# "Pure photographic experience"



## Grumbaki (Nov 6, 2013)

"Pure photographic experience"

We see those words tossed around quite a lot recently and more specifically with the new nikon that made it it's tagline (for the cam as no video mode, mainly).

What would be the spec of a camera that would fit your definition of a "pure photographic experience?"

All the talk with the a7r and the df, I thought of a kinda weird machine. Mirroless FF high ISO and DR performance and so forth, of course, like 99% of us will want but the form factor in my mind is quite different.

The biggest retro conundrum of mine would be to just give up the LCD. We have cards that can store 500+ pics, not 36 expo films, why do we always need to look at a damn 3" lcd? For those who never did, I suggest one photo outting with the LCD blocked, you'll feel way more free. (bonus point, the sucker will stop draining batterie)
That also save space for a big @ss viewfinder with the modern HUD techs.

Second would be fixed lens. I know zooms are more convenient...but they are generally just that, a convenience. I really tend to be more original, more raw, more acid when bringing out the primes. 
More space saved to go toward the inards. More calculating power saved for AF and such if they aren't lazy coding.

Give up all the software crap. RAW or jpeg of course but forget about styles, mode and all this crap. TvAvM.

Of course this isn't a "pro gear" as in paying gig gear but a high IQ toy for photog.

I know, Marketing guys called, they said I'd have 2 customers. Meh


----------



## Max ☢ (Nov 6, 2013)

Hi - first of all, what is exactly "pure photography"? what does this mean anyway?...

In my opinion this is just a marketting BS term used to sell overpriced goods to yuppies and hipsters, or more generally to people more interested in fashion statements and lifestyle than the actual art of photography. In my view there's no such thing as a form of photography being more "pure" than other forms - it's like saying "pure painting", or "pure sculpting", doesn't really mean anything. Even if the term "pure" is related not to the art itself (framing, composition, subject) but just to the action of taking a picture (i.e. using technology to do so), does this mean that the presence of a video function, or even a telephone function, on the camera makes it less "pure" from the photographic/technology sense? if so, does it even matter?

I won't even consider the term "pure" being applied to the places you go to make pictures, or the clothes you wear or how you trim your 3-day beard, it's really getting silly at this point. It's clear that _Pure photography_ is just a hip catchphrase designed solely to make an impression, to make the prospective customer feel special = _Mind you! I'm not doing photography, I'm doing "pure photography", I evolve in artistic and lifestyles layers above yours, common mortals!_
The fact that this thread even exists is proof that Nikon marketting has indeed struck a chord in some people's mind, but beside this there's really nothing much beneath the varnish.

In my view, if there is no such thing as "pure photography", there are however different forms of photography (I don't even need to go into this subject as I'm sure you're well aware of that) which have thus different requirements in terms of equipment (the compulsive Facebook "food photographer" won't have the same needs as the professionnal portrait photographer). If you add up to this the wide variety of personal tastes/preferences that exists out there, then you see that there is also not one universal norm to define photography as a whole, or to distinguish the "purist" from the common people (again, if there is such a thing as a _purist_).
You might prefer a camera without LCD at the back, with only manual focus, etc, but in the end that's just a matter of personnal preference and in no way a criterion that sets you in a "superior" cathegory - because let's face it, the term "pure" implies a certain form of superiority and in photography I think this aspect is quite subjective in nature...


----------



## Grumbaki (Nov 6, 2013)

Fun thing is, Max, i agree with most (close to everything) you said.

Yes it is a weak marketing ploy. But I just felt like playing the game of "what device would fit my personnal definition".

As to the part I disagree, I think it's possible to apply, subjectively, "pure" to an activity, when it depends on a medium that can be limiting/distracting (in our case) or if the activity as conditions/dependancies.

Funniest thing is this thread might even be more interesting as a philosophy one than as a weird concept emporium one.


