Are you Practical or Philosophical about photo trips?

[Heroique]

I just read an entertaining thread about “what equipment should I bring on my trip?” and I started to consider the question much more broadly than the poster had intended – that is, first on a practical level, then on a much more philosophical one:

The main concern: whether to bring LF gear, MF gear – or both – to an area of natural beauty for a 14-day trip.

And the first “practical” consideration occurring to me was how far one wishes to walk from the vehicle. The farther one explores, I thought, the more suitable the “lighter” format might be (if one format is indeed lighter than the other). A second consideration was how safe one might feel about leaving one format behind in the vehicle, while taking photos with the other – whether venturing far or staying near. (Perhaps one enjoys having two systems always at hand, though that sounds like a heavy and distracting option!)

On my trips, I’ve usually made similar decisions about my LF and 35mm gear; but over the years, I’ve worried less and less about such decisions, even while taking more and more trips.

And this is where I started to wax philosophical – and was very curious when, if ever, you’ve shared similar or contrasting thoughts :rolleyes: :

Sure, I like to plan ahead like everyone else – doing my best to choose the gear that will best serve my photographic aims. But it’s also important for me to remember that an area of great natural beauty – like Yosemite in the original thread – is rich enough (especially if you have only 14 days to explore) to offer endless possibilities for just about any combination of personal aims and type of equipment one might have.

Perhaps more important for me is determining (in advance of my trip) the behavior that will best invite the scenes I like to photograph to “find me” – an approach, I’ve discovered, that seems to work independently of the camera equipment in my pack, or the more conscious ideas in my head.

Simple examples: identifying where I might take "the road less traveled," taking one (and only one) lens, exploring "unstudied" areas where I don’t really know what I’ll find – or, of course, avoiding spots favored by crowds and tourists. Also: ridding my mind of the photographs of the same area by other photographers – especially the famous ones! (With all the serious readers among us, I’ll risk mention of that famous passage in Don DeLillo’s novel “White Noise” about “the most photographed barn in America.”)

It’s an approach about trip planning that may not work for everyone, but over the long term, it has spun a lot of photographic magic for me – adding an immense amount of enjoyment to my trips, plus plenty of photos to my portfolio of which I’m proud. I’ve even come to consider it the pre-eminent part of my "planning," even more critical than decisions about my gear.

Can you share additional thoughts on the matter? I'd enjoy hearing them.

[Caroline Matthews]

From a practical and philosophical standpoint (if that's possible), your posting is tooooooo loooooong. Please shorten and repost.:cool:

[Heroique]

(Ed. note: my apologies for the “Cliff Notes” version above. If interested, please PM and I’ll be happy to forward the unexpurgated version! ;) )

[Vaughn]

On a recent trip to Yosemite to do some practical preperation for a workshop I was giving there a month later, the first thing I loaded into the van was my 8x10 camera pack and large tripod. Then I went thru a long list of stuff I needed to make carbon prints in the Ansel Adams Gallery darkroom. I knew I would have plenty of time to photograph -- and after all it is a 500 mile drive and I wanted to take advantage of every minute I was there.

About 100 miles from Yosemite Valley I suddenly thought "I don't remember loading my film holders into the van." A quick pull over to the side of the road and a longer tearing thru everything in the van confirmed my error of errors. I had no second camera/format with me. At first I totally pissed...a couple minutes later all I could do was laugh and get back on the road to the Valley.

A good friend in the Valley lent me his Mamiya Super 23 (w/ 50, 80 and 150mm lenses, and 6x7 and 6x9 backs) and a bunch of out-dated Ilford B&W film.

I had a wonderful time wandering around making tiny little negatives, exploring the light, and am looking forward to making small platinum prints with the negatives this Fall.

When life hands you lemons, and you forget the sugar, just pucker up and enjoy it!

I love the light and I photograph to explore my relationship with the light and to improve my ability to see the light. I don't worry about what famous photographer may have done in the same place. I see the light, and the images I make using it are my own.

Vaughn

[Robert A. Zeichner]

It seems that every trip I plan for involves a lot of trying to nail down what to bring in the way of back up equipment. What if a camera gets damaged beyond repair? What if I injur my arm or ankle and can't carry the load I planned on? I like to be prepared for the unexpected, but in my ever advancing state of decrepitude, I just can't drag as much stuff as I used to. On the most recent trip I took to Greece, I brought 7-10 pounds less than I brought on the previous trip 5 years ago, and it felt like the same load. I'm finding that less is more. Henry Kissinger said it best: "a lack of options clears the mind". Now there's someone I don't quote very often.

