| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/06/2004 05:01:53 PM · #1 |
I have a few questions and I need your help (and I apologize in advance for the self-absorbed thread, although I've tried to be as helpful to others in dpc whenever possible).
I was on the verge of deciding to buy a digital SLR (most likely the rebel) this month as I would like to get serious about my photography. My problem is that after submitting the first challenge-entry photo that I was truly pleased with into the 'Travel' challenge, my score is well below my expectations (I was hoping for a 6.1 - 6.4 and I'm at 4.2625 right now).
I'm beginning to wonder if I don't have an 'eye' for making photographs like I thought I did. I'm not so worried about lighting technique, editing, etc. as I'm sure I can learn these things but I'm worried that I just don't have the eye that's required...
I would really, truly appreciate it if a few of you could take a few minutes of your time to look at my portfolio and be honest about the following things:
1) What is the main things missing in some of these photographs that would give it the Wow-effect of a photographer like jjbeguin or frumoaznicul?
2) Do you see anything in these photographs that could provide me with hope that I do have a photographic eye?
3) What advice can you give me?
I'm honestly not looking for a pat on the back as much as a kick in the butt...
Thanks.
Message edited by author 2004-09-06 17:02:29. |
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:09:28 PM · #2 |
i started low too, but after hanging around here for a while learning some stuff from the tutorials and forum posts i've gotten a bit better i guess. just give it some time.
by the way, your miniature entry did well. better than any of mine ever did. dont be so hard on urself.
Message edited by author 2004-09-06 17:11:15.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:12:13 PM · #3 |
I noticed that one of your latest entries into your portfolio is very similar to one in a current challenge. To keep anonymity it is best not to do this. If the one in the challenge is not yours I apologize for the assumption (I commented on that one).
|
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:13:48 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I noticed that one of your latest entries into your portfolio is very similar to one in a current challenge. To keep anonymity it is best not to do this. If the one in the challenge is not yours I apologize for the assumption (I commented on that one). |
Good point...I've now hidden that particular photograph until the end of the challenge... |
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:22:26 PM · #5 |
How long have you been at this? Photography is an art just like painting or sculpture or music... Do you think a great painter creates a masterpiece the first time he/she picks up a brush? Of course not. It takes time, and practice, and study and more practice, practice, practice! So give yourself more time to do just that.
Something else to keep in mind is that it's not the camera but the photographer behind it. Don't buy a dRebel thinking it will instantly improve your eye. On the other hand, a DSLR will give you more freedom of expression so if you can afford it and you are willing to put in the time to learn it and PRACTICE your craft then go for it. But again, don't expect miracles from a machine.
Considered reading would be "Learning to See Creatively" by Bryan Peterson - good book.
Good luck :-)
edited because I've lost the ability to type
Message edited by author 2004-09-06 17:24:20. |
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:26:25 PM · #6 |
Mike, this is a case of the blind-leading-the-blind, since I feel the same way about myself and I am much less accomplished than you are - except I feel I lack the creativity to find those shots that I have the eye for! One, I say it is most important to ask ourself if you are enjoying yourself, regardless of how far your potential can "take you". That said, yes, I feel that you most certainly have a photographer's eye. I think you are again similar to something I see in myself - that you enjoy a type of photography that doesn't always lend itself to "studio" work or DPC "wow" slick factor (please, no one take this as any kind of put-down on DPC and ribbon winners!!!). I think you see form and beauty in the world around you, and don't necessarily always go about trying to "create" it as much as capture a new aspect of it. You may also not have worked up to a good idea of what does "win" here at DPC and if that is what is important to you, then just study that aspect some more. I think everyone agrees here that ribbon winners may or may not be great photographers overall and that great photographers may or may not actually win ribbons here. I hope this helps - it is from my heart and I hope that we see you stay and grow with us here. I hope to have time later and come back and comment on each of your photos - I apologize for not being able to do so right now.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:27:07 PM · #7 |
Keep at it!! If it's something you like to do, I firmly believe you will keep at it until you're the best you can be. Your miniature entry got a 10 from me-- everything about it was perfect, IMHO. I think you have "an eye," just keep practicing!! I've signed up for 3 classes since I joined this website, and I fully intend to get a ribbon before the end of the year. I've set a goal... and I'm going to work at it. The book that digistoune recommended is a good suggestion. :) I bought my camera after a few challenges here, and the advanced controls it gives has really made me work harder... maybe it will be the same for you! Anyway, whatever you decide (new camera or not), don't give up photography. I think you'll regret it.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:29:59 PM · #8 |
Don't base any significant decisions on challenge results. They are fun to participate in, but with the limited time and topic they have more emphasis on stretching horizons into areas that you might not normally look into than on ability. Sure those with a better 'eye' will be able to recognize an opportunity when it presents itself, but that does not mean a low score in a challenge means your eye is any less capable of being developed.