----------



## Max ☢ (Nov 6, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> But I just felt like playing the game of "what device would fit my personnal definition".
> As to the part I disagree, I think it's possible to apply, subjectively, "pure" to an activity, when it depends on a medium that can be limiting/distracting (in our case) or if the activity as conditions/dependancies.



That's a good point, we can try to fit -even define- a "pure" form of activity related to the limiting/distracting elements of the technology used, but I think you can expect as many different points of views as there are participants to the discussion, because as you say it perfectly, this indeed involves a "personnal definition".
As far as I am concerned, the exemple of the LCD panel you mentioned as a distraction is for me a very valuable tool that helps me improve my technique. I had the chance of growing up with film photography and although the introduction of digital did certainly increase the "clutter" on camera bodies, the added layers of parameters and functions did not make the camera more difficult to use. Quite the contrary, for me this resulted in a more versatile and useful tool as the increased number of variables in fact tremendously broadened the field of possibilities in the way of achieving the intended end-result (still working on that though, and that's what I find interesting in Photography as a tech experience). I can also understand that some people feel more confident with simpler systems, or just don't want to be bothered with too many choices.

Interestingly, this also brings about the subject of video versus photo; I am quite surprised to see so many people being bothered by the fact that Canon in implementing video features on DSLRs. Many view that as yet an extra, useless, parameter/function layer in the camera. first of all, its not because the function is there that one is forced to use it (I, for one, don't), and secondly, I don't think the video feature impacts negatively on the photographic function of the camera, quite the contrary, it adds flexibility to the DSLR as a tool and I believe the developement we see at the moment (i.e. dual pix in the 70D) is in fact paving the way to the future of DSLR photographic technology i.e. eventual disappearance of the mirror flap and of the AF chip, which will simplify the camera (no AFMA needed anymore, AF over the whole image area, permanent live view in vastly improved EVF with direct feedback on exposure, histogram, etc even before the photo is taken... things which are already appear in products already)

Of course, technology should not be a limiting factor in the user's ability to achieve what he or she want to reach/do, and this naturally implies that personnal preferences are key factors in the defining what camera functions, parameters, ergonomics and even aestetics are the most important for a given user. In light of this, I'm afraid that we'll never agree on the point of a "purer" form of photography as an activity or experience, but this certainly opens up an interesting discussion from the point of view of philosophy, or simply from that of personnal taste and preferences


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 6, 2013)

I thought it was pretty clear by now, 'pure photography experience' means Nikon DF : 

Really photography should be all about the picture. How you get there is up to the individual.


----------



## Grumbaki (Nov 6, 2013)

Good to see that we can discuss further  If you tried to put specs on a device perfect for your pure photography experience, what would it be? Maybe in the accumulation we could see some patterns emerging



Max ☢ said:


> As far as I am concerned, the exemple of the LCD panel you mentioned as a distraction is for me a very valuable tool that helps me improve my technique.



It would deserve a thread by itself but actually I'm very interested in that. LCD helps to get the picture right if it's not a HCB "moment" but how does it help technique more than a review on computer with EXIF data? The question is totally naive as I'm a child of digital (30 and no photog in the family to only toyed with film as a kid on crappy stuff). 
I get the whole LV manual focus in x10 but that's a (of course respectable) niche but other than that I see way to often photog (and myself) spending way too much time looking at the LCD instead of taking more pics.



Sporgon said:


> Really photography should be all about the picture. How you get there is up to the individual.


OK but how your experience could be uncluttered of superfluous or limiting elements

PS: no, i'm not part of Canon market research team for their df/a7r


----------



## J.R. (Nov 6, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Really photography should be all about the picture. How you get there is up to the individual.
> ...



It is the way cameras work for you, or rather the way you work with cameras to get the images that you want. Cluttering of cameras is very subjective because I may not be very comfortable with a particular camera design and you may be. 

