David Pogue's Plea for Honesty in Photo Specs

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/a-plea-for-honesty-in-photo-specs/' target='_blank'>http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2010...in-photo-specs/</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Anyway, the caption always gives the specs for the photo: "Taken with a Nikon D90 at 1/200th second, aperture f/2.8, exposure +1, using Sigma 18-200mm lens" or whatever. It's always bothered me that often, the camera came up with these settings. Plenty of shutterbugs use Auto mode or Program mode, where the camera computes the shutter speed and aperture size."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1274305553.usr1.jpg" style="border: 0;" /></p><p>I'm with Pogue on this one - and I'm not ashamed to admit that quite often I shoot with my camera in full auto or in partially-auto mode (typically aperture-priority or shutter-priority mode). It's very rare for me to go 100% manual mode - and even if I do, I leave the ISO set to auto, so I'm never really 100% manual. Here's how I see it: there are things that I'm good at (framing, knowing when and where to point the camera, when to take the picture, etc.) and there are things the camera is good at (selecting an ISO based on available light, etc.). So I let the camera do what it's good at, and I do what I'm good at.</p><p>I feel the same way about transmissions in cars; I only drive automatic transmission cars, because there are things that I as a driver need to focus on...shifting gears is not one of them. I know someone's going to post that driving an automatic takes all the "fun" out of driving, but I still love driving...just like I love taking pictures, even if it's not in full manual mode.</p><p>Where do you stand on this issue?</p>

[David Tucker]

I drive a sports car, so yes, automatic takes the fun out of driving for me. But I won't make that argument for most people because most people don't enjoy driving a stick. I will say, on that topic though, that I feel a manual would make most people safer drivers because when you're driving stick you're paying more attention to the process of driving. It is very difficult to hold a cell phone and drive a stick and forget texting. I do think that, ultimately, the more in tune you are with the vehicle that you're controlling, the better you'll be out on the road.

That said, I don't think that's really an issue for photography and the vast majority of people have no need or desire to learn lots about cameras. That's what the automatic settings are for! I use them unabashedly.

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

Uh, wut?

Does it really matter? If the camera came up with the setting, and someone followed it, it's going to come up with the same exposure.

Most of the time, the exposure doesn't really define a photo anyway, so I'm not getting the hoo-ha in the first place...

[ptyork]

I gotta agree with Lee here. I can't for the life of me figure out why I'd care. I mean, yeah, perhaps if I wanted to "out" some photographer for not being "real" enough (totally bogus), but it makes zero difference.

As for a manual trans, I'll say two things (well, okay, a few). I've driven for close to 25 years now. Of those, I drove a manual for around 10. I've had sports cars of both varieties.

Now for the two things.

First, the only cars I've ever developed a "relationship" with were manual. There is something about "becoming one" with the car that you just can't get with an automatic. Even the fancy DSG's and paddle shifters. It just isn't the same.

Second, the only cars I've ever had at fault accidents in were manual, as well. Once you become accustomed to shifting gears, it takes NO mental thought whatsoever. It also makes you (well at least me) no more or less aware of my driving. Admittedly most of my manual driving was at a younger age as were most of my at fault accidents, so maybe the correlation is with age and not with transmission.

[David Tucker]

I didn't fully read the original argument by Pogue. I think its a completely bogus complaint. Honesty? What's not honest about it...that's the settings on the camera when the photo was taken. While I generally leave my camera's automatic settings on, there are times that I play with the settings to try and tweak the photo (cameras are smart but they don't always know what YOU want your picture to look like). Knowing what the camera sets on its own is pretty helpful when making your own adjustments.

I’m not about to start a national campaign for this, but you know — in a parallel universe, this revised system would be more helpful to those of us trying to master this complicated art.

His argument is basically if you put your camera on auto it shouldn't tell us anything because its a lie...but whoever sets it is irrelevant to this argument he makes. If I'm trying to learn more about photography, knowing the settings of ANY picture I see is very useful.

I think he just had nothing to write about today.

[Kris Kumar]

I think he just had nothing to write about today.

:)

Camera: Semi-Auto (use Aperture or Shutter priority); Number of times I use the semi-auto mode to meter the shot and then flip the camera into Manual mode and fine tune the setting. (mostly because I think Canon auto metering is not as good as Nikon)

Car: Manual. Have to agree with David, the stick shift helps me focus more on driving. With Auto I would easily be distracted or bored.

[mrozema]

... (cameras are smart but they don't always know what YOU want your picture to look like).

This is why I find myself using full manual almost 50% of the time. The rest of the time I'm using full auto, not always for the same reasons.

I like the challenge of using the manual mode. I think I start to learn more about how my works this way.

[cweeks]

This is really pretty much a non-issue...

Most amateurs will (and probably should) use the auto settings. The camera is simply a better judge of how to get the best exposure and focus... and those are really the only two things a camera can do better than a human who is not a professional.

Even a professional, however, shoots on "automatic" in a controlled environment like a photo-shoot. Most of them will take readings, set their camera's ISO, shutter speed, f-stop, heck... even *focus*, and then just shoot away while only worrying about angle and framing. The lights will change a little during the shoot, and sometimes the settings on the camera may be adjusted a bit, but for the most part they are on auto-pilot during the shoot.

Sure, if you are presenting yourself as a professional, and are just relying on the camera to do the heavy lifting, then you are being dishonest. Otherwise... not so much.

[Neil Enns]

Honestly, this whole discussion is really just about how much control you want over the final image. If you are happy with an image that is slightly underexposed and a random depth of field or shutter speed as determined by the camera, you can certainly go full-auto. Heck, even I do that from time to time.

If you want a bit more control, you realize the exposure calculation by the camera is nearly always wrong, and you dial in a little extra (+1/3 stop in my case).

If you want creative control, you use Tv or Av mode and fix one of the variables that's most important to you (depth of field or motion blur/lack of blur).

If you want absolute consistency between a set of shots you go to full manual mode. Typically I shoot full manual when I'm on a tripod, as it lets me fiddle and get repeatable results without having to second guess the camera. It also lets me expose to the right with precision.

But, at the end of the day, if you get an image you're happy with, who cares what settings you used?

Neil