Let me see if I can make myself a bit more clear in this 'self absorbed thread' :p with a more personal example.
The 'eye' as you referred to it, to me, is the ability to visualize. Some people, when they close their eyes can still see what is in front of their 'mind's eye', others such as myself are about as blind as we can get -- with many variances in between. When I started photography my images sucked bad (I'm sure some will say they still do ;) ), but I started learning about visualizing the image before I open the shutter, and I started exercising an ability I had just not used before. I still can not 'see' clearly with my mind's eye, more like looking through a dense fog, but it is clearing up with continued use.
The interesting thing I have noticed is that when I start thinking of an image I want to shoot, be it for a challenge or for myself, I have found that if I can't visualize it, I am not going to be able to capture it -- I might get lucky and get close, but it will not look quite right, even if I don't know why. So I mull over an image in my mind until I can see it clearly (relatively speaking) and then a wonderous thing happens, when I turn my attention toward the implementation of that image the details of how to implement it fall into place easily.
I am not fast with this, and I miss a lot of challenges because I don't open the shutter until I know what I am going to shoot -- but my images have improved drastically because of it.
And, to get back to your topic, the more I concentrate on being able to visualize, the more opportunities I see around me and the better I visualize it, the fewer resources I need to implement it. You speak of the "'eye' for making photographs" as if it is an ability you either have or you do not, but I have experienced that it is an ability that is developed thru use.
Oh, and by the way, your landscapes are particularly well done (even with the occasional tilting horizon). ;D
David
|
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:30:35 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by digistoune:
How long have you been at this? Photography is an art just like painting or sculpture or music... Do you think a great painter creates a masterpiece the first time he/she picks up a brush? Of course not. It takes time, and practice, and study and more practice, practice, practice! So give yourself more time to do just that.
Something else to keep in mind is that it's not the camera but the photographer behind it. Don't buy a dRebel thinking it will instantly improve your eye. On the other hand, a DSLR will give you more freedom of expression so if you can afford it and you are willing to put in the time to learn it and PRACTICE your craft then go for it. But again, don't expect miracles from a machine.
Considered reading would be "Learning to See Creatively" by Bryan Peterson - good book.
Good luck :-)
edited because I've lost the ability to type |
Yeah, it's because I know better than to expect miracles from a machine that I posted my thread.
I took black and white photography in high school about 6 years ago and haven't tried any creative photography in the last 5 years until about a month ago when I stumbled across this site.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:33:39 PM · #10 |
| My advice is to look at lots of photos you like, LOTS of them. Buy photo books and study them (not the how to photograph XYZ, but the monographs and other collections). Try to understand what is going on, what the photographer saw when he shot it and how would you approach the same topic/subject. It's also important to keep in mind that average scores on DPC are not the sole metric of good photography. |
|
|
|
09/06/2004 05:56:39 PM · #11 |
I think this earlier post to another thread is appropriate...
"I spent many months marveling at the top photographers, trying to figure out how they can be so consistently successful in the challenges, when equally competent photographers might get a more pedestrian score for technically excellent shots of the same subject. Then it finally dawned on me... the winners don't just have a photo, they have an idea.
With few exceptions, the best-scoring images have a strong concept behind them. The idea might be a particular technique, a visual game, an emotional message, a joke or some other story, but the image has meaning. Too many people enter "a picture of X," without any real central thought, then wonder why others find their shot boring. I get it now, and five of my last eight entries have placed in the top 4. Guess which three didn't start with a clear concept in mind?"
To expand upon that post... in addition to concept, I believe simplicity is important. Look at challenges where lots of photographers had the same idea- the best shots usually contain just a few elements. Show only the things necessary to communicate your idea. Everything else is clutter. For example, your shot of the Honduras Girl would be far more dramatic with everybody else cropped out. The girl is poetry, while the people in the background are visual noise.
Don't worry about the camera too much. There are DSLR owners here that can't top 5.0, and plenty of ribbons going to point-and-shoot cameras. The fanciest camera available doesn't know where to point itself. Go out and take hundreds of shots with the above points in mind. Upgrade only when you have a technical need to do so. Good luck!
Message edited by author 2004-09-06 17:57:51. |
|
|
|
09/06/2004 06:37:29 PM · #12 |
Everyone has an eye for photography. Some just have a more popular eye, or are better at making their camera see what they want to see. Also, some are more creative then others at setting up or finding a shot.
