Machine Gunning Pros and Cons

It's a lazy way of NOT getting a shot! I've tried it twice now and cocked up twice, badly last time (Sat's Doric). The problem with my camera I now realise is that the memory (RAM i guess) fills up, even on the lower res setting. So you see the target approaching fast, get twitchy and press the shutter, but then the RAM fills and it goes into write to card mode and freezes up as the loco reached the spot you really had in mind! I guess more practise is the answer, to work out the earliest you can press. I think i got about 20 shots in say 5 secs.

 

If you're a sports photographer or similar then being able to run off 10 frames per second or whatever we're up to now is useful. But for the most part it's just another big number for the marketing people to sell.

I'm terrible for machine gunning. I may take a dozen or more photos in one fairly brisk train passing me at a station and I might get two good ones. But just machine gunning does mean you get a tremendous fluke like this one where I was shooting at my full 3 fps and this is more or less how it came out of the camera: http://www.flickr.com/photos/spinner673/3696879203/in/set-72157622451319342/ In short machine gunning is quite lazy in my opinion but I do it because I'm not a hugely talented photographer and I sort of panic when I'm shooting moving things.

Sheff: If you want advice on your camera problems the forum on this site is usually a good source of advice http://www.cameralabs.com/

 

When I got my first Pentax DSLR I tried doing the "machine gun" effect and to be honest I felt it just didn't work. The images weren't composed well and sharpness suffered. So I feel it's still best to go for just one well composed, well lit, sharp photo rather than a dozen average shots.

 

I suppose a 'pro' would be that you get more than one chance - all too often in the past I've gone for one good one, which wasn't good and so missed my chance of a decent photo. A couple of times recently I've fired off a series of shots which, after some judicious cropping one or two have turned into half decent photographs.

 

Thanks Matt - I'll give that a look. I'm not really a keen photter - I'll turn out if anything's coming by locally, and always take my camera to preserved lines, but I don't go armed with tripods, video etc etc.

Another problem I find with the Uzzi appraoch is that on my camera you loose the screen/viewfinder so panning is pretty tricky too. But then what do you expect for £150! Iain

 

Usually ineffective if you are shooting a fast moving object moving towards you as the camera can't refocus in time and unless its on auto setting it can't cope with changes in light which inevitably occur.


What is less easy to understand is why people don't select the best one to post rather than 3 or four of the train approaching them at say 50 foot intervals.

 

That's a great shot, Matt.

 

I personally don't believe in 'Machine gun' fotting,for one,i would completely ruin my vid (i do,taking just 3 or 4!) but i also feel that a lot of the skill is lost,at the end of the day,its about capturing the train,and to me,just holding the shutter and pointing the camera in the direction its coming from takes no effort,sure,it is all in the setup and composure,but why someone needs to take 20-30 photos in 10 seconds,then think they are 'Pro' is beyond me,to me thats almost like doing a video!

Main thing for me would be is,which do i choose,they all look the same! If i make a hash of it (which i do!) i just put up with it,nothing more i can do about it.

I can understand why people do it,to guarantee that if something special happens in the seconds you are firing,you are going to capture it,but it isnt for me something that takes skill,the skill is in anticipating whats going to happen,then been quick on the shutter when it does.

To put it simply,in my opinion:

Pros:
Lots of photos to choose from
Dont miss any 'special effects' etc

Cons:
Ruin your own video (and/or anyone elses)
A bit lazy
Requires less skill

Cheers,
Mark

 

I tried the machine guning method a few times when I first got my DSLR but I don't think I have used the continous shooting setting for around 2 years now when linesiding. If needed you can get around 1.5fps on single shot mode I have found.

Simon mentions above that the camera can't refocus in time, I have found that even on predictive AF this is true and and 5-6 out of focus and badly exposed shots is more annoying than 1!

 

Mark, Can you expand on your comment about video? Are you talking about noise from the camera? In which case can't this be turned off, or are there still mirrors etc flying up and down - surely not?

Iain

 

I keep doing that, several videos of mine on youtube you can hear my camera clicking

 

Since buying a DSLR, I've become a proud convert to machine gun shooting.

