The freaky guy with the camera

Maybe someone here can help me, I have a hangup about eating alone and taking pictures of my food.

It's not that I'm a total freak and no one will eat with me. My schedule lately forces me to spend an inordinate amount of time reading, so I usually have to turn down most chances to dine with other people. I still like to eat out a lot; usually at small, cheap, ethnic restaurants. I have no problem asking for a table for one, but there is something more missing from the whole experience.

I like to take pictures of food, and share them with people. As much as I can say how juicy, crispy, and meaty the mackerel was, a picture of the broiled fish would do much better. I have a fairly new digital camera. With a memory card and rechargeable battery, I can take as many pictures as I like without it costing me anything. But I have this hangup about taking out the camera when I am dining alone.

With my friends, who are sympathetic to my urge to photograph food and not people, I can take out the camera and photograph until my heart's content. At many Asian restaurants the waiter or waitress will see me taking pictures and offer to take a picture of all of us at the table. We smile and go along with her assuming we're there to visit with each other and take pictures of each other with the food. But I'm only thinking of the close-up shot of the food.

But when I'm alone, I am much more self-conscious about how I am perceived by the people around me when I take out my camera. Am I a reviewer? Am I a competitor? Am I from the board of health? What possible valid reason could this guy have in taking a picture of that cheap taco? So I enjoy my food in silence, taking mental pictures how I can describe the food to others. Even with an otherwise stellar meal, I walk away unsatisfied in not taking a picture.

Am I alone or unjustified in my concern? Have any of you ever had a bad experience photographing food alone, asked to leave, asked who you are, or asked what your problem is? I really would like to get over this. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

I tend to sneak the shots just for reasons of self-consciousness, although I also don't mind seeming eccentric in public, either. Compared to other habits I've had, like turning the table tents inside out and adorning them with an advertisement for Lizard on a Stick as today's featured appetizer, picture snatching seems benign.

The only time I've ever been bugged about it was described here.

I dine alone and take pictures often. It really doesn't bother me in most cases. I can't think of a reason that anyone would want to look at me let alone care about what I am doing. Once in a while I'm in a place and the vibe just isn't right for some reason or another. In those cases, I pay attention to my feelings and don't whip out the camera. I have found taking pictures of my food to be a conversation starter at times. If someone asks me about what I am doing, or just stares like they are interested, I'll engage them in conversation and sometimes end up getting some good chow tips (especially on the road).

Hi,

Last year, I was visiting a factory in Czech Republic for 10 days. Since I was a foreign guest and client, they originally intended to invite me to a restaurant every day. I didn't want to waste time on ceremony, so I proposed eating in the worker's cafeteria, which absolutely stunned them.

We spoke in a mixture of English (their weakest), German (my weakest), Russian, Czech (non-existent for me but has slavic roots) and good intentions. They brought a menu for me to select and I pulled out my camera. I photographed the menu, the meal ticket and the daily menu card.

My first day in the worker's cafeteria, I stood up before eating and photographed my food and those eating with me. I had every eye in the place observing my every move. More checked me out the subsequent day. Goodness knows what rumors were swirling around about my activities. By the fourth day, nobody paid any attention to my activities.

Every day I made a point of stepping into the kitchen to thank them for their efforts. Just as much as I thanked the workers who allowed me to observe their efforts. Each group contributed mightily to my visit's enjoyment and education.

You know I never did post on this trip because I wanted to include the pictures. I guess that time will come soon.

So yes, I just do the picture thing without much hesitation. If anything, it sometimes becomes a conversation generator. Though my next camera will be small enough to conveniently take everywhere.

Rich4 wrote:Maybe someone here can help me, I have a hangup about eating alone and taking pictures of my food.

Today's Blondie cartoon should help you feel a little better. You will have to look in the newspaper to find it. I went online and they post the comics 2 weeks later. Well worth looking up.

As an aside I was at Zingerman's in Ann Arbor talking with Gary W. on the phone and taking some pictures of my lunch of a pastrami sandwich and matzo ball soup. I noticed a woman at another was watching me. She watched for a few minutes, got up and came over and said "I understand". We began to converse and was in to good food. We even had a short discussion about Chowhound.

