not logical technical or the least bit binary in nature. And just because one person, or even many say, that the earth is flat doesn’t mean that it is.
    I personally see these ‘rules’ (or the desire to focus on the technical process) as counterproductive and inhibits creativity. It’s my view that good creativity comes from the synthesis of ideas to form something new. Placing constraints on this delicate often tenuous process inhibits its flow and places unnecessary restraints on the development of our creative processes.
    Anyway, my kids are about to kill each other and it’s time for me to get of this computer and try to find new creative ways to stop them arguing…

    • Ben Stephenson

      Hi Jason,

      Thank you, too, for your willingness to enter into discussion – I think that we learn more from constructive commentary and critique than from getting things ‘perfect’ first time (that is, if there is such a thing as perfect!) I definitely agree with you with regards to your comments on ‘rules’ being drilled into photographers from the first time the pick up a camera. I would say that it is arguably important to have some structure to one’s thinking when starting out in photography (something that the ‘rules’ can provide to an extent), but that it should always be made clear that they are less ‘rules’ and more ‘reference points’ – something to get you started, but that is not hard and fast. There is certainly a very real danger that these become so ingrained that in the end one cannot see the wood for the trees: that landscape photography is an art-form and that there is ultimately no clear-cut answer when making art… only shades of grey and opinion.

      In terms of my article, I confess that I wrote it as an opinion piece aimed at exploring an approach that was novel to me and that I found added another reference point for thinking about the artistic process. Having started out all my ‘serious photography’ using digital equipment, it was fantastic to be exposed to the opposite end of the spectrum in terms of technological sophistication (in the form of Large Format cameras), and notice the impact that it had on LF photographers’ approach to their art.

      However, given that it’s an opinion piece, don’t be surprised if you see me argue something somewhat to the contrary in future!

      Hope that you were successful in developing some creative approaches to stopping your kids arguing!

      All the best for the New Year,

      Ben

  5. tobers

    I found this very interesting. I usually photograph sports – football and rugby – where everything from taking a picture to captioning it and transmitting it to a newspaper picture desk is about speed. Fast fast fast. Total focus and concentration, juggling 2 or 3 cameras.

    I’m off to Mull in a few weeks to slow down a bit. So looking forward to it, and I’ll take a few of these tips from Ben with me, along with some thermals.

    • Ben Stephenson

      Glad that you found it interesting. I have immense respect for sports photographers – so much pressure – not something I’m good at dealing with!

      Enjoy the trip to Mull – think you’ll need the thermals!!

      All the best,

      Ben

  6. Interesting article Ben. I’m a DSLR user, and do find myself trying to force myself to slowdown when taking landscapes. When I do (which admittedly isn’t always!), I do find that it helps – more time to immerse yourself in the scene and feel part of the landscape. It’s definitely a psychological thing though – no reason you can’t slow down with a DSLR.

    Looking forward to the 2nd part.

    I have to admit that from a weight point of view a DSLR seems an advantage – in winter I’ve sometimes got crampons and ice-axes, spare clothing, as well as the camera gear – I’ve the greatest respect for photographers who manage this with Large Format gear.

    • Ben Stephenson

      Thanks Andrew.

      There is indeed no reason you can’t slow down with a dSLR, and there are certainly advantages to having the bells and whistles available should you need them. I still shoot digital and while I have an interest in LF, I haven’t made the leap yet, and may not do so (though am keeping an open mind!). The lower weight and bulk of 35mm certainly helps out when trekking – though of course it all depends on how many lenses you convince yourself that you ‘must’ take, just in case!

      Re: photographers who manage such feats with LF gear – Richard Childs was saying he’s done Munros with his kit – respect, indeed.

      Kind regards,

      Ben

  7. jlbatista

    The ‘slowing down’ aspect of photography is simply one of the first steps in developing artistic maturity for me and I feel it applies to all formats. While it might take a while to load the film, adjust swing and tilts e.t.c. with a view camera, this is merely a technical hurdle and I don’t think this alone encourages a slower, more considered approach to image making. The most important thing is to take time absorbing our surroundings, which really, should be done without a camera in hand.

    I’d also like to say that this article is, for me, a little too David Ward-lite and the images supplied are also quite derivative of his. I think it’s fantastic that we have a magazine devoted to serious landscape photography and really appreciate Tim Parkin’s devotion to this project, but there’s something a bit worrying about the content. It currently seems that there’s a very exclusive club or scene consisting of Light and Land participants who all share this same artistic vision and similar ideals. David Ward is one of my landscape heroes and I can’t begin to tell you how much of an impact his images and writing have had on me, but it seems to have affected photographers in a similar way that Michael Kenna’s images did. We now have a legion of ‘Wardabes’ and we’re running the risk of not only inhibiting our own individuality, but maybe dismissing original work of others who don’t stick to the David Ward formula (not that his images are at all formulaic).