I shot 4 years with the film SLRs (when I started shooting) and for the past 6 years with the DSLRs. I for one cannot go back to the ergonomics of the film SLRs because using the Canon DSLR has become second nature to me. I can control the camera without having the need to look at any of the buttons and am loathe to turn dials to change ISO, EC, etc. taking my eye away from the viewfinder. 

Currently, the only thing limiting my images is my own skill. I feel it is better to work on that rather than champing on whether the ergonomics of a retro camera will give me a pure photographic experience.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2013)

"Pure photography." An Argus TLR with a flash attachment and a box of flashbulbs. Oh, and you have to use "cure transportation" (your feet) to get where you want to go to take pictures.

I'll pass, thanks….


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 6, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Really photography should be all about the picture. How you get there is up to the individual.
> ...



I had a think about this, and to be quite honest I find both the 5 and 6D as you describe above. They are 'uncluttered of superfluous and limiting elements.

That's why I use them. And I guess that is why they out sell their Nikon counterparts, and will continue to do so until Nikon take me on as a designer


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> ...until Nikon take me on as a designer



Seems they missed the chance to bring Ashton Kutcher on in that role. Nikon's loss is Lenovo's gain...


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 6, 2013)

Taking photos.

Edit: I'd like to mention the 5D classic has been providing a similar experience for years.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 6, 2013)

I guess "pure photography" might be something like William Henry Fox Talbot's idea of the "Pencil of Nature" – images drawn by nature with the photographer being just a servant to the sun. But I suspect that's not what we are talking about here.


If its retro we're after, lets go for some real innovation.

A button/switch on every camera that engages the sensor. If you forget to turn it on, you can shoot pictures the whole day, but not one will be recorded. And, while we're at it, let's make sure that the button "slips" once and awhile and even though you think you hit it, it won't record any pictures. That way we can resurrect the "pure" film experience of forgetting to check the rewind knob to verify that there is film in the camera and that the take up spool has actually engaged the film. 

How about separating the ISO display from the actual ISO on the sensor, so that you have to select both. That way, you can recreate the "pure" experience of putting ASA 100 film in the camera and forgetting to change the meter dial from Tri X.

Or maybe, there can be a random feature where all the images on the card appear as though someone inadvertently opened the back of the camera without rewinding the film.

While were at it, let's extend the experience to Lightroom. Maybe every once and awhile when you upload your images, several of them will have chemical-like blotches on them or be undeveloped in the center, so you can recreate the "pure" experience of film sticking together on the developing reels. 

Maybe have shots taken at ISO 100 have the same noise as ISO 100,000 to simulate the experience of someone developing the film using Dektol.

Better yet, sometimes the entire upload can be blank, simulating the experience of accidentally pouring in the fixer first. 

I'll think I'll stick with today's photography instead of some retro "pure" experience.


----------



## J.R. (Nov 6, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I guess "pure photography" might be something like William Henry Fox Talbot's idea of the "Pencil of Nature" – images drawn by nature with the photographer being just a servant to the sun. But I suspect that's not what we are talking about here.
> 
> 
> If its retro we're after, lets go for some real innovation.
> ...



ROFL!


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Nov 6, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> "Pure photographic experience"
> 
> The biggest retro conundrum of mine would be to just give up the LCD. We have cards that can store 500+ pics, not 36 expo films, why do we always need to look at a damn 3" lcd? For those who never did, I suggest one photo outting with the LCD blocked, you'll feel way more free. (bonus point, the sucker will stop draining batterie)
> That also save space for a big @ss viewfinder with the modern HUD techs.



As odd as it sounds initially, this does seem like an intriguing idea. Although I would amend it by adding wifi functionality so that there is still some way of file review on the go and modified liveview shooting when desired. I'm not a camera tech, but if these two factors alone could theoretically free up significant hardware space for other innovations, my interest would be majorly piqued.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 6, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > ...until Nikon take me on as a designer
> ...