If your camera has a macro feature you can get very close to the food and take great pictures very inconspicuously. Use the screen instead of the viewfinder. If there's enough light, don't use the flash. It will look like you're just looking at the camera. No one will even know you're taking pictures.

Cathy2 wrote:My first day in the worker's cafeteria, I stood up before eating and photographed my food and those eating with me. I had every eye in the place observing my every move. More checked me out the subsequent day. Goodness knows what rumors were swirling around about my activities. By the fourth day, nobody paid any attention to my activities.

You are a freak. That's (one reason) why we like you so much.

David "Just Another Freak" Hammond

It will look like you're just looking at the camera. No one will even know you're taking pictures.

A technique my Father used at a long gone Lake County strip club called 'The Cheetah.' He got the snap, then pleaded innocent to ever taking the picture. The stripper in question sat down with my parents, yes my Mom was there, who chatted them up until she was convinced the snap was never taken. Ha ha, we have the picture though it isn't very good.

I believe in bold moves, but that's me.

Speaking of cameras, anyone have recommendations for a new digital? I've been searching for one off and on ever since mine was stolen last year.

I'm not a pro photographer, but I do want something that will give me advanced features. Also should have movie mode W/ sound.

I had narrowed it down to possibly a Canon A75 (which my sister bought) or the Nikon Coolpix 4.0MP. Course, since I last did my research, I think they came out with some advanced models of both. Would love to talk to someone who's owned either of these cameras. My former camera was a Panasonic Lumix.

I just bought my first digital camera, and its actually waiting for me at home. I was looking for a 10X zoom, so I can't say much about the cameras you're looking at, but I found these two sites to have the best reviews: www.imaging-resource.com, and www.dcresource.com.

Janet C. wrote:Speaking of cameras, anyone have recommendations for a new digital? I've been searching for one off and on ever since mine was stolen last year.

I'm not a pro photographer, but I do want something that will give me advanced features. Also should have movie mode W/ sound.

I had narrowed it down to possibly a Canon A75 (which my sister bought) or the Nikon Coolpix 4.0MP. Course, since I last did my research, I think they came out with some advanced models of both. Would love to talk to someone who's owned either of these cameras. My former camera was a Panasonic Lumix.

I have owned several (3) Canons and can't say enough good things about them. The Digital Elph series is a favorite of many LTHers. My camera was recently taken from me during the Bob S/Basil Container confrontation at the Periyali outing. I replaced it with a Nikon Coolpix 4200, which is a superb camera with lots of features that are really handy when it comes to taking chow pix. All of the pictures you have seen posted by me on CH or LTH have been taken with these two cameras. If you neded more info, send me a P.M. and I'll do my best to help.

Hi,

Rather than PM Steve - discuss it here because I am in the market for a new camera, also.

Steve,

The Nikon 4200 is what I was leaning towards. Now I see that Nikon has released a 4800 w/ "super" 8.3x optical lens (!). Needless to say, the 4800 is just out of my price range at $399 retail (about $350 online).

What frustrates me about the camera search is, like most things in life, I keep find that there's always SOMETHING that makes the product just shy of perfect. With the 4200 it's the smallish LCD screen. With the Canon's, it's the fact that you can only record video in 30 sec - 3 min increments, unlike other cameras that let you record up to memory capacity.

Of course, when you get something as an out of the blue gift, like my first camera, you don't fall prey to the grass-is-always-greener envy since you got the thing for free. But now that I have a choice and am spending my own money, I get pretty picky.

Have you had any problems w/ the Nikon's LCD, or are you pretty satisfied with it? Also, how good is the flash in low light situations? Digital cams are notorious for weak flashes, though some of the newer models have AF assist lights that are supposed to help. In fact, do you think you could list the pros/cons that you've faced w/ the camera so far?

