RNF: The Psychology Of Photography.

RNF: The Psychology Of Photography.

Pretty sure this will be a ramble fest. At the start of it I was uncertain where it would end. The name was changed since I started it. A bit all over the place. Plus I am an Industrial Engineer by degree. So any warbling about psychology will be a layperson’s spitballing affair. You have been warned.

Broadly, this will be about the impact of photography as it has to do with the photographer and the subject.

As is often the case the jumping off point for this post was conversations with two creators. The topic of both exchanges centered on a recent wedding session.

The first was an exchange with the videographer (Good guy.)…

…who said something that made me laugh. He said he did not need all of this stuff.

“I could do all of this with just the camera in my hand, but folks like to see the rig to justify what they are paying for.”

This started me thinking about the intersection between the gear and the psychological impact on the subject.

Later, after sharing some samples from the wedding, my friend Hamish on the other side of the pond said this:

“I wouldn’t know looking at those images that they were taken with different cameras – which is either a compliment about your style transferring across kit, or a comment about how kit doesn’t matter that much, I suppose .”

Ths got me thinking about the impact of gear on the images created. I countered to Hamish that I shoot RAW and edit all the same so regardless of starting point the resulting pictures should be similar. The camera used informs the success rate of the capture more than the appearance of the surviving RAW files.

So… It got me to thinking. Yes. Potentially dangerous, I know.

After spending much time spilling virtual ink in this space about how the gear is not the main thing, I think some distinctions may be in order.

With regards to gear I have been mainly talking about two aspects up to now.

Specs. (Objective)

In any capacity. Whether it be burst speeds, AF speed, resolution, sensor size etc. These are quantifiable specifications laid out before us all. For simple stills in good lighting, near any camera made within the last few years, even including MFT, can get the job done. I still stand by this.

Provenance/Feel. (Subjective)

I point to a refrain I have stated multiple times in this space as an example.

If you want a Leica, get a Leica.

As I have experienced over the last few years whether it has to do with the history of the brand, feel in hand, or a combination of the two it simply feels good to use it. I have heard the same said about other brands. There is no technical reason why. It is about experience.

I have no issue with either way of thinking. Both are valid to me.

In short gear not just as it impacts the photographer, but by extension how that impacts the subject, which should then impact the results.

Sony, as a main system, is an objective choice.

It is about getting the picture.

On the objective side having confidence that a bit of gear makes one comfortable. This confidence in your gear should be felt by your subject, which should help them relax.

My prior dances and final dance with Leica were subjective choices.

On the subjective side feeling that you are using a piece of kit that will help you create something magical, or at least special, should impact the subject as well.

But I eventually got over the latter. Even sold it off to obtain an hybrid of both objective and subjective. What can I call it?

Objective-driven provenance, maybe?

What am I on about? I am glad I imagined that you asked.

In a picture, this.

What of it is objective? Welp.

“Value” (Quotes required at these prices.)

For starters as far as medium format goes it is the sensible choice. Sounds crazy, but I am serious. Not intending to offend it is the Sony of medium format. Even has a Sony sensor I understand. Don’t believe me? Check this.

The closest product, a mirrorless medium format interchangeable lens digital camera specifically, is only one other brand. Hasselblad. I dabble in discontinued models, but for simplicity’s sake, I will compare models that are currently in production. First the cameras.

Remove the Hasselblad name and professed personal preferences regarding color science (A seemingly dubious claim to a RAW shooter like myself, but some swear by this.) from the equation and the Hasselblad has two documented advantages…

• Available leaf shutter lenses offer higher full power flash sync speeds.
• 1 TB of internal memory.

…some softer experience based advantages…

• Ergonomics, look, and feel.
• The aforementioned colors.

…similarities…

• Same sensor as I understand things.
  • 100MP.
  • Medium format.
• IBIS.

…and the GFX counters with quite a few advantages despite its lower price tag.

• Video.
  • Yeah, yadda, yadda, artistic stills only blah, blah. Look. This is not a superleggera exotic car thing where I am paying extra for you to delete the radio, A/C, sound insulation, and cloth pull straps instead of interior door handles. I pay more I expect at least the same level of stuff, not to have stuff removed.
• Last I heard, better AF.
• Faster burst speed, at 7fps as opposed to 3.3fps.
• More flash options.
  • A plain old third party Fujifilm flash works just fine thank you very much.
• Less expensive lenses with better lens specs.
  • Don’t spill your espresso. I did not say better lenses. Better lens specs. For example…

Less expensive, faster glass.