What I can recommend before each trip, no matter how well organized you think you are, is to make a detailed list and check off each item as you pack it and make sure it gets into the van or car the day you depart. On my return flights from big trips, I always make a list of stuff I took that I didn't use and stuff I left home that I wish I had taken. That has worked for me.

[Maris Rusis]

I try never to photograph on a speculative basis or just carry a camera in the hope that inspiration will strike.

When I travel to a "rich" landscape area I try to walk the territory a couple of times without a camera but with a framing card. Often I mark exact camera locations with a stone or stray branch. And I write notes about the time of day, best light, cloud backgrounds, filter options, etc.

On shooting days the 8x10 camera is supposed to work at optimum efficiency to justify the cost and effort invested. So much for theory. In practice rain happens, wind blows, cable releases get lost, meter batteries fail, and so on. Nevertheless some cold blooded forward planning helps equalise the odds against the contrariness of nature.

[Kirk Keyes]

From a practical and philosophical standpoint (if that's possible), your posting is tooooooo loooooong. Please shorten and repost.:cool:

SAY WHAT?

Isn't philosophy supposed to be long?

[John Kasaian]

Well, if I'm going out to photograph the landscape I'll take whatever format I feel is approriate. Generally 8x10, either a folding wooden 'dorff or a handheld Gowland, usually depending on if a tripod is justifiable or not.
If 8x10 is just going to be too heavy I'll switch to a 5x7 Speeder. If the job calls for a monorail, I've got a 4x5 Graphic View but it doesen't get used much (about as much as the 12x24 Banquet or the very dignified Rolleiflex T that lives in the drawer with my socks)

For the most part I am committed to 8x10. I do have an Olympus Stylus (and lately a digi camera/cell phone) which is great for snapshots across the table when going out with friends for pizza and beer but IMHO not much else.

Sometimes the reason for the shoot requires something odd ball (like a ULF pinole made from an old wine barrel used to shoot ---what else?--- wineries!
Then I tend to get very philosophical (I'm even considering a pinhole made from a gun powder keg for Civil War reinactments)
Too much fun!

[Gary L. Quay]

This is not a flippant answer: I don't see anything practical or philosophical about the matter. I cram whatever gear I can fit and / or have the energy to lug around. I always start with the largest format I can, and pare down from there. I do, after all, have to fit the rest of the family into the car. I have been working on a setup with my Deardorff that handles 6x9cm, 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10 all in one camera. I have to drag a small cart behind me to carry it, so if the trails are too rugged or steep, I grab my Hasselblad backpack, and suffice it at that.

[Eric Leppanen]

I have a car with a large trunk. If I go on a long, dedicated landscape photography trip (which I rarely get to do these days), I take all my camera systems (8x10, 4x5 and DSLR) and film stocks and stuff them in the trunk. For me, trying to predict which system I'll need is too often a fool's errand. Photography can be very resistant to detailed advanced planning and guiding philosophies.

My photo trips tend to consist of two basic categories of photography. The first is the initial exploration of an area and the identification of potential portfolio-grade compositions (which I typically record with a DSLR). The second is determining the optimal timing and conditions for each shot, and grinding out the actual shot execution using the largest format possible (this second stage frequently requires one or more return trips to the area, often at a very different time of year).

For me, the initial exploration stage is the most fun. For a hard-core LF shooter like me (8x10 is my primary format, 4x5 is usually a fallback), shooting a hand-held DSLR, with its spontaneity, fast shutter speeds and no depth-of-field or subject motion concerns, is incredibly freeing. Occasionally I'll get lucky and drag out the 8x10 or 4x5 and get a portfolio grade shot. But I typically do not obtain my best work at this stage, at least from a technical standpoint.

Traditionally my best work has arisen from the final stage of seeking to get ideally realized photographs, shooting at the (more or less) ideal time of day, time of year, and atmospheric conditions. Since my target shot(s) has already been identified in advance, I used to think that I could very specifically plan what format, lens, and film I would need for each shot, and keep my gear count to a minimum. Often this advanced planning works just fine. But frequently serendipity arises that one could not have planned for, e.g., different flora at a different time of year, frequently changing atmospheric conditions, unanticipated lighting, etc. Often I'll be at my pre-planned location, getting ready to snap my pre-planned shot using my pre-planned camera, lens and film, and suddenly discover that I can get an even more compelling image by doing something totally different! And I need to do it quickly before the lighting changes!

