I can work my camera - now what...?

elven

What do you do, when you've learned how to use (most of) the buttons on your camera, what lenses do, how to expose correctly, and how to compose and generally shoot a technically good and aesthetically pleasing picture?

Has anyone else round here managed to get past this stage? I know there's more to a lot of the national geographic type stuff (sorry, its' the only way i know how to describe it - but I'm sure you know what i mean) than just technical excellence but it's all a bit of a sameness sometimes - like everyone's striving for the same thing. Is there a way to get away from that?

Is there a source of non technical c&c, besides going to art school? I read a lot of blogs that talk about portfolio reviews where you get a day with a series of 20 minute sessions with curators, editors, other experienced photographers and the likes where you can discuss your work - but they all seem to be in the US. Is there ever anything like that, even in the UK?

Does anyone have someone that they talk to about their photography, where they are going with it, how to figure out what they want to do with it, how to push themselves further? Is anyone interested in getting beyond technically perfect?

*slinks back into the corner*

AnimalRights

You could try and become an over zealous type moderator on a photography forum....

/oh wait.

Fajitas!

elven wrote: »

Is anyone interested in getting beyond technically perfect?

Why bother going for technical perfection when you can just get a good photograph instead?

Meh, you know my stance on it, but art college does that to you. Personally, I find it quite funny seeing people looking at a photograph discussing it's exposure, and exposure only, or sharpness, instead of whether it's actually a good photograph or not, why it was taken (Other than trying to recreate the picture of whoever scoring that goal from the back of the paper the other week... :rolleyes: )

NatGeo has some great photographs alright, but other than being documents, I find them empty - Again, I struggle to see why people strive to recreate the photos they've seen in it, when they could create their own... There's almost an unwritten template behind their work.

I'm lucky in the sense that I'm surrounded in people that are more related to the fine art world - We're free to talk about the conceptualism, either relating to photography or not. Ad I also have Elven to chat to, which is also great

Technical perfection is/can be very boring. Yes, I'm as delighted as the next person to have a properly exposed photograph etc, but the only time I think about that is when I'm taking a break from giving photography a bit more thought... They're my photographs that 99% of people here and the rest of internet won't, and probably will never see. Reading theory for me is fascinating - Whether a I agree or disagree with it, I think it's still quite important to read through - And there's some great essays out there on photography.

On your point of perfection, we've talked before about the faults being what makes the photograph - I think this is an incredibly interesting area of photography - Exploring the limitations, and the unknown, to see what it provides us.. But that's a thread for another day

Placebo

on perfection one should conquer all aspects of photography, [nature, landscape, street, fashion, potraits, night shots] and build an artillery of lens' .
go to japan.

Fajitas!

AnimalRights wrote: »

You could try and become an over zealous type moderator on a photography forum....

/oh wait.

You really don't approve of authority, do you?

I won't be appreciating another sniping comment towards any moderator, or indeed, anyone on this site. Have a bit of cop on.

magicbastarder

elven wrote: »

What do you do, when you've learned how to use (most of) the buttons on your camera, what lenses do, how to expose correctly, and how to compose and generally shoot a technically good and aesthetically pleasing picture?

without meaning to sound trite, go out and enjoy yourself...

AnimalRights

Fajitas! wrote: »

You really don't approve of authority, do you?

I won't be appreciating another sniping comment towards any moderator, or indeed, anyone on this site. Have a bit of cop on.

Read my 1st infraction from her in my CP, that was my problem and if anything my "sniping" in this thread was just too tempting to miss.

Anyway Missie gave me another infraction so do I get punished twice for 1 comment?

Fajitas!

From what I'm reading, you've three infractions from three seperate occasions, two from 'Missie' and a previous banning from myself.

If you feel you can't stop the temptation to make insulting comments about the moderators of this forum, I'm sure there's other places on the internet for you to post.

AnimalRights

No comment on the 1st infraction from her?
Not over zealous? Perfectly fine was it?

Paulw

AnimalRights wrote: »

Read my 1st infraction from her in my CP, that was my problem and if anything my "sniping" in this thread was just too tempting to miss.

In all fairness, there is NO NEED for such comments in here. Any person asking for help/advice should be given the same respect. The fact that Elven is a mod has nothing at all to do with it.

Please ... stick to the photography, and keep your personal disagreements out of the public forum.

