DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> The art of learning
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 15 of 15, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/08/2005 01:21:24 AM · #1
The art of learning by the eternal student.

Mine is the story of an individual who works hard and plays hard. Above it all is the desire to keep on learning. And yes, the more you learn, the less you know. I play musical instruments and these are many and I paint in all the mediums. Some say I am very talented but let me assure you that I am lucky if my talent is more than 10 percent. The rest is old fashion work. Before I picked up a brush I studied the styles of the old masters. The same with photography. The photography infection caught me very early and after reading and researching, I constructed a pin hole camera. Then I wanted to study optics and as I grew older I began to mix all the magical chemicals that Ansel Adam used. Even now, when I conceive an image I visualize the end result and this may take a few days. After it all comes together I go take the image. By this time I know the lens I want, the lighting and the exact dof. Understand that even the most gifted, of which I am not, have the tendency to lay a turd here and there. However, I continue to trust my instincts for better or for worse.

What matters to you is what can you take after reading this post that can help you with your photography. I do have an answer for you. I think you will see the sense in it.

The first thing is to explore your interest, in this case, photography and observe the panorama of work available. Learn to admire. You see admiration is one of those secrets. When you admire, a change comes over you. You project and pay tribute to the object. This change will begin to expand your awareness and then a flicker will burn within you to dare to imitate. Do not be affraid to imitate at the start. And do not be so vain to think that you can forego preparatory work because you know what you want to say from the start. The first lesson is, "we know nothing" It is here that the journey begins for those that will end up the best students.

Photography, as you know is used for many different purposes as such it is more a tool. You will eventually lean towards certain modes but the second secret is to look over your fence at the many styles being practiced. Some of these you will like and some you will detest. However, the wider the field of appreciation, the more you continue to learn. I have done much advertising photography and as you know advertising and displays employ different techniques. One of these is the graphical representation which can be rendered in different forms. Highly interesting is the silk screen. That is, you take an image and with a process camera convert it to dots. What you see in magazines is similar, only the dots are much smaller because the printing presses can employ tiny dots wherein the silk screen is limited because of its primitive treatment. Well, the important thing here is that observing silk screening and all forms of reproduction can even help in the expansion of your understanding.

The next secret is possibly the hardest to digest. This one is the research of your interest. Now, you do not have to read it all, no, only enough to understand the basics. While doing so you will run across some of the problems, many of which we still have today, and how they were solved.

Attached to the above is the learning of technique. Do not be impatient, a little knowledge from either tangent will go a long way. Do learn about lenses, even if your current camera only has a single lens. After doing so you will come to understand dof and the relationship between f stops and shutter speeds. Then lighting. Even if you opt for the natural light, do learn the basics of lighting because it will help you employ better the magic of natural light.

I said that some of these secrets are harder to digest, but if you go back to the first of admiration, then a thirst will develop which will make the study a real pleasure.

Currently I am playing the piano, but say that I wanted to play the sax. I just can not pick it up and play it. No way. What I do is I go into study mode and do exercises for three months. About the second month I begin to play a few melodies. At the end of the third I am set.

Now, photography is not like instruments, yet the camera is another beautiful instrument but what you learn requires little refreshing to take the picture. However, you will always find a limitation, that is something you can not do. This is where technique begs perfection. Do not be affraid that technique will spoil you. If you have nothing to say it will, but if you something to say then it will open doors that are currently closed. I say open them.
 04/08/2005 01:26:56 AM · #2
Do you prefer Liszt, Chopin, or Rachmaninoff?
 04/08/2005 01:32:54 AM · #3
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Do you prefer Liszt, Chopin, or Rachmaninoff?


The above are all excellent. These great folks are like bottles of great wine. It all depends on my mood. When I am super alert I prefer Bach. When I want constrained feelings i go to Mozart. When I feel lightheaded i turn to Vivaldi. When I want studied pieces I go to Beethoven. And when I feel funky I do Pink Floyd. lol
 04/08/2005 01:51:42 AM · #4
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Do you prefer Liszt, Chopin, or Rachmaninoff?