    I’d be really pleased to see a wider variety of approaches to landscape photography in the magazine – and I don’t just
    mean less of the portrait orientation ;)

    I really hope this doesn’t come across as an attack on people who attend David Ward’s workshops, I think Richard Childs’ images have their own essence as do Tim Parkin’s and others. Landscape photography is such a personal art form, that’s all I’m trying to say.

    John Batista
    (A concerned young landscape photographer)

    • None taken (as David Ward would say).

      I think it is a little harsh to say ‘David Ward’ lite although I understand what you are pertaining to. The magazine is going to have a definite slant towards my own colleagues and acquaintances to begin with as those are the people I can talk to, influence to write content, etc. However, we’re definitely trying to include content from many sources (hence input from Ian Camera, Bruce Percy, Chris Friel, Coug Chinnery, David Langan so far) and will be trying to keep the references as wide as possible.

      Inveitably influence will show through and it may just be a symptom of the current ‘blinkered’ view of landscape photography that many of us have. That David Ward is referred to as an influence is probably because very few people do ‘close’ landscape work well and it is such an appealing genre. However, anybody doing colour detail work with strong composition will end up being compared to David Ward, anybody doing near far vistas will be compared to Joe Cornish, simple black and white compositions -> Michael Kenna, serene square landscapes -> Charlie Waite.. There is as much laziess in the categorisation and the execution.

      I’d be interested in your suggestions in how what sort of content you would like to see in order to achieve the variety you seek? (We have a few ideas but getting some independent contributions would be cool).

      In other words, don’t be too concerned :-)

    • Ben Stephenson

      Hi John,

      Thanks for taking the time to comment. None taken from myself also – I said to Jason, above, that I learn a lot from constructive commentary. I think Tim has covered a lot of ground below with regards to the shape of the magazine, so I’ll focus more on the article itself:

      I couldn’t agree more with regards to the need to absorb one’s surroundings before diving in with a camera – it usually takes me a good few hours to get into the frame of mind where I’m truly receptive to what my senses are telling me, and only once I’m in that frame of mind do I feel like I’m actually able to make good images. Wish I had written that in the article!

      Fair point also with regards to the adjustments on LF being simply a ‘technical hurdle’ – of course there are equivalents to this when using any camera, and it’s all part of the process. However, with (overall) fewer bells and whistles on LF compared to digital, in addition to the bulk/necessity for a tripod with LF, I do think that it does help the process of slowing down more so than using a dSLR (though slowing down using a dSLR is certainly possible!).

      With regards to being ‘David Ward-lite’ :) . I think it’s generally easy to spot correlation, but significantly more difficult to ascribe causation. Certainly, I enjoy David’s work, find it inspiring, and see similarities between it and my own. And yes, I went on a workshop with him recently, on which I made the images above. However, whether my work is ‘derivative’ or not, is up for debate, I feel.
      I started out my photography doing a lot of abstract macro and abstract landscape work (see the abstracts section of my site) before I came across David’s writing and photography earlier this year. Certainly, on being exposed to his work, I felt a lot of excitement that someone was out there who had achieved acclaim as a landscape photographer through making images that were not the ‘classic’ sweeping vistas that are more prevalent (though no less engaging, I find). And certainly his work has opened my eyes to the fact that one can make pleasing abstract images at a variety of spatial scales. So yes, it’s safe to say that I have been influenced by him. But I am reminded of a recent talk by Charlie Waite (sorry – not doing much to dispel Light and Land bias, here!) where he displayed a series of famous landscape photographs that were each by different photographers ranging from Cartier-Bresson to Minor White, to himself and beyond. He had hand-picked the images to have similarities between them, and for each of the images in the set posed the question: ‘Was X, when making this image, inspired by Y?’. The answer was invariably ‘Perhaps’ or ‘Who can say?’. It was interesting to see the similarities and a calming to realise that referencing other inspirational work had always been part of art. But overall, I found it was most inspiring to simply appreciate the images for what they were, and accept that it was not the answer to the question Charlie posed that was important, but the each of the images themselves.

      Long response – sorry!

      Kind regards, and all the best for the New Year,

      Ben

      Kind regards,

      Ben

  8. jlbatista

    Hi Tim. Thanks for replying – and so quickly!