AnimalRights

Ya guess so it just annoys me sometimes how OTT modding can be, especially on a serious forum.

helios

Maybe this topic should be moved to the 'Flame Wars' thread...


In response to Elven, I would go take more photos and learn more techniques. The fact that you have a presumed full understanding of your camera should give you fantastic leeway in your subject matter and composition...

Fajitas!

Well, I'll tell you what, I'd hate to see you annoyed. Try another photography forum if you don't like it here.

I swear, I won't make you come back.

Edit; And for what it's worth, I didn't see any problem with either infraction. Now, on with the topic at hand.

AnimalRights, step out of line one more time, and it's a permaban. (que crowd going *oooooooooooh*)

AnimalRights

:rolleyes:

conkeroo

I actually think there is a science about being abstract in that you can keep the rules to make a shot aesthetically perfect(if thats possible) but also knowing when to break those rules can add and not detract from a shot.
Have a look at http://news.deviantart.com/article/25650 It gives a brief overview of the different components of a shot.
Maybe it'll help.

Edit: And try googling "semiotics".

Hugh_C

elven wrote: »

Is anyone interested in getting beyond technically perfect?

Technical perfection has less very little correlation with aesthetic excellence, subjectivity aside. Creativity cannot be taught, but is something which either develops or doesn't develop over the course of a career.

City-Exile

Elven, the next stage for a female photographer is to have babies & take millions of pictures of them!

Fajitas!

Oh lol.

If I were you, I'd be editing that faster than you can say sorry.

helios

Two near-miss bans in one post... is that a Boards record?

City-Exile

I'm not editing it, because I didn't intend any offence to Elven.
I've seen women on flickr, who have the usual flower, landscape, self portrait stuff, then they give birth & they have pictures of nothing else but their babies.

Technical perfection is irrelevant, the subject is all that matters.

sprinkles

City-Exile wrote: »

Elven, the next stage for a female photographer is to have babies & take millions of pictures of them!

quoted before you edit :P

EDIT: Dig up City, dig up!!!

Fajitas!

City-Exile wrote: »

I've seen women on flickr, who have the usual flower, landscape, self portrait stuff, then they give birth & they have pictures of nothing else but their babies.

You don't see how your post could be condescending or in any way offensive?

311

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9-iHsZCMQc

snellers

I sense someone will be crying before bedtime!

helios

Lol... best use of a YouTube video. Evar.

Dink

Ah I think it's all light-hearted. I kinda know what City means with wimmen and kids, being a mammy myself. Alas, mine are at the stage where they tell me where to go when I point the camera at them for any length of time!
Regarding Elven's post, I haven't reached the stage of technically excellence.. (I'm a million mile away from it!) so cant really comment anything worthwhile.
I have to say, I love Elven's thought provoking posts, they always make me think about why I love photography so much!
Anyway.. enough rambling from me.

Overdraft

City-Exile wrote: »

I've seen women on flickr, who have the usual flower, landscape, self portrait stuff, then they give birth & they have pictures of nothing else but their babies

We must mix in different circles. My experience is that it's insufferable first time fathers who never desist from snapping their babies, you know the types. :rolleyes:

City-Exile

Dink wrote: »

Ah I think it's all light-hearted. I kinda know what City means with wimmen and kids, being a mammy myself.

Thank you, Dink.
I think most women would have understood what I meant.
Kids open up a whole world of photo ops.

City-Exile

Overdraft wrote: »

We must mix in different circles. My experience is that it's insufferable first time fathers who never desist from snapping their babies, you know the types. :rolleyes:

I'd probably be the same.

Overdraft

City-Exile wrote: »

I'd probably be the same.

Ah, then you might add to the men on flickr who have the usual flower, landscape, self portrait stuff, then their wives/girlfriends give birth & they have pictures of nothing else but their babies.

City-Exile

Overdraft wrote: »

Ah, then you might add to the men on flickr who have the usual flower, landscape, self portrait stuff, then their wives/girlfriends give birth & they have pictures of nothing else but their babies.

Yeah, that's fair enough, but I know in Elven's case, there's only one photographer in the house.

FX Meister

City-Exile wrote: »

Kids open up a whole world of photo ops.

What's that? Pictures that only the parents want to see?
Was at a wedding a while ago and my mates wife was going around with an album of their kid. Babies all look the same. FACT

City-Exile

Holiday snaps can be the same.
Some people on here have posted brilliant pictures of their kids though.
It's all about quality over quantity, which applies to most areas of photography.

