| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/02/2013 11:50:42 AM · #1 |
photography is perhaps the most zen of all the arts. a sand mandala is supposedly zen because they work so long and diligently on it and then throw it away in an instant...
but photography is created in an instant. a good photograph is a haiku, finding the moment that twists between moments.
sempermarine leans toward the studio school, the shot that is manufactured before it is taken. There is nothing wrong with this approach. My favorite photographer is Man Ray.
Just keep in mind that studio photography is closer to the other arts. you have complete control over your finished product, but control is a kind of death, so you must seek ways to give up that control. the Surrealists experimented with many different methods of accessing the unconscious... collage, randomness, even holding their breath.
Introduce an element that is beyond your control. By capturing a time-period of light, your camera is essentially a window into another world. don't just paint over the window. look through it and see what you find.
please contribute your ideas and schemes to make sempermarine a better photographer. |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 11:57:42 AM · #2 |
Stick a cat into it. It's definitely an element beyond your control. :)
(Probably not what Don meant, but it was more interesting than the picture of the apple for which I was originally shooting... :)
|
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:00:49 PM · #3 |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:01:35 PM · #4 |
Seriously though.
Get out of the studio - get into the field. Apply what you know from the studio to the work out there. |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:03:20 PM · #5 |
But what's the difference between creating it at home or finding it in the world and creating it?
I was out at the beach, and I saw the striped reflections. I sat and waited about 10-15 minutes for the right seagull and the right pose, because I knew what I wanted. I got other shots by accident, but my mind still new what I wanted to create.
The only difference is that I had a happy happenstance with the striped reflections that I wouldn't have had at home. But I still knew my scene.
It seems like when I go out, I usually get more essays than poetry, and I stand more of a chance at something creative when I have time to work at it.
Perhaps that's the difference. My daughter is the poet. I'm the journalist.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:04:32 PM · #6 |
Go into a dark alley at night and shoot someone.......
|
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:06:03 PM · #7 |
For me the difference is serendipity.
Stuff happens in the real world, you can't control it. Wind, rain, clouds, horses, antelope, egrets, fighter jets, flash floods, who knows. But it happens. And sometimes something magical occurs because of it.
Beyond that though? Balancing the real world along with 'studio' type shots really does add a whole new dimensionality to the work, and certainly increases the challenge.
Here's a good example - on a hillside, camera set up on opposite side of valley, fighting with radio triggers, burning 20 or so lbs of magnesium in a cave, and trying like hell to get a shot that will actually look decent. (Thank goodness for friends, eventually Schlake started pushing the shutter button for me)
Certainly much more challenging that just setting up the lighting and putting a subject in the shot.
The costume was another interesting challenge, but that's just because of bad planning (bought cloth and safety pins, made costume in the field)
Message edited by author 2013-09-02 12:11:25. |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:06:34 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Go into a dark alley at night and shoot someone.......
|
Wasn't that his old job description? ;) |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:11:10 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Cory:
For me the difference is serendipity.
Stuff happens in the real world, you can't control it. Wind, rain, clouds, horses, antelope, egrets, fighter jets, flash floods, who knows. But it happens. And sometimes something magical occurs because of it.
Beyond that though? Balancing the real world along with 'studio' type shots really does add a whole new dimensionality to the work, and certainly increases the challenge. |
Completely and totally agree with that. Nature photography is still my passion, because it's simply what I enjoy. I could watch the egrets, osprey, GBHs, etc all day and be perfectly happy (and sometimes do!) I don't know that the studio work has necessarily helped with that photography, but it's certainly helped the processing tremendously. Studio work is still my least favorite thing, but it's made me a much better photographer, and now I'm trying to improve my lighting. I figure knowledge is power. As many things as you can experience will help you somehow!
|
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:13:04 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Cory:
For me the difference is serendipity.
Stuff happens in the real world, you can't control it. Wind, rain, clouds, horses, antelope, egrets, fighter jets, flash floods, who knows. But it happens. And sometimes something magical occurs because of it.
Beyond that though? Balancing the real world along with 'studio' type shots really does add a whole new dimensionality to the work, and certainly increases the challenge. |
Completely and totally agree with that. Nature photography is still my passion, because it's simply what I enjoy. I could watch the egrets, osprey, GBHs, etc all day and be perfectly happy (and sometimes do!) I don't know that the studio work has necessarily helped with that photography, but it's certainly helped the processing tremendously. Studio work is still my least favorite thing, but it's made me a much better photographer, and now I'm trying to improve my lighting. I figure knowledge is power. As many things as you can experience will help you somehow! |
What you need is two better beamers, two strobes, two radio triggers and a friend... Have them give you late-evening cross lighting on the wildlife, with one flash on your body, set to about 1/2 the power of the cross-light. :D
Never mind.. Ignore that - you already have enough ribbons. ;)
Message edited by author 2013-09-02 12:14:04. |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:20:56 PM · #11 |
Your lighting and processing are phenomenal, and about the most polished for portraiture you can find. Yes, you use a lot of props, and have mastered the ability to not take yourself too seriously, but your photos tell some very funny stories that are much richer than the sum of all of these elements. You've got serious story-telling talent.