So as far as equipment is concerned, I generally take everything and pack it efficiently so things are not too cumbersome. I keep everything out of sight in the trunk, and have all my gear covered by a supplemental insurance policy, so I am not too concerned about theft.

I tend to like overtly visually striking, photographically rich environments, which typically take me to well known areas with lots of people during the tourist season. I generally avoid shooting during the summer months, and tend to prefer traveling during late fall/early spring, which avoids much of the crowds. Being near photographic clichés doesn't bother me; I find that as I have gotten older and developed my own personal aesthetic, I tune out what I have previously seen from other photographers and follow my own way. Plus lighting and other conditions are rarely the same, so even so-called cliché shots frequently have their own unique identity.

[Heroique]

[...] What I can recommend before each trip, no matter how well organized you think you are, is to make a detailed list and check off each item as you pack it and make sure it gets into the van or car the day you depart. [...]


[...] Photography can be very resistant to detailed advanced planning and guiding philosophies. [...]

These are the two “talents” whose balance is imperceptibly changing inside me. I’m less concerned with the first talent, more open to the second – that is, I agonize a lot less about equipment decisions, but work a lot harder to be where things might “happen.”

Yes, there’s a cost: I more often kick myself for not “remembering” that piece of equipment I might need when inspiration (or “serendipity,” as Eric Leppanen says) strikes – equipment, that is, I might have brought with more careful deliberation. But strangely, a greater number of satisfying photos are finding their way into my portfolio than ever before. I’m trying less, getting more.

Perhaps results would be even better if one “talent” wasn’t necessarily at the expense of the other, as I often believe to be the case. (And perhaps it’s not the case, as often as I would like to think.)

[Turner Reich]

No and Yes.

[Bruce Barlow]

I become more practical as I get older.

My recent trips have all been to Maine. I have a routine that I follow, and rather than be toooo looong here, for those who are interested, here's the link to the free download page with the View Camera article about A Trip to Maine from a couple years ago. It pretty much explains it all.

http://circleofthesunproductions.com/FreeDownloads.htm

The punch line: it seems to work. From the last trip, all, and I mean all my 5x7s were keepers. Not so the 8x10s, and I do have a metric ton of 35mm keepers from the day with the really sore hip at Pemaquid-land-of-infinite-photographs-Point.

[Bruce Watson]

I find that it's difficult to stay proficient at more than one format at a time, and that switching between formats requires an internal "changing of the gears" that can take me a couple of days.

Life's too short for that. I'd rather stay razor sharp with one format, always ready to get the most out of it. So I eliminated the less used formats (sold them all so there's no looking back) and just use the one. IOW, I don't choose between formats. I either photograph or I don't.

That's my philosophical answer to your long post -- I try to follow the K.I.S.S. principal as much as I can. To eliminate these vary decisions.

[Gem Singer]

I agree with both Bruces.

You do get more practical as you grow older. At seventy-nine years of age, i find that the fewer decisions and choices I need to make, the the better.

The philosophy that I follow is choose the simplest and most comfortable way to do what I am setting out to accomplish.

[Steve M Hostetter]

First of all and most important to me is consider the time of year.. If I were to go on a hike in this heat I'd come back looking like the swamp thing..It's a steam bath out there.
If I'm planning a Maine trip I always go in the fall and bring some color film..
If I was planning a trip to California I'd go in mid winter for cooler weather and better skies.
If I make photos in the heat of summer I do it early and late of a day and closer to home..

One format and 3 lenses in backpack,, one 915mm Wray process lens in a domke waterproof case behind the seat w/ a light stand and 3' rail ... Just in case I feel froggy.
I may in the future cut that down to one lens... Might force me to think in terms of just that lens and format in use..

As my dad used to say,, keep it simple :D I miss ya pop

PS... now which Petzval :D

[darr]

I have grown into a one-lens kind of gal. For me it is both practical and philosophical to see my visions this way.

