Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Discussing Photographic Styles => Topic started by: wmchauncey on November 16, 2015, 08:47:49 am
-
There was a time that the advice "go take a lot of pictures to learn" was given to me...at the time it was quite valuable, for I did learn.
I learned to shoot only in manual mode/only shoot something that makes a descent image/whatnot.
Today, I only shoot images that, IMHO, are print worthy enough to display in my living room.
Based on images for C&C, from all sites, I am in the minority. What say you all?
-
I think you should stay in the minority. Whether or not you can afford to shoot only what you're going to hang on your wall and take time to decide things before you shoot depends on what you're after. If you're a landscape guy or a wabi sabi guy you can afford to take your whole life deciding what to shoot. If you're a street guy you can't do that. You'll miss everything you thought was good. In street you have to learn to compose and shoot without thinking conscious thoughts. That doesn't mean you're going to get much by just banging away, but it does mean you need to take chances -- all of them; always.
-
If you shoot for yourself, why worry if you are in a minority?
Since you are probably the only one who shoots for you, by definition you will always be in a minority. ;D
I think that a lot of photographers would do better if they cared a little less what other photographers do/want/like. ;)
-
.... Today, I only shoot images that, IMHO, are print worthy enough to display in my living room...
Isn't that basically what's known as a (pre)visualization? An Ansel Adams' concept, if I am not mistaken? The ability to see the final print in a scene?
-
Shoot what you like, whenever you like. I take the camera out and come back with lots of shots, or none, depending on how I feel about what I see. But - consider keeping a little "play" time, in which you try something new and work in a different technique or aesthetic from time to time.
-
I've got to agree with NancyP on this one. But I suppose that I am still in the learning stage and frankly I hope it stays that way. Although I have been finding myself taking less shots lately, I am compelled to keep trying different things, taking different approaches to the light, different perspectives and different subject matter. I can't always pre-visualize the end result (still learning right) and the results are not always good but when I stop 'playing', I think I'll lose interest in making photographs. As much as I might enjoy looking at images created by others, the doing it myself is still the real kick. Of course, I have the luxury of not making my living with photography but I like to think that I approach my job as an academic in the same way. Admittedly no Nobel prizes coming my way :).
Chuck
-
I think you should stay in the minority. Whether or not you can afford to shoot only what you're going to hang on your wall and take time to decide things before you shoot depends on what you're after. If you're a landscape guy or a wabi sabi guy you can afford to take your whole life deciding what to shoot. If you're a street guy you can't do that. You'll miss everything you thought was good. In street you have to learn to compose and shoot without thinking conscious thoughts. That doesn't mean you're going to get much by just banging away, but it does mean you need to take chances -- all of them; always.
Agreed! Lots of good opinions so far. Over time your approach could/should change though and an open mind is very helpful. I see lots of good advice on here and like most members don't always acknowledge it. Just keep going. :)
-
There was a time that the advice "go take a lot of pictures to learn" was given to me...at the time it was quite valuable, for I did learn.
I learned to shoot only in manual mode/only shoot something that makes a descent image/whatnot.
Today, I only shoot images that, IMHO, are print worthy enough to display in my living room.
Based on images for C&C, from all sites, I am in the minority. What say you all?
If you can tell that an image is print-worthy just by looking at the scene, your skills are way beyond mine. Heck, even when I shot 4x5 film and each image was carefully contemplated and planned I don't supposed more than 1 in 10 images were printed. As for C&C, I know some people post their best work in hopes of getting strokes, but a main purpose is also to post images that don't quite make it in hopes of getting advice.
-
If you can tell that an image is print-worthy just by looking at the scene, your skills are way beyond mine. Heck, even when I shot 4x5 film and each image was carefully contemplated and planned I don't supposed more than 1 in 10 images were printed. As for C&C, I know some people post their best work in hopes of getting strokes, but a main purpose is also to post images that don't quite make it in hopes of getting advice.
I agree about ......print-worthy just by looking at the scene..... Looking at the monitor when you are in a different frame of mind means you "see" more and your mind goes in a different direction, especially if a couple of weeks has passed since the capture.
-
Today, I only shoot images that, IMHO, are print worthy enough to display in my living room.
I misspoke...I meant to say that the scene was print worthy...as we all know, the captured image quite often pales in comparison.
Inserting that image on my desktop for a week or so, to see if I can live with it after a sRGB conversion, is a guide for judgment.
-
Hi WM,
I'm not sure how to help but I do like your work. It is worthy of being shown to a large audience. Did you have a show of your work? Where do you exhibit it besides on the website you linked to here?
Alain
-
There was a time that the advice "go take a lot of pictures to learn" was given to me...at the time it was quite valuable, for I did learn.
I learned to shoot only in manual mode/only shoot something that makes a descent image/whatnot.
Today, I only shoot images that, IMHO, are print worthy enough to display in my living room.
Based on images for C&C, from all sites, I am in the minority. What say you all?
My comments:
1. One should shoot a lot while learning. I did that using slide film.
2. One should learn to edit and cull ruthlessly. Waste bin needs to be used.
3. Probably, when you were learning, you were not sharing all your photos, were you? I mean, if the easiness of the internet were present at the time, what would you have done? The same as the "learners" are doing today, sharing a lot of dubious quality photos?
-
Alain...again you humble me with your accolades. Truth be told, I fumble around like the proverbial blind squirrel seeking an acorn.