I'll add some comment on your pictures.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2004 06:56:05 PM · #13 |
I see you just strated here in August. Give yourself some time, you'll learn a lot here. I've been here almost a year and feel I have gained a lot from the other photographers here.
I agree with what Spaz said, look over a lot of photos. I suggest reviewing and commenting on as many photos as possible. You can learn a lot by studying other peoples photos and seeing what works and what doesn't.
I agree 100% with scalvert's last comment. Until you have reached the technical limitations of your camera, there is no need to worry about upgrading to a DSLR. The camera does not make you a better photographer.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2004 07:44:21 PM · #14 |
| It's a big jump from your cam to a DSLR. If you feel your A40 is holding you back in developing your skills, why not try something in between. The DSLR learning curve may not do much for your confidence. Unless you have a lot of money to invest initially you may find yourself feeling like your first ribbon is only a new lens away. Take it a step at a time and build up your skills along the way. By the time you've mastered something like Canon Pro 1 or G6, a Konica-Minolta A2, or a Panasonic DMC-FZ20 (to point out a few examples) you will know you have the "eye". Better cameras can speed your developement, or retard it if they overwhelm you. They won't give you the elusive "eye" overnight if you don't think you have it. |
|
|
|
09/06/2004 08:02:15 PM · #15 |
Thanks for the comments, encouragement and advice everybody...I shouldn't have mentioned the bit about the digital rebel as I don't expect it to help me develop my 'eye' or anything like that.
I prefer working with SLR's as I'm frustrated with the inability to control depth of field as well as the lack of manual focus on my A40.
My main concern was getting specific feedback on the few pictures I've added to my portfolio in the last month as well as your discernment on whether you think my ideas have any potential or not...
Thanks again!
|
|
|
|
09/08/2004 01:50:50 PM · #16 |
| hi, what advice would u like to give for a color blind fotographer? |
|
|
|
09/08/2004 02:06:00 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Tanveerhawk:
hi, what advice would u like to give for a color blind fotographer? |
Master B&W |
|
|
|
09/08/2004 02:16:56 PM · #18 |
There are some people who seem to have a natural eye for photography and others have to learn it, either way it is possible. When you start out it's all about learning what works, the "rules of photography", experimenting with hundreds of shots on the same subject and learning from each one, playing around with lighting, learning your camera and its limitations and playing on the strengths.... and then you learn when to go against everything you've learnt.
Composition and lighting are what I consider to be the fundamental things to learn. Rule of thirds, diagonals, circles, leading lines, framing, and even when to place objects in the center of the shot. It becomes like a checklist in your head and eventually you see the world in lines and shapes and you know exactly where to place things. Knowing the best times of the day to shoot in, feeling the 'quality' of the light when you shoot, knowing which angle to have the light source for different effects.
Looking at your shots and asking yourself what works and why, what is the best aspect of your shot and what is the worse. Dont settle. Make a list of the things you would do different and go do them and then compare. Reviewing shots a week or more after you've taken them can be good too as you dont have the imprint of what the actual scene looked like, only what the camera saw. Re-evaluate, take notes, and go reshoot.
When learning the technicals then your subject can be anything, but choosing the right subject is part of what makes it wow. If your subject is interesting to start with then you've won half the battle, the rest is just getting the best out of that subject.
I started on DPC with the A40 and I won three ribbons with it after a long, hard struggle. Looking at images and analyzing why I liked them, receiving comments about things I didnt even think about (like my crooked horizon line), and reading photography books and talking with other photographers really helped. Just dont expect to be great the first time you pick up a camera. The more time and energy you put into learning when, why, how, who about photography the more you will change and adapt and hopefully get some images that you can really think 'wow' about.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2004 02:18:05 PM · #19 |
to be brief, you may have the 'eye' but it just hasn't been revealed yet.
Throw a stone out your window and you're bound to strike atleast ONE photographer, however, the rarity is getting one with a natural creative eye.
Good luck, and don't let it bother you. Maybe you've got it, maybe you don't, so you won't be the world's BEST photographer, but you can still be a good technical photographer. |
|
|
|
09/08/2004 02:36:17 PM · #20 |
| Advice from a "newbie"...Stick With it! I "blindly" entered my first two challenges without even knowing that much about my camera. And now each challenge I enter I try to use a different "technique" so that I can learn from it. And surprisingly I ended up in the top 50 for the Hope challenge and my Backlighting entry score is currently even better(hope I don't jinx myself) I definitely feel like I am making progress and that is worth more to me than a ribbon at this point. |
|
|
|
09/08/2004 02:53:19 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
1) What is the main things missing in some of these photographs that would give it the Wow-effect of a photographer like jjbeguin...?
