Psychology of the amateur photographer.

Lefrash

Lefrash

Suspended / Banned
Messages
136
Name
Fraser
Edit My Images
Yes
I've mentioned this I a previous thread. Back story is as follows: taking my dslr to my first gathering and I quickly realised due to the light, I was quite self conscious about using my flash. I would imagine a pro can get a way with a lot more as people will happily let a pro get on with his/her job, correct me if I'm wrong. However, as an amateur (ie just another punter at the wedding) I feel the whole dslr with a lens and flash can feel a bit obtrusive. Rightly or wrongly, I felt I was being quite rude so I pretty much put the camera away.

My query would be, is this simply a confidence thing? Will it get better as I do it more? Or is there a real dislike from the general public capturing candid pics? Do you find having a mirrorless body make it feel less obtrusive?

I could sell my d7000 and buy a Sony a6000 for not much cash so it's a very doable swap but I'm just more wondering whether it's more a physiological thing for me rather than the punter?

Hope that makes sense!
 
I think it's down to the person with the camera and the situation. I will be taking my camera to my Aunt's wedding at the end of the month and will feel totally comfortable using it however I feel as it is my Aunt's wedding.
However, if I were to take it to a wedding of a partner's friend, I might feel a little more self conscious.
With regards to street photography, I would feel far more comfortable shooting however I wanted if there was an event happening and people expected cameras to be around than if it was just a normal day with nothing special happening.
 
1: yes it's a confidence thing, when you're 'the guy with the camera' no one objects to your presence (not quite 'no one')
2: candid pics tend to be spoiled by obvious flash*
3: using a smaller camera will only help by having people think of you as a harmless amateur - it'll help you feel comfortable, but won't help you take control.
4: taking control in social situations will improve your images - when people ask for a grab and grin, the first thing I do is change the location.

* photography is about light! When you see a 'great image' in the viewfinder it's lit by what's already there, adding flash changes the image considerably. When a 'pro' adds flash, it's to take control of the lighting, not just to add more light.
 
I'll only take pictures if people are happy for me to and whilst doing so I'm conscious that the occasion isn't about me and my camera and that people want to enjoy their own thing and don't necessarily want to be bit players in the life of me and my camera. I don't want to change / ruin the ambiance and I don't want to spoil the moment for anyone else and I think I'm less likely to do these bad things if I'm using less obtrusive and invasive kit and behaving like a gentleman with some degree of control and empathy for those around me.

I don't dislike seeing people with large DSLR's fitted with large lenses and flashes but I do dislike how they sometimes use them. I'm sure we've all seen people ruin a moment for everyone and thought "What a d**k." It's a slippery slope that I try to keep off.

In the example of being a guest at a wedding I suppose some people will be disappointed and maybe offended if you don't take their picture :D but I suppose there's a chance that shooting away and using a flash could affect what the pro is doing so I'd want to be sure I wasn't making a nuisance of myself.

I think awareness of what's going on and being able to judge what's appropriate and what isn't is the key. I'd rather not touch the camera than spoil it for other people.
 
Lefrash said:
I've mentioned this I a previous thread. Back story is as follows: taking my dslr to my first gathering and I quickly realised due to the light, I was quite self conscious about using my flash. I would imagine a pro can get a way with a lot more as people will happily let a pro get on with his/her job, correct me if I'm wrong. However, as an amateur (ie just another punter at the wedding) I feel the whole dslr with a lens and flash can feel a bit obtrusive. Rightly or wrongly, I felt I was being quite rude so I pretty much put the camera away.
Click to expand...

I felt like posting on your previous comment that you were trying to reason why you need to buy a different camera, and you exhibit the same behaviour here, i.e. photographer wants new camera/lens and tries to find reasons for buying one.

A professional has been invited (paid also) to take photographs of a gathering of people. It all depends in your relationship to the group and whether they like you and want you to take group photos. In what capacity are you taking photos and have you been a long standing member of the group?

Not that I bother any more but I was never self-conscious as you are ... and that was in the days of full blown flash. I do hope though that you will make the photos available to the group free of charge ;-)

PS. A Mamiya C330f and a Metz 45 are rather visible pieces of kit.
 
Last edited:
It's all about communication and expectations.
Are you know as the guy with the camera? Is it unsaid but expected you bring it and make some images? If so it's easy doing and then just bring the big flash Gun
Have you asked? Got a no? Then don't do it. Though I bet most will be excited to get some images for their album so the question will probably be met by a big smile.
 
If there is a pro wedding photographer, remember he is paid to do a job and he is probably under pressure to get the money shots at the right moment. Chat to him or her beforehand.