The 1x site was joined simply for ego gratification as I like a lot of work shown there. Don't have a personal site.
Will get back to you via your website later on.
Paulo...early on I was a member of NAPP, got a lot of good advice back then before the politics turned south.
The term "dubious quality" would have been a delicate way of phrasing a lot of my stuff back then.
-
For me it's a balance. I'm not shooting professionally so I don't have as many hours out with a camera. This means that when I'm out I usually shoot at least one scene, if I don't find a subject, and that does happen. I rather shoot something mediocre to keep my technique fresh than letting the weeks pass by with no shots made. Otherwise I start forgetting technique and do craftsmanship mistakes for those important images.
There's also the aspect that some images can be relevant for a project I'm working on, while others are not. If I see something that can be a "good image" I generally shoot it, even if I won't be using it in any project, as I find satisfaction in the process of making those images anyway.
When it comes to image sharing I don't really know. The "safe" strategy is to only show your edited projects, that's what photographers did in the past. However it's starting to become more common that also established and highly regarded photographers have blogs and instagram etc where all sorts of material is published, where the quality is naturally lower than their portfolio and projects. I think that is okay these days, but you need to separate them so the audience know what's your "real work" and what's just casual images.
-
The "safe" strategy is to only show your edited projects
Most of us, at some point, have taken images that are technically superior, but...are "coyote ugly", from an artistic standpoint.
Would it not be beneficial to get a second opinion as to what direction might take that image toward an object d'art.
-
Most of us, at some point, have taken images that are technically superior, but...are "coyote ugly", from an artistic standpoint.
Would it not be beneficial to get a second opinion as to what direction might take that image toward an object d'art.
I don't think so: you can put earrings on a pig, but a pig it remains.
Rob C
-
Technically shmecnially. There are two things any photograph needs in order to succeed: significant content and good geometry. Rob's right on the money. Technically perfect crap is exactly that. Chuck it.
-
Hi,
My take is that it is really up each of us to decide how many images to shoot. In real world there is no optimum moment to capture a subject. Or rather, you cannot predict the optimum time to make that perfect exposure. You wait for good light, when it is OK you take a picture, than light gets better and you take another shoot. A group of cows walk into the picture… you take another picture. You can observe the past but not predict the future.
(https://echophoto.smugmug.com/Landscapes/Dolomites-2015/i-qR75PQx/0/X3/20150930-_DSC2471-X3.jpg)
(https://echophoto.smugmug.com/Landscapes/Dolomites-2015/i-SWFpbtr/0/X3/20150928-_DSC2258-X3.jpg)
(https://echophoto.smugmug.com/Travel/Dolomites2014/i-grJdXpF/0/L/20140605-_DSC4390-L.jpg)
(https://echophoto.smugmug.com/Travel/Dolomites2014/i-9XZc3DZ/0/L/20140605-_DSC4388-L.jpg)
(https://echophoto.smugmug.com/Travel/Dolomites2014/i-35h2X56/1/X3/20140612-_DSC4611-X3.jpg)
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
I would like to add good light and also, to an extent, involvement.
Technical quality is pretty much worthless on it's own. That said, excellent technique can enhance vision. Ansel Adams works are a good example of that.
Best regards
Erik
Technically shmecnially. There are two things any photograph needs in order to succeed: significant content and good geometry. Rob's right on the money. Technically perfect crap is exactly that. Chuck it.
-
I'm with you to an extent. I certainly don't blaze away like I once did, but as has been pointed out with landscape we may not know which moment was the best until after it has passed. So I try to catch as many of the potential best moments as I can, and then pick the best later. With digital it's nice to be able to do this and then just delete the ones that were only ended up being "potentially best".
-
I'm with you to an extent. I certainly don't blaze away like I once did, but as has been pointed out with landscape we may not know which moment was the best until after it has passed. So I try to catch as many of the potential best moments as I can, and then pick the best later. With digital it's nice to be able to do this and then just delete the ones that were only ended up being "potentially best".
Agreed!
-
With reference to Miss Piggy being ever Miss Piggy, regardless of makeup and Cartier's, Van Cleef & Arpels' best efforts, I can only refer you all to Mr Frank Horvat's advice:
"Photography is the art of not pressing the button."
http://www.horvatland.com/WEB/main.htm
Save yourself pain and much fruitless effort.
Alternatively, think of your digi wonder as an 8x10 camera, and that you are about to expose a sheet of Ektachrome or Velvia, or whatever the hell still remains today. If you consider the shot worth the expense of film and processing, then hold your breath and shoot the digi frame. If not, don't bother.
Rob C
-
Once I think the moment is right, I'll often press the button a couple of times in case of random effects (I'm a statistician, after all).
However I rarely bring back more than 50 images, and I delete mercilessly. I would typically keep from 0 to 10. The rest, I delete from the machine: I just don't want to hang on to mediocre images, so I'm a bit amused by people who want to stack up TB's of external HDD's archiving everything they ever clicked at. Maybe one day I'll regret it, who knows? It's what works for me now.
-
An advantage of keeping not such brilliant shots is that you then have bits you might be able to use later on - if you can remember them well enough. It can be fun combining images too...
Rob
-
Alternatively, think of your digi wonder as an 8x10 camera, and that you are about to expose a sheet of Ektachrome or Velvia,
Or you are André Kertesz, you've been sent to cover the arrival of a train returning PoW's to Paris at the end of WW2. Due to scarcity, you have one 20-frame roll of film...