Is this all there is to photography? In which are you expert?

[weltweit]

So, "all there is to it" Version 2

1) Imagination. Creativity. Art
2) The Photographers eye (feeling)
3) Deciding what to take a photo of
4) Timing
5) Image composition
6) Ambient lighting
7) Shutter speed
8) Aperture setting
9) ISO selection / colour space / bw
10) Filters
11) Flash
12) Studio Lights
13) Post processing

So thats all there is to it, simple huh, why can't I get it right yet then!?

Oops forgot

14) Lens selection

 

[Paul Russell]

Anticipation, spontaneity, selection and that hard-to-define knowing what you're looking for go a whole long way towards taking good photographs. Composition, while vital, is only one half of the selection process.

Didn't someone say there's only two main variables - where you stand, and when to press the shutter.

Of course he forgot about having a huge box of Cokin filters, but he was on the right track.

 

[weltweit]

Or a macro lens and finding an insect or a flower.

What, you mean something like this :

from
http://www.mplonsky.com/photo/article.htm

 

[weltweit]

Didn't someone say there's only two main variables - where you stand, and when to press the shutter.

What, no did I bring the right lens? are the batteries charged? will I need my tripod ... I wish it was that simple .. perhaps it should be !

Of course he forgot about having a huge box of Cokin filters, but he was on the right track.

I have I think 4 or 5 cokin filters, and that is also about the number of times I have used the flipping things !

 

[weltweit]

A lot of it is about getting some black & white film then finding someone who looks miserable in a scene of obvious deprivation of some kind.

something like this:

from
http://www.pbase.com/crespoide/infierno

 

[alef]

I'd say filters are the most important. As long as you've got your Cokin starburst, polarizer and graduated tobacco filters in place, everything else is secondary.

Edit: woah, filters now joint leader!

I just had to vote Filters after reading this.

 

[alef]

This photo I think displays some mastery of the technical aspects. I believe it was taken in raw with quite a small aperture to give depth, a fast shutter probably as there is lots of light in Arizona where it was taken, and then I think it was processed and sharpenned very well in PS to give what I think is quite a rounded "in depth" feel for a digital image.

I think it almost has three dimensional properties which are down to how it was taken (technically) and then how it was processed.

I find it very hard to replicate this "three dimensional" quality in my images.

It's a nice enough photo. I'd have cropped out the window edge on the left and had the door less central. It's a photo about strong colours and composition, something I've played with a fair amount.

However, I would not at all describe this as three dimensional. It's a particularly flat photo in that all of the subjects are in nearly the same plane, in fact that's what makes this photo a bit stylized.

If you want to take photos that look similar to this then travel to a hot country and give a lot of thought to composition. It hardly matters what kit you use and how you use it. Overcast days help, otherwise just find the colours, frame and snap.

Here are some of my attempts at this kind of textbook coffee table colour photography:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/_alef_/340051497/in/set-72157594450453669/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/_alef_/340211301/in/set-72157594450453669/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/_alef_/1030777574/in/set-72157601257335282/

 

[Paul Russell]

I just had to vote Filters after reading this.

Thanks Alef. Filters are winning.

 

[zenie]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/_alef_/1030777574/in/set-72157601257335282/

Really hot round there

Have you seen the crocodiles?

 

[Vintage Paw]

I think what you mean about 3-d is the contrast. You can see clearly defined lines around the cactus leaves. Perhaps you need to play with contrast in pp a bit, to find something that makes the shapes pop.

 

[lobster]

HDR looks more 3d imo

Whenever I am in the mood I use qtpfsgui, its very easy to get lovely 3d like photos , albeit cartoonish .

 

[weltweit]

Some people say you can't teach artistic ability – others say bullshit, of course you can. Who knows? No harm in carrying on and trying to improve all the time. Especially if it's doing something you love.

Well indeed, I do think some people have a natural artistic ability, as to whether I will ever have that, as you say does it matter when I enjoy it.

And who has the final say on whether something is 'artistic' or not, or 'good' or not? You? The viewer? Who cares?

Someone said to me "just make picures that you like to look at!" I strive to do that. The problem that creates frustration is when I see a photo that I like a lot and think, I would like to make an image like that, but I struggle to find the right conditions for the image. That can be frustrating. I have found that mainly with both wildlife and landscape photography.

I go through flickr every week and favourite photos I love the aesthetic quality of. I think I do it to have a kind of reference to go back to for inspiration. I might try to imitate some of them, and then I might try to just imitate a style, and then I might just find I have a style of my own.

I think that's a good way to go about it

Well I don't think I have a style of my own yet. Perhaps it will take some more years!

..

Re: style.

I have been following some photographers on pbase for a number of years, looking at their images and some of them do seem to have a style of their own, so much so that if you mixed five of their photos, picked at random, with five random photos from others, I am pretty sure I could pick out which 5/10 were theirs.

In one persons case their images are always good but also artistically enhanced in ps such that you know not all the image came direct from the camera. They are definately much more expert in ps than I. I love the images they create.

Another just seems to me to have a very good understanding of colour, proportion, shape, perspective, texture and the suchlike and their photos also seem to be of their individual style.

 

[boskysquelch]

your Cokin starburst,

I've had mine within arm's reach since 1986 when I pulled it out of a skip...I shit you not.

that and 25 dernier stocking(Chanel) for camera or enlarger. or all three at once.

Plus Potatoeplop.

 

[gnoriac]

I don't think the word 'exposure' has been used yet. In terms of technical skills, perhaps the most important.