I'd never imagine you need to improve, but if it's feeling stale, I'd suggest entering more layers, adding complexity to the stories. More characters, more depth to the photos. With your lighting skills and ability to wring every last drop of emotion out of a face, I'd imagine it'd be highly entertaining. |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:21:36 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
photography is perhaps the most zen of all the arts. a sand mandala is supposedly zen because they work so long and diligently on it and then throw it away in an instant...
but photography is created in an instant. a good photograph is a haiku, finding the moment that twists between moments.
|
Perhaps this is one of the things I like so much about DPC. All of our images are akin to the sand mandala - created only for the challenge, to be nearly forgotten and buried after their week in the sun. Then on to the next one. It is rather zen, in a maddeningly crazy sort of way. ;) |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 12:34:50 PM · #13 |
You'll have to start by defining "better photographer," which is easier said than done.
For some that will mean appealing images of unusual subjects, sharply focused where appropriate. Neutral or complementary white balance or B&W with a wide range of tone, rule of thirds compositions and low noise are all good. Bonus points for humor or surprise. This is considered stock or "eye candy" and generally scores well in the mainstream challenges.
For others that will mean finding interest in the mundane. High-key or low-key B&W, motion blur and missed focus are good here. Toned B&W and muted colors are effective and noise is OK. Break the rule of thirds and go for cutoff elements, people without faces, rural slice of life scenes and photo bomb intrusions. This is considered "deep meaning" and scores well in the Fine Arts and abstract type challenges.
The two approaches are not mutually exclusive, but the closer you get to one side the more you will stray from being a "better photographer" in the eyes of the other. Shoot the styles and subjects that suit your own taste and strive to make them better in your own opinion. Seek out the work of other photographers that resonates with you and study it to learn why you find it appealing. Working along that path will lead to a satisfying personal experience in photography no matter the challenge scores or opinions of others. |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 02:10:35 PM · #14 |
| Who cares about creating better photographers? Those are everywhere. How about better photographs instead? |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 02:13:24 PM · #15 |
| try it without all those glasses? |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 02:31:36 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by tnun:
try it without all those glasses? |
What should I be using instead? I tried just a lens cap but that left me in the dark. |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 02:47:26 PM · #17 |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 03:23:47 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by tnun:
try it without all those glasses? |
What should I be using instead? I tried just a lens cap but that left me in the dark. |
Me too ...  |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 03:31:18 PM · #19 |
I meant these glasses
and for the rest of you yobs something like this |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 03:37:22 PM · #20 |
...oops, nevermind. I read the topic as "threat to make sempermarine a better photographer" |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 07:10:46 PM · #21 |
Hmm. I think it's human nature to do what you can, the best you can, & then invent a rationale to justify it later.
I would really like to know -- what is a better photographer? |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 07:14:31 PM · #22 |
| "The art of seeing is the beginning of art." : Richard Avedon (who was, of course, a terrific portrait photographer) |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 07:35:07 PM · #23 |
Wow! A whole thread dedicated to making me a better photographer. Thanks Don! :)
|
|
|
|
09/02/2013 07:41:37 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Your lighting and processing are phenomenal, and about the most polished for portraiture you can find. Yes, you use a lot of props, and have mastered the ability to not take yourself too seriously, but your photos tell some very funny stories that are much richer than the sum of all of these elements. You've got serious story-telling talent.
I'd never imagine you need to improve, but if it's feeling stale, I'd suggest entering more layers, adding complexity to the stories. More characters, more depth to the photos. With your lighting skills and ability to wring every last drop of emotion out of a face, I'd imagine it'd be highly entertaining. |
Thanks for the compliment and your suggestion of adding some complexity. I've noticed a few suggestions for me to get out of the studio. So I guess it's time for me to go outside and adapt my style to another environment. |
|
|
|
09/02/2013 07:43:36 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Hmm. I think it's human nature to do what you can, the best you can, & then invent a rationale to justify it later.
I would really like to know -- what is a better photographer? |
I should have said, "make me an inspired photographer" vice "a better photographer". This thread has certainly done the trick. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/26/2025 04:59:04 AM EDT.
