P3D Re: Stereo Camera Cases

["Gregory J. Wageman" <gjw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Bill Davis writes:

>I guess I would opine that I've eliminated unnecessary options.  How many
>pictures is *enough*?  If I get the shots I want, why would I need to shoot
>more?

It sounds like you've also eliminated the opportunity to experiment.
Maybe take the same picture from three or four different angles, with
different framing or emphasizing different elements.  Primary subject
centered, or using the rule-of-thirds on the left and on the right, or
top and bottom, of the frame.

Do you always like every composition you've chosen once you've gotten
the film back?  I know I don't, and having taken some different variations
often (but of course not always) results in one compositional choice I'm
really pleased with, where the others may be merely "OK".

>Well, I use Kodachrome 64, which seems to be versatile enough for sunny
>*and* cloudy days. Do some folks really stop and switch films when the
>available light changes by an f-stop or two?  Isn't it easier to adjust
>shutter speed and/or f-stop?  Or am I missing something?

Well, you're either missing something (depth-of-field) or getting something
you'd rather not (camera shake). :-)

I will switch, for example, from Velvia (50ASA) to E100S (100ASA) if it
gets too dark to maintain both a reasonably small aperture and a
sufficiently fast shutter speed.  Or from Kodachrome 25 (which, in stereo
at least, is really only a sunny day, 10-til-2 film IMO) to Kodachrome 64.
Why not minimize grain when you've got the light to do it?  And why settle
for shakey or blurry pictures when you don't?

Different emulsions are also a creative choice.  I'm generally going to
avoid shooting people pictures with Velvia in the camera, for example,
because of the horrid way it renders skin tones, but nothing beats it
for photographing landscapes, flowers, parades, or anything where you
want explosive color.  (Of course not everyone likes that, either.)

>A roll in the camera, two more in my pocket makes nearly 90 stereos.  I
>would need to shoot in *extremely* interesting areas to worry that 90 shots
>won't be enough for an afternoon or even a day.  

In a Realist, yes.  For me three rolls is 54 pairs.  At a really photogenic
place like, say, Marine World in Vallejo CA., I have been known to shoot
5-6 rolls over the course of a day.  I don't necessarily keep them all
(some experiments don't work), but I'll often do in-camera dupes so that
I can remount in Realist mounts and still have 2x2's for projection.  If
your subject is dynamic (like animals), it may take quite a few shots to
catch them in just the right pose or framed the way you'd like, looking
in the right direction, or with just the right cute expression.

>Can't drop the camera into a bag with flash attached either.  Or does one
>just get an even bulkier bag? :--) I designed the flash bracket for my
>camera to slip under my belt and hang there nicely, so I wouldn't need an
>extra bag to carry it.

True, the flash comes off to go into the bag.  But I only have to set up
the camera once when I get to the venue. (I use a handle-mount flash which
is a convenient way to hold the camera as well, even if flash isn't
necessary, and if I do want it it's already connected so all I have to do
is flick the switch).  I only take it down when I'm done for the day.  In
the mean time I have spare batteries for camera and flash, lens tissue,
remote release, notebook, pen, and all the other odds'n'ends in the bag
with me.

>I *am* selective about composition, focus and exposure and don't use
>(waste?) a lot of film or time bracketting exposures.  ("Only four more,
>keep smiling, folks!") That would easily triple or quadruple my film use,
>and I'd still end up keeping only the properly exposed pics.  Better (for
>me, at least) to learn to hit the proper exposure with the first shot.

Any good film course will teach you that film is relatively cheap and
you should plan on "wasting" some (although I don't consider it waste).
A pro doesn't count on getting more than maybe one "keeper" on a roll.
I'm not saying that we amateurs should be shooting that much film (budgets
won't generally allow it for hobby purposes), but taking a single shot and
calling it a keeper is clearly the opposite extreme.  If nothing else it
seems to me to be creatively limiting.

I like to have options when I mount.  I can always crop down to get
tighter to the subject in mounting, but I can't go the other way, so I
might take a shot with more space around the subject in addition to a
tight one.  What looked good through the viewfinder might not look as good
to me several days later when I'm mounting.  If you're really sure of
your compositional skills you may not need to do this, but I find it
invaluable.

I don't generally bracket exposures, either, unless the situation is
particularly difficult (strong backlighting is one case where I might
shoot two or three shots with different amounts of exposure compensation;
or a particularly contrasty scene [i.e. lots of deep shadows] where I
might shoot one opened up a little to get some shadow detail as well as
one where I let the shadows go black).

>I don't ever punt my camera.  I don't understand the reference. 

I meant punt on a shot, as in not take it, because your minimalist setup
didn't give you the necessary option.

        -Greg


------------------------------

End of PHOTO-3D Digest 2807
***************************