It needs to be used with a bit of thought though, so I disagree that it takes the skill away. It can increase your chances of success, which I see as a good thing, and not in any way cheating. The posts above allude to the fact that it isn't actually an easy thing to do right. I rarely try to take multiple compositions while machine gunning, but will leave the camera in the same position and same zoom setting and fire off a few frames around what I consider to be the optimum position. Occasionally, I may shoot a long zoom pic and then a wider view, or a standard and going away shot, but the compositions and positioning are worked out before the train arrives. I'm currently limited to about 3fps which means the machine gun approach is only possible for trains going reasonably slowly, as at 60mph+ the movement between frames is too great and there's little chance of the loco being in the optimum position in any of the pics. Obviously, when a composition is really tight or requires extremely precise timing then I'll just take the one. Otherwise, I see no reason for not doing it as there's more chance of getting everything right, whether that be exhaust hanging nicely, maximum glint, rods down, or whatever you're after.

So, I think there's definitely a skill in being able to shoot machine gun style and it still requires careful preparation and execution if you want to do it successfully. However, I do admire those photographers with the skill to get everything right with one press of the button, but I'm not one of those so I'll take all the help I can get from technology!

 

A good picture comes from a combination of composition and timing. Not, in my opinion, with a scatter gun approach.

 

A good post. I wonder what the photographers of old would have made of all this technology. Instead of lugging around heavy plate cameras with half a dozen photographic plates, would they have welcomed the ability to have relatively lightweight equipment and the option to take tens or even hundreds of shots a day?

 

A-ha, that is where my assistant comes in (namely my Dad) but some of my videos, like when I saw 70013 last month I was on my own so I just set the camcorder up on the tripod and pushed the record button. Actually that's another video where you can hear my clicking. One day I'll learn...

 

Agreed. 'Scatter' is the key word and implies to me a kind of random approach to taking pics, i.e. point your camera in the direction of the train, hold the shutter release down and hope. It rarely produces good photos unless thought has gone into the composition(s). All too often you see people 'panning' the loco with the shutter button held down. Again, it's more down to luck if you get a good pic and frequently the results have the rear coaches chopped off, too much sky, objects obscuring the train, etc. Also, it can't be good practice to have the camera moving or zooming while taking a pic, unless you're after a specific blur effect.

I don't know many folk who are able to take a whole series of different pictures of a train passing where all are well composed. In some situations, you might get two or three different compositions, but it's relatively rare for a location to provide such opportunities. I would always advocate sticking to a single composition and concentrating on that, unless you are absolutely confident that the train will be going slow enough to allow you to zoom back, alter position and recompose the pic. Doing so quickly takes real skill, and isn't something I'm particularly good at. Another approach that some photographers use is to have multiple cameras, one set up for a long shot, and another for a wider view. This can make it easier, particularly if one (or both) of the cameras is on a tripod, but obviously requires more expense. In general, I try to make sure the first pic I take is the one I want and then any later attempts to recompose can be considered as bonus pics and it doesn't matter if I mess them up.

However, I still think you can have a carefully thought out composition, but use a machine gun approach to get the timing spot on. I'd certainly say my success rate has gone up since I've used that approach, but it still needs you to judge the speed of loco and timing so you don't miss the critical moment or run out of card writing buffer. I remember losing many shots in film days where with no power winder I only got one opportunity and was waiting for the pre-determined optimum moment for composition, only for the exhaust to come down at the last moment. If I'd fired a second earlier and cropped I'd still have got a decent pic. With digital I can now take both, hedge my bets, and delete the ones that don't work. In a way, there are two different approaches 'scatter gun' and 'machine gun'. I'd definitely consider myself in the latter camp, but not the former. I don't really care if people consider it cheating, if I've travelled 100s of miles to see a steam train, I want to come back with the best photos I can, and I'll use technology as much as possible to help me.

 

Indeed, surely it's cheating using these new fangled cameras with viewfinders where you can actually see what you're taking? In my day we composed upside down on the ground glass, fitted the film holder, and fired the shutter based on remembering where the train should be in relation to other objects in the scene. ;-)