 

[weltweit]

I don't think the word 'exposure' has been used yet. In terms of technical skills, perhaps the most important.

Oh, ok ..

But I would argue exposure is just the combination of

ISO
Shutter speed
Aperture setting

There is nothing else no?

I don't know why modern cameras have so many scene settings when there are usually only two things to adjust - Aperture and shutter speed !

 

[lobster]

Oh, ok ..

But I would argue exposure is just the combination of

ISO
Shutter speed
Aperture setting

There is nothing else no?

I don't know why modern cameras have so many scene settings when there are usually only two things to adjust - Aperture and shutter speed !

Scene settings are only found on consumer and pro-consumer cameras, its so users do not have to look at the light meter and figure out whats best.

Even then its debatable....I tend to overexpose slightly to get more contrast.
The argument to that, i can loose information and risk blowing out highlights as well as added contrast can be done in post processing..

 

[weltweit]

Scene settings are only found on consumer and pro-consumer cameras, its so users do not have to look at the light meter and figure out whats best.

Even then its debatable....I tend to overexpose slightly to get more contrast.
The argument to that, i can loose information and risk blowing out highlights as well as added contrast can be done in post processing..

As I understand it there is an argument that digital cams store more data at the brighter end of the exposure with less data set aside for recording dark areas so your over exposure assuming you dont blow out is .. a good idea.

When I started I didn't understand how the P S A type modes worked so I got into spot metering and manual mode, setting aperture and speed with the two dials. I got into photographing white swans for a while and got used to metering the brightest bit to be almost white and let the rest fall where it may.

I continued like that, exposing manually for the highlights in spot for a long time till I met someone who took much better swan pics than I did but who used matrix and exposure compensation. With the added advantage that you can leave more to the camera and get more quick shots of birds flying for example ..

I resolved to learn matrix and exposure compensation (and obviously S P & A modes) and I think I pretty much understand that now.

If I have time I still prefer manual & spot metering round a scene deciding myself what exposure to use ..

 

[Stanley Edwards]

...

There is nothing else no?
...

The lighting you have already mentioned is a way of controlling the exposure. I always carry diffusers and reflectors when possible for use in landscape work and portraiture with ambient light. They're incredibly useful.

I'm also creating pen light sketches and 3D models photographically these days. Three minute (plus) exposures controlled 100% with torches.

And, whilst Mr Russell might be talking tongue in cheek about filters, 90% of the time I'm using colour film for landscape work I use a very subtle graduated ND filter. The skies are often an important part of a landscape photograph. Generally I find they need toning down a little to get the exposure on the land spot on. You can use post production techniques, but that's not what photography is about for me.

All photography technical stuff is pretty basic and very easy to understand. The greatest value is always going to be creativity - creating images that haven't been seen before.

 

[weltweit]

I havent used a diffuser or reflector really yet. Oh except during product photography lit with only one flash, I used white sheets of card to bounce light, off the ceiling, into the sides of the products. Worked ok.

Re long exposures and lighting things with torches. I watched a guy using multiple flashes to light scenes and it gave me an idea, I used a set up shot of glasses and bottles and in bulb went and flashed it from all sorts of directions. Made for interesting lighting. I also came across a guy on the net who was making night time shots of derelict buildings that way. He would flash light them from inside and out using different colours. He made some very unusual and quite beautiful images.

Re: your comment about "creating images that haven't been seen before". You did mention that before on here Stanley. The trouble is it is very unlikely I am ever going to do anything that is new to photography, i.e. something that has not been done before. Especially as I only know a tiny fraction of the images that have already been made. For me it is a pleasure to make something that is new to me and often a pleasure to make something that I have done already, a little better.

 

[lobster]

Re long exposures and lighting things with torches. I watched a guy using multiple flashes to light scenes and it gave me an idea, I used a set up shot of glasses and bottles and in bulb went and flashed it from all sorts of directions. Made for interesting lighting. I also came across a guy on the net who was making night time shots of derelict buildings that way. He would flash light them from inside and out using different colours. He made some very unusual and quite beautiful images.

I am intrigued , do you happen to have any links to this guys photos?

 

[weltweit]

I am intrigued , do you happen to have any links to this guys photos?

Just had a look through my bookmarks and nothing stands out. He used iirc to drive around the states in a VW bus finding derelict buildings to shoot. Sorry, it was a few years ago.

If you can imagine a building in the dark where he had painted the outside (or part of it) in red and then the inside in blue (so light shining out from the windows was blue) and then perhaps part of a neighbouring tree in white. He basically used to walk about his scene flashing it with his gun and coloured filters.

 

[Stanley Edwards]

...
Re long exposures and lighting things with torches. I watched a guy using multiple flashes to light scenes and it gave me an idea...

I did a similar thing in B&W back in the 80's during the housing boom that happened then. Went around the country side of the South Shropshire/Welsh borders photographing empty barns and old agricultural buildings filled with bursts of flash to the point that they almost looked like they were exploding at night. Called the series 'Sheds with Potential' as in barn with potential - the standard estate agent blurb at the time. It's good fun.

Re: your comment about "creating images that haven't been seen before". You did mention that before on here Stanley. The trouble is it is very unlikely I am ever going to do anything that is new to photography...

I can guarantee that you, or anyone else will create something new. The skill is recognising the value of the new idea without referencing to any photograph you've seen before as a measure of it's worth. Don't try and copy, or imitate others' ideas - have the confidence to trust your own ideas. No-one can tell you it's wrong.