With many of my friends having babies, I'm always getting asked what would make a great baby shot. I think I'd be totally snap happy, if I had my own kids.
It's the only reason I can think of for buying/making a lighting rig & backdrops.

AnCatDubh

When i've learned all the camera and lens stuff - i'll probably try get much better at lighting (I find it difficult to manage challenging lighting conditions with a degree of consistency that i'd personally be satisfied with).

Personally, I'm still learning the technical stuff and as I think that photography is incredibly subjective it means that the learning will probably continue for as long as I can hold a camera (at least i hope it will).

I find the subject matter of the images which others post in the random threads, c&c or plain pimping can be motivating if you haven't captured something similar yourself, or mastered the technical capture/production values of the image. I think this is why you see a lot of clichéd shots! Cliché or not, the subjectivity and the intensely personal nature of photography is what makes it special and nothing short of magic.

The sharing is important - communities like this forum are really great and very important to your development as a photographer (if that's a term that you can become comfortable with). If you have someone that can mentor you then all the better. I don't think they need to be an expert in photography but someone that can be honest with you and that you can accept their opinion. Slightly different subject but I heard Bono interviewed once and he said it was really hard arriving into the studio in the morning time to find Edge there after an all nighter with the guitar trying to perfect the 'sound' and having to explain to him that there is a very good reason why the 'sound' which has taken all night to perfect has never previously been found i.e. it wasn't worth the air space it was occupying. I guess even Luke needed Obi Wan and Yoda.

Oh but i'd love to say i knew (that is to fully understand) what every button and setting does on the camera and their interdependencies. All in time I'd hope!

Thanks for raising.

Calina

Alright. I may regret this in the morning.

1) This thread has been derailed by attitude problems. It's not fair on the original poster and it's not fair on readers arriving late to the show. This particular reader is aghast. Not because I missed the fun, cos fun it ain't, but because if you put a new reader into this thread it gives a shocking bad impression of the community.

2) Peadar, you'll have to forgive me but yes I think you dug a hole and kept on digging with your comments about female photographers. Personally I find that new fathers have a worse case of the babby-photography addiction, but that's just by way of an aside.

3) Back on Topic.

I haven't reached a point where I know everything there is to know about my 40D. I think it may be possible to get there, but there are so many convolutions, particularly with lens combinations, the addition of filters, that frankly I don't expect to ever get there.

What I have reached is a point where I feel comfortable with the camera; that I can predict with reasonable certainty how it's going to behave.

The key question is "where do I go from here?" In some ways, it's a slightly existential question. Anyone who's looked at my flickr stream lately will see that I'm tending to mess about with stuff way outside my usual comfort zone (the jewellery stuff comes to mind) so the simple answer is "mess with stuff way outside my comfort zone".

I think one of the interesting things is that photography is a journey, and sometimes, it's hard to see where it's going to bring you. Right now, it's bringing me slowly in the direction of digital art.

That being said, one of the things which I have rosying around in my head at the moment is to go to one of the top guys in my field and say "Give me one hour of your time" (for a consideration, of course) and tell me if you see things I don't in my photography, be it good, be it bad. It may be an option for you elven - is there any photographer in the UK whose opinion you'd like to get? First thing is to try and get a feel for whether you'd have the nerve to ask.

I'm wary of technically perfect. I keep harping back to the picture of the young kitesurfer which was burnt into oblivion into the sun, horrendously over-exposed, a complete nightmare to print and which people are still telling me is the best photograph I've ever taken.

All you can do is strive for something people want to look at. Is that perfection?

Setun

Once you've got to the stage of having a very astute eye and in general capable of producing technically proficient work, you can't forget the enjoyment you originally got from experimenting with your camera when you probably didn't know what teh feck you were doing with it (I'm around that stage now ).
To make a jazz reference (stop groaning!), Miles Davis used to say in the late 60s "play like you don't know how to play", much to the initial confusion of the musicians on the record date. All those musicians were technically perfect, but sure many are. You need something a bit different, a kid's curiosity or something, an ability to seperate your creativity and concept from technical practicalities.

Just go out and shoot like you don't know how to shoot, and have fun

thebaz

on topic -- if photography is just about technical brilliance , i'd have long binned the camera , and thats not cause i know it all, as i consider myself weak technically , in comparison to many -- so i have a lot to learn , particularly ps -- but thankfully great photograpy is so much more than technical , know how .
Look at Karsh's shot of Churhilll, its 60 years old , and with all the technical advancements , i have yet to see a more powerfull portrait.