You see the price difference, right? There is nothing you can say that will convince me that the Hasselblad lens is more than twice as good as the slightly faster FUJIFILM lens. Add up that one camera and lens and we are talking high end camera gear prices vs. used car prices. So as nuts as it may sound the GFX is the value option in this discussion.

Performance.

More than just value performance is on the table. This GFX camera and lens is not known for being particularly speedy but it did just fine when it was called on for a few fast action pics as a recent wedding.

I will not be using it for this on the regular, but it is nice to know it can keep up while churning out massive image files. Not as fast as the best of breed full frame offerings but far better than I ever expected out of a 100MP medium format camera.

So, the provenance part.

Not born out of a brand name, but by the sheer might of specs teamed with a fine build quality itself, this camera feels special when using it. Then align that with the images it is able to produce…

…and you feel like you are using something special. Not because of the name brand, country of origin, and/or aesthetics. But because of what you can create with it. Whether adapting M glass with its wonderful MF focus aids…

…or with the lowest price native AF lens available.

Then I had a brief dance with a wonderful third party portrait lens…

…before hitting up the exact native portrait lens to show exactly why I did this in the first place.

This is where I experienced Objective-driven provenance.

Not because of the name on the outside of the camera, but because of what that camera could do. Not a camera I wanted to be seen with, take pictures of, and say that I own. A camera that I wanted to take pictures with. So much so that I am constantly thinking of scenarios and scenes to best exploit its capabilities.

This came to a head at the last wedding I shot. No offense to the bulk of the folks at the proceedings, but I mostly used my tried and true gear for them. And it did just as I expected. Take the groomsmen for example.

Killed it. As it did for the remainder of the day. But when it came time to take photos of the bride. The daughter of my sister cousin…

…I wanted something a bit elevated. The daughter of one of two women who are as close to siblings as this only child has ever had deserved a bit more. This brings us to the bride and bridesmaid session. Inspired by low angle photos I took with the GF 80mm f/1.7 in the wild where background and foreground were blurred I knew what I wanted. And I knew it would deliver. This gave me a confidence in posing and subject direction that I believe transferred to the bride and bridesmaids. With that we worked together to produce the images.

I gave a bit of direction to create a grouping that looked natural, near accidental but still coherent. Then just as I started framing the pic my little cousin raised her arms to check her hair. I asked that she do that again and once placed, I simply asked the young ladies to strike a pose.

Yep. That is it.

Exactly why I have been wanting a medium format camera all of these years. And not a fluke.

Even the groom had a moment in the GFX sun.

Could I have created an image like this before? I do not think so. Close? Yes. But not quite there. A Pentax 645D as I made my way through this gear churn journey did well.

I thought the mighty Sony 50mm f/1.2 GM could do it for me. It did very well. Better than the 645D. So much so that I sold the 645D on not long after I purchased the GM.

Perhaps it was a mental block. Maybe I just did not believe in the gear and that impacted the images I produced. Perhaps in more experienced or more skilled hands the results would be the same. All I know is that I enjoy the experience more now, am more confident in the gear, which I believe transfers to the subjects which all helps in producing images that I have never been happier with. So much so that I am already looking forward to the next sessions I have scheduled. It is a camera nerd dopamine hit and I want more.

Let me back up.

Strictly necessary?

Absolutely not.

I was doing just fine from the start. Regardless of brand or mount I could recommend a portrait lens that I thoroughly enjoyed. Take the Olympus 75mm f/1.8…

…on MFT for example. But all of those lenses led me down a path to where I am now. And I could not be happier about it.

To wrap up to each their own. M mount rangefinder glory may be your nirvana. Perhaps that Hasselblad X mentioned above is right up your alley. Perhaps some classic film camera is ore your speed.

My broader point is this.

If feasibly attainable without hardship, whatever it is that puts that pep in your step will likely not only impact you but will also likely translate to those you are working with.

Maybe it is not gear that does it for you. Perhaps it is a scene or setting…. some manner of experience. A rare film… film format… destination… that person you have been meaning to ask to photograph… that project you have been putting off… whatever it is that inspires you. Seek that thing out.

Whatever it is that you have been considering, but have held back on pulling the trigger, go for it. Your excitement will likely inform the subject and will likely allow you all to create something better than either of you expected before it is over.

That was a lot of gear talk to ultimately say that this is not primarily about gear. Go figure.

Happy capturing.

-ELW