Darr

[Bill_1856]

PRACTICAL:
One camera (Technika or Crown), three lenses (plus a backup Leica or digital P&S). I may spend months planning for a trip (like a kid waiting for Christmas), choosing between cameras, lenses, films, filters.... Unfortunately, the infirmity of old age, #$&*# airline travel problems, and the demise of Polaroid have all contributed to making it really tough.
PHILOSOPHICAL:
Heartbreaking medical disasters which have robbed me of two Photo Workshops which I've signed up for: Per Valquartz's first workshop in Mammoth when I almost died of altitude sickness the day before it started, and this week's Photostock, when an acutely ruptured disc absolutely forbade the three day car trip from South Florida to Northern Michigan.

[Brian Ellis]

Thanks for starting an interesting thread. If I'm driving I take everything I own. If I'm flying, which I don't do much any more, I take only digital. That's about the extent of my practical and philosophical issues with equipment. I find that the more I photograph the less I care about equipment, which is one of the reasons I'm using digital more and more. I have absolutely no interest in digital equipment, I don't read reviews of it, I don't participate in any of the camera forums, I don't want to know anything about it except to the extent it relates directly to what I do, everything about digital equipment as such bores me to tears. But I like it as a tool and that's all it is to me, which I think has kind of freed me up to think more about my photography instead of worrying about my equipment.

[Diane Maher]

I think I try to determine what equipment I will take based on where I am going. I was able to take a whole plate camera, two lenses, some film and accessories with me on a plane to Seattle in Jan. 2008 with no problem. I shot approx. 15-20 images.

However, I drove to Iowa last August and took a 35 mm digital and the same whole plate camera with me. The digital was for the work related stuff I was going to see and the whole plate was for anything that I decided I wanted to shoot outside of that.

I wound up shooting a lot of digital (30-40 pictures) and a couple of whole plate images.

[rdenney]

Of course, Adams famously responded to the question of his preferred camera with "The biggest one I can carry." That included medium format, and he was obviously happy to point out his Hasselblad equipment on the old FilmAmerica bio of him.

For me, the camera I take depends on two things: The purpose of the trip and the means of getting there. If I'm flying, I will usually restrict what I take to digital small format unless the sole purpose of the trip is photography (which it never is). It's just MUCH easier to get through airports with digital equipment. My last trip to Alaska saw all my images made with my Pentax 6x7 ruined by security X-rays.

If I'm driving, and the trip is a vacation, I will always take at least medium format stuff. I take large format when the purpose of the trip is to make large-format images, which it will be from time to time. So far, though, I have zillions of worthy subjects as yet untapped within a few miles of where I live.

If I did it professionally, everything would be different.

Philosophically, I'm with Adams. I take the biggest camera I can carry, and live with the results. He would never print his picture of Georgia O'Keeffe, which he shot off the hip with a Leica, larger than 8x10. But that picture is still a famous part of his oeuvre. If the Canon 5D is the best I can do on a given trip, then I make the best images I can with it.

Rick "who takes the view camera when doing so will be fun and not seem like work" Denney

[Bill_1856]

He would never print his picture of Georgia O'Keeffe, which he shot off the hip with a Leica, larger than 8x10.

It was a Contax, not a Leica.:D

[rdenney]

It was a Contax, not a Leica.:D

Yeah, he always preferred the Zeiss stuff, heh, heh.

Rick "recalling some early Contarex SLRs, too" Denney

[Heroique]

[...] When I travel to a "rich" landscape area I try to walk the territory a couple of times without a camera but with a framing card. Often I mark exact camera locations with a stone or stray branch. And I write notes about the time of day, best light, cloud backgrounds, filter options, etc. [...]


[...] My photo trips tend to consist of two basic categories of photography. The first is the initial exploration of an area. [...] For me, the initial exploration stage is the most fun. [...]

The scouting quest – an approach I should try more often, pencil and pad in hand.

Not all photo trips provide the time and leisure for it, but it seems an effective way to discover unanticipated scenes, and to capture them – a little later – with the equipment you have, under conditions you prefer. :p

[Turner Reich]

I have grown into a one-lens kind of gal. For me it is both practical and philosophical to see my visions this way.

For many years I was a one lens kind of person too, I hope that in the end I can be that person again.

[Michael Wynd]

I have no choice but to be a one lens, one camera (8x10) person. And all of my gear goes in one backpack. I don't carry it all the time, only when I have a photo trip planned. If I could afford the film, then I'd probably carry it al the time, just in case.
Mike