Last friday , i had an anmazing chat and serious critique from a top Irish photographer, his standards were so high , his opinions on light so detailed, but we agreed the challenge is to photograph the soul

maybe see about getting a mentor you respect , Julie -- diffiult to find , but will help push you , from where you are

B.

FreeAnd..

anyone remember b0rg? I miss that guy...

elven

elven wrote:

What do you do, when you've learned how to use (most of) the buttons on your camera, what lenses do, how to expose correctly, and how to compose and generally shoot a technically good and aesthetically pleasing picture?

Has anyone else round here managed to get past this stage? I know there's more to a lot of the national geographic type stuff (sorry, its' the only way i know how to describe it - but I'm sure you know what i mean) than just technical excellence but it's all a bit of a sameness sometimes - like everyone's striving for the same thing. Is there a way to get away from that?

Is there a source of non technical c&c, besides going to art school? I read a lot of blogs that talk about portfolio reviews where you get a day with a series of 20 minute sessions with curators, editors, other experienced photographers and the likes where you can discuss your work - but they all seem to be in the US. Is there ever anything like that, even in the UK?

Does anyone have someone that they talk to about their photography, where they are going with it, how to figure out what they want to do with it, how to push themselves further? Is anyone interested in getting beyond technically perfect?

*slinks back into the corner*

From what I can tell,you seem to be viewing "technically perfect" photography as completely separate to the "arty" side of photography.In essence isn't technical perfection just one of the tools we choose to use (or not to use) in the creation of the photograph? Even when we are striving for technical perfection we are just using it in order to get across our message.You seem to want to push away from any type of photography which relies too heavily on this technical perfection.But at the end of the day we can choose not to achieve it in our photography and when it comes down to it don't all photographers,from landscape to abstract,aim to create aesthetically pleasing photos.Technical perfection is only a tool used to help achieve this.

Fajitas! wrote:

Meh, you know my stance on it, but art college does that to you. Personally, I find it quite funny seeing people looking at a photograph discussing it's exposure, and exposure only, or sharpness, instead of whether it's actually a good photograph or not, why it was taken (Other than trying to recreate the picture of whoever scoring that goal from the back of the paper the other week... )

NatGeo has some great photographs alright, but other than being documents, I find them empty - Again, I struggle to see why people strive to recreate the photos they've seen in it, when they could create their own... There's almost an unwritten template behind their work.

But can't you see that this is just another form of art.People are trying to create a photograph which represents the beauty of a scene.People aren't aiming to copy what they have seen in the National Geographic or the back of the paper.This is just the best method of getting their message across i.e for landscapes preserving the beauty of a natural scene and for sport to preserve a split second of the match as it happens.You are not being forced by a template in these types of photography,you can of course think outside the box but these are the best methods in order to get the message across.And I for one don't think a photographer should be looked down upon for sticking to a certain tried and tested method.Many photographers aim to preserve a scene by these methods and the success of this in the end will be judged by the technical perfection of that shot.I don't see why people should be looked down upon and patronised for that.

Hope I've made sense.I'm not the most comprehensible person this late at night.

City-Exile

Calina wrote: »

Peadar, you'll have to forgive me but yes I think you dug a hole and kept on digging with your comments about female photographers. Personally I find that new fathers have a worse case of the babby-photography addiction, but that's just by way of an aside.

Late to the party & completely missed the point, I think.
Looks like you were too busy thinking up your own drawn out response, to bother reading the rest of the thread.

It's got nothing to do with whether fathers are worse than mothers when it comes to the number of photographs taken of their kids.

In the same way that I think women often take better wedding photographs, I also believe that the better baby photographs I've seen, are typically taken by women.

Anyway, my original post was made in a very light-hearted way & if you have failed to see that, then I'm sorry for you.

sprinkles

To reach a stage where you are comfortable with the camera, know most of the features (daunting to say the least) and are happy with your ability in terms of lenses/filters etc is very impressive - I'm saying that as every time I check out these forums I learn something new (granted I only began in earnest this year ). Where to go from there is a very intriguing question though.

As Calina said, maybe try going outside your comfort zone, experiementing with different subjects/techniques.

Are you trying to perfect those techniques you are currently happy with or are you trying to expand your portfolio?