I am no wedding pro but I have done a good few. When some family member walks into your shot at a critical moment the annoyance is equal whether it was a cellphone or a medium format system. Be confident, get the shot, have fun doing it but be sensitive to the fact that you are not the working tog on the event. Some time soon you might just be the official working pro and then you will understand both sides of the coin.

Sure, some pro toggers can be downright miserable but they are few and far between. No decent pro will stop you from getting a shot but let him/her do their thing.
 
Basically what Phil said. A smaller camera can help with candids where you don't want to be controlling people, provided it isn't more fiddly to use. Regarding flash, I'd suggest only using it in this kind of circumstance as a tool of last resort.
 
IMO selling your D7000 and getting a Sony A6000 will do nothing for you.

No idea what lenses you have ... but perhaps consider the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 DX to add to the camera ... a "nifty fifty" for DX. I found it brilliant in similar situations with my D3200. And don't worry about letting the ISO go fairly high.

Beyond that its a lot about confidence and avoiding getting in people's way.
 
Performance wise, there's not a great deal of difference between your D7000 and a Sony A6000 - both APS-C with a reasonable sensor, broadly similar ISO performance (I have an A6000, and I find the images are acceptable up to ISO 1600, and usable at 3200 (if I need the shutter-speed to avoid subject blur).

Is it worth changing camera?

It's probably only something you can answer, and possibly only after you've done it!

If it means you feel more at easy taking shots, and so you get more shots (and more interesting shots) as a result, then it will be worth changing, but you might swap and still feel awkward.

As Eloise has suggested, getting a small, fast prime may help both in keeping the camera small (if you opt to swap Sony do a 35 f/1.8 and a 50 f/1.8, both APS-C with optical stabilisation, and not particularly expensive), and allowing you to shoot at lower light levels without needing flash.
 
If you're polite and respectful and share your images I can't imagine many people will take the huff but as a guest you need to stay within your comfort level.
When you're a bit more confident of the results you may find it easier to step forward, I doubt the camera is that much of an obstacle.

I take my camera to weddings and parties - as a general rule I only photograph people I know or people I know with people they know.
Sometimes I'm asked to take a picture of someone too because I have a "proper camera". I certainly wouldn't run around the room firing off flash candids of every guest eating their cake.
Most people are taking pictures at these gatherings with phones and compacts too.

At the last wedding we went to the photographer took his shots then invited the guests to take theirs after him with the same groupings. Seemed to work well for everyone but it was quite an informal do.

We've since been asked to send our photos to the bride and groom. I'm probably being fussy that I want to process the better ones not just send the JPGs - compounded by a 3 week holiday straight after the day.

I shoot Olympus M43 usually with a small fast prime. It feels unobtrusive, I would never have taken my old Pentax K100D to the same events and would probably have used my phone or compact.
I'm not there as an official photographer so I don't feel compelled to act like one.
 
Faldrax said:
Performance wise, there's not a great deal of difference between your D7000 and a Sony A6000 - both APS-C with a reasonable sensor, broadly similar ISO performance (I have an A6000, and I find the images are acceptable up to ISO 1600, and usable at 3200 (if I need the shutter-speed to avoid subject blur).

Is it worth changing camera?

It's probably only something you can answer, and possibly only after you've done it!

If it means you feel more at easy taking shots, and so you get more shots (and more interesting shots) as a result, then it will be worth changing, but you might swap and still feel awkward.

As Eloise has suggested, getting a small, fast prime may help both in keeping the camera small (if you opt to swap Sony do a 35 f/1.8 and a 50 f/1.8, both APS-C with optical stabilisation, and not particularly expensive), and allowing you to shoot at lower light levels without needing flash.
Click to expand...

I kinda mentioned the a6000 as an example of a smallish camera which i would imagine a lot of people would not feel too bad if it gets pulled out at a party. I wouldn't expect the pictures to be improved in the situation i described just by changing camera. It seems that my first thought though about getting enough light is true, having a fast lens will make a big difference. Definitely food for thought as I'll certainly want to bring the beast out with me to more get togethers... I'm sure the difficulties i experienced were not new! I'm also glad I'm not alone at feeling funny about using flash - it's good to hear other peoples perspectives.
 
Why would you use flash? It is totally destructive of atmosphere, and throws hard shadows..

I too have a D7000, and used it a an evening wedding in Stockholm during February of this year. I had to push the ISO up, and used some open apertures on an f2.8 zoom. There were some duffers for sure, but some very satisfying shots too, and avoiding the flash held the 'ambiance'. Sure, a full frame, or say a D500, would have handled the high ISO better and the hit rate would have been higher, but a Sony A6000 would have given no advantage over the D7000.
 
horrocks said:
Why would you use flash? It is totally destructive of atmosphere, and throws hard shadows..
Click to expand...