    I might have been a little harsh with that comment. Apologies to Ben (I did have regrets after posting). I’m certainly not saying the images are bad anyway, they’re very nice, particularly the textural studies.

    Sometimes it’s easy to forget that colour art photography is still only really in it’s infancy and maybe so far, we’ve had very few game changers and people to look up to. That being said there’s a hell of a lot of colour work out there and likely many greats yet to show themselves, which is nothing but exciting in my mind. My main concern with the ‘scene’ I spoke of is not simply the small circle of influence, but the fact that so little seems to be happening (at least from my perspective) might be a sign that we’re about to hit a dead end. That scares me, as I’ve barely started!

    I think maybe the magazine is a great opportunity to highlight some personal work that might be out there, projects with running themes or locales – portfolio showcases in the vein of Lenswork maybe. Of course, there’s the difficulty of seeking out such work and you seem like a pretty busy guy already! I’m sure portfolio submissions would prove to be… a reason to upgrade your bandwidth.

    I’d like to see more of a unity of all the landscape work being produced, rather than such exclusivity (sorry if I’m being offensive again). Personally, I’d like to know about people working in obscurity.

    Is black and white completely out of the question? I’d definitely say there’s room for a black and white feature or occasional artist showcase, if that’s not straying from the cause?

    I’m sure these are things you’ve already considered anyway, but at least you know one guy will appreciate them.

  9. Ok ok, slowing down can help some people think more…. (Always good)….
    But, maybe it’s just me that sprints at top speed along a beach whilst changing a lens, and extending the tripod legs to arrive at a location totally out of breath, but in time for the parting light to illuminate the scene…. http://www.flickr.com/photos/photoimage/4108803440/
    Or under pressure from the setting sun, and after an unproductive walk in a new location on the last day of my winter holiday, again in deep snow I sprinted along a track and up a hill (not knowing there was a tree on the other side) where I under pressure and in haste composed something I was happy with (trying desperately not to spoil the foreground knee deep snow) before the sun disappeared… http://www.flickr.com/photos/photoimage/4219709602/
    Or under pressure from the rising sun and disappearing fog I ran through the forest towards the parting, whilst desperately trying to ‘inspire’ my 7 year old son to keep up without him injuring himself, I made this composition… http://www.flickr.com/photos/photoimage/4008400770/

    As you can see my photographic life isn’t one of slow contemplation in the field or hours of waiting for the light, (my family life doesn’t allow that) but it is about squeezing in limited times and resources in the pursuit of a passion and for me at least, it’s about the end result.

    • I think it’s worth saying that ‘slowing down’ isn’t the only way to take pictures. For an extreme example, Galen Rowell was in Lhasa, Tibet when he saw a Rainbow forming – he had an inkling that he could get the rainbow to end at the Dalai Lama’s palace (Potala) and so dropped his camera bag and ran for over a mile to get the shot. If this is quite remarkable, the fact that he was at 12,000 ft should just blow you away.

      View Galen’s photo of Potala Palace

      So, like Jason says, sometimes slow doesn’t get the shot. However, if you are always working like that, you’ll miss out on some on the learning that can be had from working in a more considered style, then when you have your ‘rushing to get the shot’, hopefully the compositional techniques you worked on honing over time will all come into play instinctively..

      • “However, if you are always working like that, you’ll miss out on some on the learning that can be had from working in a more considered style, then when you have your ‘rushing to get the shot’, hopefully the compositional techniques you worked on honing over time will all come into play”

        I think that comment hits the nail on the head. Galen Rowell took some amazing pictures, and indeed for some of them he did have to run to his chosen spot – but his instinctive style in these situations was backed up by years of experience, an understanding of mountains, composition, light, his camera and his chosen film. Too many newcomers with a DSLR can spend time rushing around machine-gunning – slowing down helps to hone technique and compositional understanding, so that when the time really is tight you still have the skills to get the shot. Just my opinion in anyhow.

        Tim – I might be interested in submitting a review of Galen Rowell’s ‘Mountain Light’ if you think it might be appropriate for the magazine – I find his mountain images and style inspirational, and that book in particular a good complement to books by the likes of Joe and others.

        • Please do Andrew – I’m reviewing ‘Sierra Nevada’ at the moment and am writing a biog of Galen so it will fit in well – if you can get it for next issue that would be great (sooner the better of course – if this issue then it appears in context with other Galen stuff.

    • Richard Childs

      We all do the running thing from time to time. LF imposes a pace upon our working but we often find ourselves in a situation where fast changing light dictates the pace. I can have my camera set up, fucussed, metered, filtered and loaded with film in under four minutes and I rather suspect that Joe, with his many more years of experience is faster than that.