I could see Kutcher wearing one of these Dfs 

Put it this way, if I was Mr Mitsubishi I'd find out which parties Canons chief EOS designer went to, get myself invited, stick a drink in one of his hands and a big wad of cash in the other and say







HELP


----------



## distant.star (Nov 6, 2013)

.
The "pure photographic experience" is a sales slogan aimed at people who make purchase decisions based on emotion. It is no more than that.

And I think it's insulting to intelligent, reasoning people to pretend it can be dignified with some kind of rational discussion.

And by way of disclaimer, I'm a fan of comedian Bill Hicks who once said:

"By the way, if anyone here is in marketing or advertising...kill yourself. Thank you. Seriously, kill yourself, you have no rationalization for what you do, you are Satan's little helpers. Kill yourself, kill yourself, kill yourself now. Suck a tail pipe, hang yourself...borrow a pistol from an NRA buddy, do something...rid the world of your evil...presence."


----------



## SPL (Nov 6, 2013)

J.R. said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I guess "pure photography" might be something like William Henry Fox Talbot's idea of the "Pencil of Nature" – images drawn by nature with the photographer being just a servant to the sun. But I suspect that's not what we are talking about here.
> ...


+1!!
ROFL!!
I think I have done several of these!
kinda miss the smell of all those chemicals!


----------



## mackguyver (Nov 6, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> "Pure photography." An Argus TLR with a flash attachment and a box of flashbulbs. Oh, and you have to use "cure transportation" (your feet) to get where you want to go to take pictures.
> 
> I'll pass, thanks….


I'll raise you one on this - camera obscura 

Personally, I'm still trying to have a pure PhotoShop experience - but it's gotten all _Cloudy _now ;D


----------



## mackguyver (Nov 6, 2013)

In all seriousness, I like Steve McCurry's take on this from his recent interview, particularly his final sentence:
http://www.americanphotomag.com/photo-gallery/2013/11/interview-steve-mccurry-changing-world-and-state-street-photography?page=5

"Having said all that, whatever one wants to do to achieve what they want to do with photography -- whether it's pinhole or a Leica or an 8x10 view camera or whatever. It's your work. It's like a poem. You put the poem on the table and you read it and no one is going to ask you if you typed it or wrote it out long hand. No one cares how long it took or how many re-drafts you did. How many pictures did you shoot? It doesn't matter. *The proof is the final print.*"


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 6, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> "Pure photographic experience"



I can do pure photography..... just let me grab my completely manual OM-1 and load a roll of Kodachrome in it (I still have some in my freezer)... now if there was only somewhere to develop it.....


----------



## chilledXpress (Nov 7, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Grumbaki said:
> 
> 
> > "Pure photographic experience"
> ...



Don't let developing stop you... Ive been using these people for years. They take film by mail from anywhere in the world... they rock with Kodachrome and MF film! 

http://www.photoworkssf.com/services-and-rates/film-processing


----------



## Grumbaki (Nov 7, 2013)

I guess the "concept" (yeah marketing BS, we all agree) is too fresh, too nikonian, too controversial to be put in perspective the way I felt like.

This wasn't about retro, hipsters love/hate or whatever. To be even more conceptual and clearly non retro, a "print screen"button in my brain would be, to me "pure photography".



JohnDizzo15 said:


> Grumbaki said:
> 
> 
> > "Pure photographic experience"
> ...



BAM, that was the aim of the topic, random nopn conventionnal ideas due to thinking outside the box to "seriously"define a bullshit marketing ploy. With ad hoc wifi and all the devices we have in our pockets, LCD is indeed superfluous. Great idea IMHO.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 7, 2013)

The opening of D&P envelope, be it prints from the lab, or slides through the post. Finding a good south facing window. The thrill that something new worked. Nothing more joyful than a slide held up to the light. Forking tricky those slides. But you nailed it.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Nov 7, 2013)

I prefer an impure photographic experience.

The models are slightly more trashy. ;D


----------