I tend to avoid the Canon Elphs. I know they're small, popular, and probably decent cams, but I just have some self-made impression that they don't add up to being a "real" camera, IOW a good point and shoot, but fewer advanced features, which is why I like the A-line. I think the S-series is supposed to be good, too, though pricier. If it just wasn't for that movie mode issue, I'd probably go straight for a Canon. Which Canons have you owned?

I am totally happy with my Canon, which is an SD110 I believe. My main criterion (assuming a model of adequate quality) was simply fitting in my shirtpocket, on the theory that I'd never carry it if it didn't. But I have been extremely happy since then with 1) image quality which is excellent, 2) rechargeable battery life, 3) ability to click the buttons I need to click while barely looking at them, etc.

If you don't have to have the latest most megapixel model-- and 3 megapixels is perfectly fine for most uses unless you plan to make poster-size prints-- then you can look online for something that is not the latest and greatest and probably find it for not much over $200. The one add-on you'll want after that is a bigger memory card, which you can get at Costco for $50. I am interested in what makes a good quickie point and click camera that I could lose or break without crying too much, not in having the best possible pro-level equipment, so on that level my Canon has been a totally happy purchase.

Here's my favorite food shot to date (from the Evanston farmer's market:)

Hi Mike,

That is a really lovely picture. Just wondering how the camera holds up under low-light conditions?

Hi,

About two weeks ago, I went to a meeting where the guy next to me is a camera buff. I remembered someone on LTHforum complaining about how slow their camera recorded the image onto the memory card. They thought out loud about buying a new camera, which could record faster. I mentioned this scenario to Mr. Camera Buff who said it was not the camera but the memory card. He said higher speed (semi-pro to pro) memory cards can be obtained via camera stores. They have have speeds of 50X and up, so you could just about click and immediately click again. He said memory cards sold in non-photography stores are typically cheaper and slower.

Something to consider when making that purchase.

Regards,

I have been thrilled with my Canon PowerShot A70.

Janet C. wrote:Speaking of cameras, anyone have recommendations for a new digital? I've been searching for one off and on ever since mine was stolen last year.

I had narrowed it down to possibly a Canon A75 (which my sister bought) or the Nikon Coolpix 4.0MP. Course, since I last did my research, I think they came out with some advanced models of both. Would love to talk to someone who's owned either of these cameras. My former camera was a Panasonic Lumix.

I just upgraded from a Nikon CP 950 to a Canon Powershot S410. I love it. The size of the camera is great. The options are beyond what I need or expect to learn but are there if necessary. I like the fact it fits easily into my shirt or pants pocket without a problem. Buttoms are easy to work and find.






Steve's Digicamshas the best site for camera information. Great place to browse and narrow down what you want. This is my first source for photography information.

My first source is http://www.dpreview.com

-ed

LTH,

I'm not really the one to give digital camera advice, as I had three successive versions of the same camera. I started with the Canon PowerShot S200 Digital Elf, which lasted over two years, moved on to the PowerShot S400 Digital Elf, which I would still be using if I was not clumsy, and now have a PowerShot S500 Digital Elf.

That said, I will give the same advice given me when I bought my first camera, buy a camera with an optical lens, metal body and is small enough to comfortably fit in your pocket. The metal body is important as people, especially me, are clumsy and metal is less apt to break than plastic.

I dropped my S200 at least 6-7 times and it kept on chugging, finally dying as it lived taking a picture of a Peking Duck. The S400 would still be going strong, but it fell from waist high with the lens extended, right on the lens. If you are going to drop a camera make sure the lens is not extended.

I was also given the advice to take pictures in the highest resolution available to the camera, as you can always decrease, but never increase. To this effect a larger memory card is mandatory. I have a 512mb card for the 5 MegaPixel which allows me to take 198 full size pictures. If I went down in resolution I could take some ungodly number, but 198 is usually enough, even for me.

Speaking of memory cards, I popped for a Ultra II SanDisk card (whatever Ultra II means), as opposed to a standard card. The lag time does seem to be shorter, but I am not 100% sure if it's the newer camera, the card or a combination of the two.