      A few years ago Joe and I were descending off the summit of Marsco on Skye at the end of the day when the sun suddenly broke though the sheet of cloud painting the mountains around us a vivid red. With my head down I failed to notice until Joe sprinted past me to try to get in position in time. I was too late to react and Joe had found the only decent foreground around anyway so missed the opportunity but many of my mountain images are born the same way, a reaction to the sudden splashes of light that the mountain climate creates. If I miss the light the first time I sit and wait as it often happens again. It’s a heady mix of fun and frustration and, from time to time elation when you find yourself in the right place at the right time.

      • Ben Stephenson

        Hi Richard,

        Good to hear from you, and thanks for your comment – insightful as always. I was at your website yesterday browsing through some of your images and noticed one of Larches in Heavy Rain that seemed somehow familiar! It turned out very nicely indeed.

        All the best,

        Ben

  10. Ben Stephenson

    Some great photos there Jason. I especially like the beech forest. Very evocative indeed.

    I do agree – there’s certainly a time for haste in photography, and slowing down isn’t always the answer. There are some times where you know that you would miss an opportunity if you didn’t hurry, as conditions in the landscape can change so fast. Where I am right now (I have little time to photograph also) it’s important for me to feel that I have gone through the process methodically, otherwise I forever feel that I will be missing something important. I am so rushed in the majority of my life, that being able to slow down and appreciate what is immediately around me when making photographs is deeply rewarding and much needed. However, I’m positive that (somewhat ironically) by doing this, I have missed some other opportunities by not ‘chasing the light’ as you did to make those fantastic images, and as Galen Rowell did to make his famous photograph of Potala Palace.

    I think Tim and Andrew have wrapped it all up nicely with their comments, so I will sign off here, and finish off the second part of the article in the coming weeks!

    I’d like to say thanks to everyone who read the article and who commented. Particular thanks to you, Jason, for being willing to engage with me on this – I always enjoy being exposed to different opinions and constructive criticism, and the conversation has hopefully made interesting reading for folks here!

    Kind regards,

    Ben

  11. Surely “slowing down” isn’t always about quantitative things, like how many shots you take and whether the family back home is crying out for attention. It’s more about an attitude of approach, about how you relate to your surroundings. It’s about, say, mining the apparently ordinary for the extraordinary, about ‘seeing’ shape or connection, or whatever. It may not be entirely about the actual quantity of time you spend; it could be more about the willingness to inhabit, in detail and in quietness, a given space. Meditatively.

  12. Interesting article and discussion but as Jason points out it probably generalizes a smidge too far. I’m a proud digital landscaper and, having been brought up on books and imagery by my large format heroes, I always try to operate in a slow and thoughtful manner. My doing this is not because I am encumbered with gear but because I really want to think about what I am framing and watching the play of light around me. I don’t have to be forced to slow down as I really care about what I am trying to do and work methodically as a conscious result. I use a plastic viewfinder cut from a 99p B&Q paint tray and I continually watch how the light and shadows are forming and what, if any, role the sky might play in the scene. My viewfinder is 3:2 format but I will be making another at 5:4 as I am getting quite fond of that format. My camera doesn’t come out of the bag until it is time to fine tune and get ready to determine tripod placement. I use a tripod for 100% of my landscape work and I even use a loupe and focus cloth to aid in close inspection of the viewfinder when the sun is glaring. I frequently use tilt-shift optics to get the very best in sharpness and I am increasingly using the shift feature to enable super resolution stitches that exceed the individual exposure capabilities of even my nice 21MP camera. I find that I get the best results by using manual focus and fine tuning with the live view feature. The only slight differences to my workflow and those of you using film is in the fact that my image is right side up on the LCD and likely in my occasional tendency to bracket to handle certain three dimensional exposure challenges. In addition to the super resolution technique I mentioned I do this in situations where I know I will want to (at at least want to retain the option to) open up shadows in a composition. Joe Cornish will accomplish this in post-processing using the shadow/highlights tool or a curves adjustment. With my digitial medium I will more often get better results with less noise through bracketing and using the erasor tool to subtley bring in the detail. That’s just something that the high tech aspect my medium allows me to do. Having the advantage of immediate feedback is also a positive high tech feature for me in that I can be sure that I am getting the best exposure I am able. It makes for fewer disappointments and helps me spend less time in Photoshop back at the house.

    I am a digital photographer and slow and deliberate is my approach as well.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.