The above are all excellent. These great folks are like bottles of great wine. It all depends on my mood. When I am super alert I prefer Bach. When I want constrained feelings i go to Mozart. When I feel lightheaded i turn to Vivaldi. When I want studied pieces I go to Beethoven. And when I feel funky I do Pink Floyd. lol


Bach got to play a piano once in his life, I believe. It was a relatively new instrument that appeared during his lifetime. I agree with your 'alert' mood for Bach. The multi voices of the baroque music require a little attention to really hear it.

I just mentioned those three because I believe they are the 'big guns' of the piano world. It's all heavy stuff for the most part. It's demanding music to listen to.

When I'm drinking wine, I prefer the impressionism of Debussy, for what that's worth.

The only reason I asked the question is because of your statement about learning to appreciate in your original post. We can appreciate lots of different things, whether they be visual or auditory, and there are reasons we appreciate them. When we get to a point where we can describe our appreciations, our own ability to create begins to grow at a rapid pace.

Message edited by author 2005-04-08 01:52:24.
 04/08/2005 02:04:00 AM · #5
Hmm.. I like Willie's Seven Spanish Angels pretty much any mood and when I'm feeling peppy Toby Keith's Whiskey for my men and beer for my horses. When I'm feeling retrospective I like Johnny Cash's The Highwayman and I pretty much enjoy Sinead O'Conner singing Don't Cry for me Argentina anytime. If I want to fire it up I like Bonnie Tyler singing Holding Out for a Hero or Total Eclipse of the Heart. In a Gadda Davida after a drink or two...I think Bear was right...I'm a Philistine. Bach isn't all that bad though. ; )
 04/08/2005 02:08:13 AM · #6
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
When we get to a point where we can describe our appreciations, our own ability to create begins to grow at a rapid pace.


I like this statement......and, as usual, I enjoyed reading your insight Daniel.
04/08/2005 02:29:42 AM · #7
As to the art of learning, only those who accept the role of student are able to begin. While it is easily admitted in word, the ego often pilots the ship and we feel misunderstood and under appreciated, when in fact we have not accepted the discipline of patience and the college of persistance. In so many of the arts true learning winds up on the rocks of not accepting first efforts as foundational and demanding the focused effort of a true builder.Often we imagine ourselves the metorical master who will in a few razored swipes of the lens and printer change the scene of things. The true muse is the honest editor's voice whispering in our ears and if we can hear it, nurture it and sharpen it, then we can learn the mechanics and experience the power given by them when well directed.
 04/08/2005 05:34:31 AM · #8
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Bach got to play a piano once in his life, I believe. It was a relatively new instrument that appeared during his lifetime. I agree with your 'alert' mood for Bach. The multi voices of the baroque music require a little attention to really hear it.

I just mentioned those three because I believe they are the 'big guns' of the piano world. It's all heavy stuff for the most part. It's demanding music to listen to.


Liszt, Chopin and Rachmaninof are actually amongst the most lightweight of all the composers, there's really very little compositionally heavyweight about them. If you want heavy, check out late Beethoven, Brahms, Wagner, etc. Liszt, Chopin and Rachmaninof were excellent at writing very accessible, romantic music which happens to place high technical demands on the pianist, but not the listener.
Liszt was interesting for his rock n' roll lifestyle and flamboyant performances, anticipating the way modern pop/rock bands are marketed nowadays. Rachmaninof is the most compositionally interesting of the three (although many disagree), and loved to provide intricate counterpoints all through his compositions which most listeners tend not to pick up on. It's still very accessible though. Later Russian composers such as Scriabin and Prokofiev are much more heavyweight... listen to Prokofiev's war sonatas or Scriabin's last few works for example. Chopin was the most refined of the composers, structurally holding together better than the other 2.
At the moment, the repertoire I'm learning includes the Chopin 4th Ballade, Liszt B flat sonata, Chopin Etudes and Rachmaninov Etudes-Tableaux... technically very demanding but easy to listen to. In the classical music world, many of these are called 'lollypops'.
 04/08/2005 07:07:46 AM · #9
Only to add: Understand your subject.

