By Wayne Cosshall 

The discussion that followed the Lensbaby review I posted on my site (The Digital Imagemaker) got me thinking about the different ways photographers approach their work. Photographers fall into two main camps: in camera and post camera.

In-camera photographers get their buzz from doing as much as possible at the time of shooting. These photographers love their filters, including things like graduated neutral density filters, unusual lenses, like the Lensbaby. Or, they might smear Vaseline on a skylight filter.

Post-camera photographers like to sit at their computers (or in the darkrooms) and manipulate to their heart’s content. With their bum in a comfortable chair, they work on a nice, big screen, sip a great cup of tea or coffee, and have their favorite music playing in the background. When shooting, they want a clean, optimal image that they can work on later.

The in-camera photographer has no fear of commitment, of trying something and missing the shot. They will risk all for the thrill of the chase at the time of shooting. They seek virtuosity in the moment. This is the thinking of the painter, who must risk destroying a painting by pushing it too far in the quest for an outstanding result. The thinking goes that if you do not risk it all, you will not excel.

Some in-camera photographers may also have a philosophical belief in the ‘purity’ of the image created in camera, the magic of capturing a moment, or a belief that a real photograph is made in the camera. In the analog world such photographers would be willing to scratch their negatives or bubble an SX70 instant print over a candle flame to get the effects they want.

The post-camera photographer craves a straight image they can shape at their leisure into the perfect photograph. They fear committing the image to something that may not work. Their quest is for a more careful virtuosity. The negative is sacred and must not be violated or damaged in any way. The image can be repurposed and massaged as many times as they want. Nothing is committed in a permanent way. In the digital world such photographers will crave information on how to extract that last piece of power out of Photoshop.

Of course the two descriptions above are obviously exaggerations. In reality, most photographers fall somewhere between these two extremes. Many of us grew up on Adams’ The Negative and somehow do feel that the negative is sacred. We regard our RAW digital negatives the same way.

Yet most of us will also make some commitment at the time of shooting that we can’t readily correct, such as a shallow depth of field or some another choice that can limit what we may later do with the image. Perhaps we will compensate for this by shooting many variations.

The way we shoot probably says a lot about our personalities. At one point, I had become fairly cautious about doing things to an image that I could not fix. I broke out of this pattern by taking up watercolor painting, one of the most uncorrectable forms of art practice there is. In a watercolor paining, you must risk all the work you have done every step of the way. One false move can ruin it, yet one bold stroke can make it. Watercolor painting proved to be immensely beneficial to my approach to photography, because it loosened me up to push my photography much further, both in camera and in Photoshop.

This shot was made completely in camera by using a Lensbaby 3G on my infrared converted Canon 350D.

Road to Elysium: This composite image is made from 20 to 30 images taken at different times and locations.