I’m with Phil on this. If you stick straight on top of the camera and point it straight at the subject on full power then yes you will do what you say, however with a little knowledge of how light works along with the correct positioning, settings etc it can take an average scene and create something spectacular. It can evoke emotions and highlight details that ordinarily would have been lost
 
horrocks said:
Why would you use flash? It is totally destructive of atmosphere, and throws hard shadows..

I too have a D7000, and used it a an evening wedding in Stockholm during February of this year. I had to push the ISO up, and used some open apertures on an f2.8 zoom. There were some duffers for sure, but some very satisfying shots too, and avoiding the flash held the 'ambiance'. Sure, a full frame, or say a D500, would have handled the high ISO better and the hit rate would have been higher, but a Sony A6000 would have given no advantage over the D7000.
Click to expand...

I'm with Phil here. Its how you as a photographer choose to use the light in any given situation.......be that controlling the light, adding some light, balancing light........its all a bit open to artistic interpretation

Jessica Secret Bed by Sir._.SR, on Flickr

Untitled by Sir._.SR, on Flickr

on camera flash used for both
 
Sir SR said:
I'm with Phil here. Its how you as a photographer choose to use the light in any given situation.......be that controlling the light, adding some light, balancing light........its all a bit open to artistic interpretation

Jessica Secret Bed by Sir._.SR, on Flickr

Untitled by Sir._.SR, on Flickr

on camera flash used for both
Click to expand...

Funnily enough Shaheed, as soon as I read the comment, I immediately thought of your work as an example of how flash can improve an image (y)
 
Those shots are lovely but they represent a completely different scenario to shooting as a guest at a wedding, as an official or unofficial shooter at a concert/gig or as a tourist or street shooter at a location open to the public.

Using a flash in a studio or someone's bedroom for a portrait is completely different to firing one off where someone else is being paid to do so or where there are people who don't know you, don't care about your photography hobby and indeed will likely be upset, annoyed or downright angry if you start firing a flash off left right and centre.
 
woof woof said:
Those shots are lovely but they represent a completely different scenario to shooting as a guest at a wedding, as an official or unofficial shooter at a concert/gig or as a tourist or street shooter at a location open to the public.

Using a flash in a studio or someone's bedroom for a portrait is completely different to firing one off where someone else is being paid to do so or where there are people who don't know you, don't care about your photography hobby and indeed will likely be upset, annoyed or downright angry if you start firing a flash off left right and centre.
Click to expand...
I think the shots were just posted to illustrate that flash doesn't have to be...
horrocks said:
totally destructive of atmosphere, and throws hard shadows..
Click to expand...

However I really take exception to your assumption that people in social situations get upset annoyed or angry about photographers, I find the opposite to be true. In fact in most social situations in 2017 the vast majority of people there will be taking pictures, never has photography been more 'normal'.

20 years ago when camera sales were at a real low, I would sometimes feel like a social pariah carrying a big camera, but stood surrounded by strangers photographing the Eiffel Tower last week, if I'd swung my camera on its strap I'd have knocked out 3 or 4 other photographers! People are literally queueing to have their pictures taken.

I do still encounter people who don't want their picture taking, but it's less than 1% of the population. And yes that's with full frame cameras, off camera flash or whatever I need to do to get the shot.
 
woof woof said:
Those shots are lovely but they represent a completely different scenario to shooting as a guest at a wedding, as an official or unofficial shooter at a concert/gig or as a tourist or street shooter at a location open to the public.

Using a flash in a studio or someone's bedroom for a portrait is completely different to firing one off where someone else is being paid to do so or where there are people who don't know you, don't care about your photography hobby and indeed will likely be upset, annoyed or downright angry if you start firing a flash off left right and centre.
Click to expand...

I've happily used on camera bounced flash at a wedding/party.

Just be mindful not to interfere with the professional.

That said, last few weddings I've just taken a compact or not taken very many pics as I rather enjoy being a guest!
 
Sir SR said:
I've happily used on camera bounced flash at a wedding/party.

Just be mindful not to interfere with the professional.

That said, last few weddings I've just taken a compact or not taken very many pics as I rather enjoy being a guest!
Click to expand...

I pretty much said this in my initial post, I think it's about being aware and caring and not treating every occasion as a chance to enjoy taking pictures.

I can't remember the last time I used a flash in a public place with strangers in the vicinity. Years ago I used to take pictures at gigs but back then all I had was an f4 lens and ISO 1600 film, I used flash for some shots as it was the only way of freezing the action and most of the time there wasn't a problem but strangers, alcohol and camera gear don't always mix and there were sometime grumbles and whinges. There's a time and a place for flash and if there's even a remote possibility that I'm going to spoil it for someone else or annoy someone then I simply wont and IMO there are far too many who don't seem to care what effect they have on others. I've seen uncaring photographers cause everything from grumbles to clearing a room, I'm not going to do that :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top