Far as technique goes, mine is a variation of the toss it against the wall and see if it sticks method. I take multiple pictures of everything I shoot and hope for the best. If I take 100 pictures, 6-7 turn out well and, maybe, 1 is really good I'm happy as a clam at high tide.

Someone in the thread mentioned movie mode, the S500 can go up to 3-minutes and, from what little I've used the movie mode, it works quite well. If I was going to buy a non Canon Digital Elf camera I'd most likely go with a Nikon CoolPix 5200. I stick with the Canon, mainly, so I don't have to learn new controls.

I should also point out that for strictly email and web posting a 2-3 MegaPixle camera for less than $200 will be just fine.

Taking pictures is fun and rewarding, especially if you don't have to have each picture developed, at a per picture cost, to see results.

Enjoy,
Gary

Janet C. wrote:Have you had any problems w/ the Nikon's LCD, or are you pretty satisfied with it? Also, how good is the flash in low light situations? Digital cams are notorious for weak flashes, though some of the newer models have AF assist lights that are supposed to help. In fact, do you think you could list the pros/cons that you've faced w/ the camera so far?

I tend to avoid the Canon Elphs. I know they're small, popular, and probably decent cams, but I just have some self-made impression that they don't add up to being a "real" camera, IOW a good point and shoot, but fewer advanced features, which is why I like the A-line. I think the S-series is supposed to be good, too, though pricier. If it just wasn't for that movie mode issue, I'd probably go straight for a Canon. Which Canons have you owned?

Janet,

Sorry for the delayed answer. I must have missed you post somehow and have just seen it for the first time. I would agree with the basic camera info that Gary posted. In terms of Canon VS. Nikon I would say that the Canons are workhorses and I wouldn't hesitate for one minute buying one. Personally, I feel that the Nikon works a little better under low light conditions, and the macro function (very important when taking chow shots) works a little better than the Canon I previously owned. I was having problems getting the Canon to focus properly in macro mode. It would often pick out the wrong thing in the scene to focus on (sometimes it would chose to focus on the plate, but the food on the plate would be soft.) The Nikon seems to be much better at distinguishing the proper subject to focus on. Although the controls are different than the Canon controls, I found them more intuitive and easier to use than the Canon was.

Steve,

Thank you for filling in the blanks why to consider the Nikon over the Canon. Between your and Gary's post, I have a firmer idea what approach to take to buying my next camera.

Just a reality check, do you find the picture in your screen differing from the image when you download and see it on your computer? I've had some look decent on my screen, which gave me the false sense I could stop snapping pictures, only to be disappointed with the downloaded picture. Of course, Mike's tips on photo editing at Useful STuff board may just mitigate my disappointment.

Regards,

Cathy2 wrote:Steve,

Thank you for filling in the blanks why to consider the Nikon over the Canon. Between your and Gary's post, I have a firmer idea what approach to take to buying my next camera.

Just a reality check, do you find the picture in your screen differing from the image when you download and see it on your computer? I've had some look decent on my screen, which gave me the false sense I could stop snapping pictures, only to be disappointed with the downloaded picture. Of course, Mike's tips on photo editing at Useful STuff board may just mitigate my disappointment.

Regards,

Looking at pictures on different screens will never give you exactly the same look. Every monitor is different. You have to pick the one you want to use as your "reference" and then learn what the "ideal" picture on your reference monitor looks like on your camera viewfinder. That way, you can calibrate your eyes to what you want to see. Personally, I never use my viewfinder for color reference. I only use it for composition, knowing that I can color correct later in Photoshop if necessary as in this thread.

Thanks to all who offered advice/tips on buying a digital cam. This weekend I found myself for the umpteenth time hovering over the camera displays at Best Buy and Circuit City, trying to make a decision, once again comparing the Nikons to the Canons.

I know I need to just make a decision and buy the darn thing, but I can't get over Nikon's crappy LCD (small and grainy) vs. Canon's limited movie recording function (why, when every other camera out there lets you record up to memory capacity, does Canon continue limiting this function on their cameras??)