Roen

FreeAnd.. wrote: »

anyone remember b0rg? I miss that guy...

Yeah...I was going to start a thread about him a while back. I wonder where he got to? Did he go back home or is he still here? And didn't he have a mate called Kurino or something?

amcinroy

Eleven,

Interesting thread.

Personally speaking, I can work my camera in my sleep. As time I passes I spend less time being frustrated with my technique and I can spend much more of my time thinking about communication and concepts which, at the end of the day, is what photography is all about.

It's the storytelling aspect of photography that has got me inspired in recent years. Putting portfolios together to tell a new story or communicate an idea is very satisfying and needs a bit more planning and thought to do something original. You will always find a new challenge with such an approach

There are always new things to do. I have another idea for a story up my sleeve once my sea cave project is complete which is starting to inspire me already. I can't say too much right now about that.

Andy

Hugh_C

Interesting about wanting to learn lighting - that's where I'm at at the moment and would love to find some sort of course.

OT: has this forum suddenly been populated by d*ckheads?

Dragan

Hugh_C wrote: »

Technical perfection has less very little correlation with aesthetic excellence, subjectivity aside. Creativity cannot be taught, but is something which either develops or doesn't develop over the course of a career.

Bingo. Right now i would be happier knowing that i have taken a conceptually original but not not technically excellent shot. I love photography and plan on putting lots of time, effort, study, money and travel into becoming a good one.....once i can do something that shows me i will not just be replicating the work of others.

RealEstateKing

is not exactly hard. Photography aint rocket science: The basics of the technical stuff can be taught in half an hour, after that it's just making it flow.

And the answer is: Nobody can teach you a damn thing about how to take a good photo.

There are essentially two ways to do it:

(1) Look at lots and lots of good photos, and ask yourself why they are good.

(2) Take thousands upon thousands of photos yourself and ask yourself why they are good/bad.

and Show them to other people and listen to their criticism.

Here endeth the lesson: You now owe me, lets see, 3000 Euros a year for a 3 year photography course, doo, doo, doo, ehm 9000 Euros.

Cheers.

Covey

RealEstateKing wrote: »

is not exactly hard. Photography aint rocket science: The basics of the technical stuff can be taught in half an hour, after that it's just making it flow.

And the answer is: Nobody can teach you a damn thing about how to take a good photo.

I would disagree fundamentally with both of those points.

The basics of the technical stuff can be both complex (interrelationship of maybe 8-10 items) and at least to some "Rocket Science". Photography depends on light and learning about light can be a lifelong experience.

No one can teach you what to take but they certainly can teach you a hell of a lot at how to take a good photo/better photo.

T.

AnimalRights

Took me almost 6 months to learn my Camera and I've not even got onto Manual yet!

Karlmartini1

I'm an amateur photographer who's gotten really into it in the last 2 years. I've come to realise that obsessing about the technical aspects distracts from the core activity...taking well composed shots that say something.
Once I learned about aperature, exposure and all the rest it started to become second nature. When you don't have to use up so much of your brain on the technical stuff you can concentrate on composition and the artsy end of things.

Compared to a few years ago we are now blessed with fantastic cameras that can do metering, exposure, auto-focus and lots of wonderful things. I only put my camera on manual when I need to do some special effect. You could miss a very important shot while fiddling with buttons when you don't need to.

here's my stuff, critiques welcome.

AnimalRights

You've some fantastic stuff up on that site KM.

conkeroo

Karlmartini1 wrote: »

I'm an amateur photographer who's gotten really into it in the last 2 years. I've come to realise that obsessing about the technical aspects distracts from the core activity...taking well composed shots that say something.
Once I learned about aperature, exposure and all the rest it started to become second nature. When you don't have to use up so much of your brain on the technical stuff you can concentrate on composition and the artsy end of things.

Compared to a few years ago we are now blessed with fantastic cameras that can do metering, exposure, auto-focus and lots of wonderful things. I only put my camera on manual when I need to do some special effect. You could miss a very important shot while fiddling with buttons when you don't need to.

here's my stuff, critiques welcome.

I personally think that if you know all aspects of your camera, flash and exposure compensation, etc, as well as learning to meter properly, I think it opens up a whole new world. You're not restricted anymore by the limitations of the tool if you know what you can get out it. Having said that you still need a great eye to take great shots which you defintely do. Really like your work.