2) Do you see anything in these photographs that could provide me with hope that I do have a photographic eye?
3) What advice can you give me?
I'm honestly not looking for a pat on the back as much as a kick in the butt... |
1) Beguin is Beguin, clouds are clouds. Perhaps, it is the absence of Beguin in his shots which make them so genuinely 'Beguin'?
2) There are, IMO, varying individual causations that motivate the taking of remarkable photographs. I do believe that for anyone who feels very strongly about something there is a way to articulate what it is that commotes or moves him/her. The key, I believe, is in accepting things as they are despite protests of the ego. Things, by and large, tend to come.
3) Study JJ's and frumoaznicull's work, if you admire it. Study any good work. Imitate it, if you like until this process too has served it's time or due. Do not become attached to your own images. Concentrate on making the next one instead.
Walk around and look. When you see something you haven't seen before, what is it? When you've seen a few things you haven't seen before, I bet, your world will change a little. When the world changes, we live. When we live, we are no longer dead to it. :-)
|
|
|
|
09/08/2004 03:01:33 PM · #22 |
I have checked your port and there is promise. I like the bridge shot best. The Canadian shot of the fields simply needed a different time of day to make that yellow sing.
You must understand that improvement is never linear. This is perhaps the most frustrating aspect of any skill that we wish to attain. We move forwatd today and tomorrow we go backwards. You know, I have been involved with a camrta for quite some time and since I continue to experiment I still have to laugh as I am forced to go backwards.
You say that you were expecting a high mark in this one challenge. I have entered challenges and check my port and note the irregularities. What I mean is, do not make a decision on one or a series of entry.
You have the eye and it will get sharper and sharper. Again, my advise is to look at ports and study what you see. It all comes slowly, but it will certainly come. |
|
|
|
09/08/2004 03:17:25 PM · #23 |
zeuszen, I understand. The weird thing is, however, that I feel I'm much more likely to notice beauty in the most unnoticable places than most people are. That's why I decided to get back into photography.
So I could photograph the beauty I was seeing...
a flock of birds with those one or two trailing waaay behind...trees in the middle of fields...the little scar on the top of my hand which follows the contour of my knuckle...a bicycle in the middle of a garbage pile...shoes hanging from electrical wires...a smiling old lady sneaking peaks at a kissing couple across the park...and on and on.
It just seems when I start to photograph these things I have a tough time capturing the beauty I see...but I hope that will come, too.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2004 03:29:02 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
zeuszen, I understand. The weird thing is, however, that I feel I'm much more likely to notice beauty in the most unnoticable places than most people are. That's why I decided to get back into photography.
So I could photograph the beauty I was seeing...
a flock of birds with those one or two trailing waaay behind...trees in the middle of fields...the little scar on the top of my hand which follows the contour of my knuckle...a bicycle in the middle of a garbage pile...shoes hanging from electrical wires...a smiling old lady sneaking peaks at a kissing couple across the park...and on and on.
It just seems when I start to photograph these things I have a tough time capturing the beauty I see...but I hope that will come, too. |
what I'm noticing lately is that most people see the beauty, they notice the little things, they just don't talk about it or think other people care. Which is what separates creative folks; the details are ALL we care about!
lol
|
|
|
|
09/08/2004 04:12:31 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
...It just seems when I start to photograph these things I have a tough time capturing the beauty I see... |
This, Mike, is a very common handicap and one, which I, too, experience.
There is a difference between what we see when looking from the inside out and what we see when we look from the outside in.
I speculate, that the things you describe would, easily, fit into the first catagory. A picture like this, IMHO, relates the latter. Way too much attention (I say) is given to the physical subject of a photograph, not enough goes into to how we see it.
The camera is actually a valuable ally when trying to see differently. Its field of vision is different than ours. It reads light and space differently. It, really, is its own eye, very different from ours. Here is a photograph I took at a point of conveyance between two ways of seeing.
Although I cannot say that this image has attracted any popular appeal, it points the very distinction I want to illustrate here quite clearly. Notice how both images, although vastly different, go well beyond depiction of (a) physical subject(s). JJ's image is no longer a capture; it is a metaphor relating a sense beyond what is (physically) there. Both, I feel, derive their unique strength from the way they are composed (or 'made', if you like).
Composition is the big one. It's what we do when we see. And it's wild.
[I hope JJ doesn't mind me rummaging through his port... ;-)]
Message edited by author 2004-09-08 16:16:43.
|
|