Given Steve's comparisons, though, maybe I'm leaning slightly more towards the Nikon....Does that LCD ever bother you?

Also, I've heard varying comments about how large you can print from a 3.2 MP camera. Some say you can still get good quality 8x10, but others (mostly salesmen, who I don't always trust anyway) say you need 4 MP. My neighbor has a 3.2 MP Sony and he blew up some pictures he took in Bali, which I thought he took w/ a manual SLR.

Anyone who's upgraded, have you been able to tell a difference?

Janet C. wrote:Given Steve's comparisons, though, maybe I'm leaning slightly more towards the Nikon....Does that LCD ever bother you?

Never. I only use it to compose shots, though. I never depend on ANY viewfinder in ANY camera for critical color judgement.

Janet C. wrote:Anyone who's upgraded, have you been able to tell a difference?

When it comes to making prints, it's just going to be a matter of what you're satisfied with. Different people have different levels of tolerance of print quality.

Personally, I wouldn't print anything larger than a 5x7 from a 3.2 image. I have a 5 MP camera and have made some 8x10 prints and they'll do fine, but I really can't wait for the day that the 8-12 MP cameras are more affordable.

Janet C. wrote:I know I need to just make a decision and buy the darn thing, but I can't get over Nikon's crappy LCD (small and grainy) vs. Canon's limited movie recording function (why, when every other camera out there lets you record up to memory capacity, does Canon continue limiting this function on their cameras??)

Given Steve's comparisons, though, maybe I'm leaning slightly more towards the Nikon....Does that LCD ever bother you?

Janet,

Here's yet one more reason to love the Nikon. Yesterday, while on my Big Baby quest, I grabbed my camera and headed out the door. I had been transferring some pictures to my computer before I left and forgot to put my storage card back in the camera and left it in the computer. When I got to Nicky's and took out my camera to take a shot, something seemed strange, the camera said that there were no pictures stored in it. It was then I realised my error. This could haver ended in disaster (if you call having to go back another time to order a Big Baby a disaster) except for the fact that you can store 5 - 10 pictures with the Nikon without any memory card in the camera! The day was saved and in that moment, my Nikon purchase was completely justified.

P.S. I took special note of looking for graininess or other flaws in the viewfinder because of your comments. I really didn't see any graininess at all. Maybe you looked at a Nikon with a defect because my viewfinder looked just fine. If you are talking about the graininess you see under extremely low light conditions, I think you will find that to be true of any digital camera under low light.

stevez wrote:When I got to Nicky's and took out my camera to take a shot, something seemed strange, the camera said that there were no pictures stored in it. It was then I realised my error. This could haver ended in disaster (if you call having to go back another time to order a Big Baby a disaster) except for the fact that you can store 5 - 10 pictures with the Nikon without any memory card in the camera! The day was saved and in that moment, my Nikon purchase was completely justified.

To be fair, nearly all, if not all, digital cameras have internal memory along with memory card slots, generally only 16-64MB, but enough to store a few pictures. That way the manufacturers can sell a "ready to go" camera without users needing to buy a card. Obviously, if they want to take more than a few pictures at the maximum resolution in RAW format, they'll need one.

But I've seen that picture, and I'm very glad you were able to take it. It's making me hungry for nicky's tonight.

gleam wrote:To be fair, nearly all, if not all, digital cameras have internal memory along with memory card slots, generally only 16-64MB, but enough to store a few pictures

My new HP 5.1MP camera allows for the storage of 17 snaps without the use of a memory card.

Erik M.

gleam wrote:To be fair, nearly all, if not all, digital cameras have internal memory along with memory card slots, generally only 16-64MB, but enough to store a few pictures. That way the manufacturers can sell a "ready to go" camera without users needing to buy a card. Obviously, if they want to take more than a few pictures at the maximum resolution in RAW format, they'll need one.

That could be true, but if it is, it's a relatively new development. This is the first digital camera I have ever owned that has that feature. It's something I never really appreciated until yesterday.