My mother is a painter (on canvas). She can paint/draw people with amazing accuracy and skill. Course, she has many anatomy classes under her belt (she says the hardest are the feet, btw). She is now working with watercolor and trying to do flowers. She finds them amazingly difficult.
She asked me, "Why are your flowers so much better than mine?" (Mine are done with a macro lens so there is really no comparison but I got her meaning.) I asked her how much time she spent trying to understand flowers in general. Her answer was "None."

I'm not saying you have to make an in depth study of your subject, like taking anatomy class or botany class, but it really helps to understand the basics of something when you photograph it. If you know how light will reflect off something you know when and where to capture the image. You can also better show the essense of the thing itself.

I have recently turned my attention to birds and now own 3. Understanding flight, how and what they eat, and how they move has not only improved my images of them it has made it easier to anticipate where I will find them.

d
 04/08/2005 08:52:41 AM · #10
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Do you prefer Liszt, Chopin, or Rachmaninoff?


The above are all excellent. These great folks are like bottles of great wine. It all depends on my mood. When I am super alert I prefer Bach. When I want constrained feelings i go to Mozart. When I feel lightheaded i turn to Vivaldi. When I want studied pieces I go to Beethoven. And when I feel funky I do Pink Floyd. lol


Pink Floyd is AWESOME!!! :) Amazing now when I hear it on the radio....it takes me back to those 'hazy' days long ago ::innocent look:: :)
 04/08/2005 10:31:28 AM · #11
Wonderful post Daniel.

Paula
 04/08/2005 11:30:57 AM · #12
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Do you prefer Liszt, Chopin, or Rachmaninoff?


Beethoven, Rach and Thelonius Monk, actually. It's funny you popped this question. I'm indeed creatively stimulated by these and, probably, owe some of my work to the above composers.

To my ears and senses, Beet is the most emotionally charged, Rach the most rapt and Monk closest to the rythms of my time.

Message edited by author 2005-04-08 11:31:42.
 04/08/2005 02:53:17 PM · #13
Bach's cello suites have a serious emotional impact on me, and can best be described as "music from heaven's waiting room."

As a generational thing, "punk music" or in essence "rock music" strikew a similar chord. And Rock and Roll is the ego-exemplified spill over of life, Sex, love, fighting, crying, social justice, humor, rejoicing, mourning- all in one drums and guitar emotional package. Iv'e been in an indie-rock band for 15 years now, some sort of band since high school, and there is no better outlet than my telecaster through my vox amp while signing along with the band.

but to your topic. there is an old saying, best exemplified by the Red Hot Chili Peppers, "if you have to ask you'll never know."

A voice coach, music teacher, art teacher, photo teacher, etc. can teach you alot but not true talent and appreciation. And they can't teach you to feel. Its easier to learn the appreciation of something than the performance aspect- but that is difficult too.

Sure there is technique to learn, but the world is filled with "competent fakes"- as ben kingsley says in Searching for Bobby Fisher. Which also has the line from Joe Montegna to one of the boys elementary school teachers that says the chess prodigy is missing too many classes for his hobby..."he's better at chess than you are or will be at anything you do in your life..."

so ask yourself- what percentage of you is Bobby Fisher, and what percentage is competent fake?
 04/08/2005 05:06:50 PM · #14
Ah, so many wonderful replies. We can sum it up thus: appreciation is indeed the first step in learning. Many interesting points and one made by blindjustice stands out regarding that it is easier to appreciate than to perform. Yes, this is a universal truism proved by the fact that there are many more fans of any art than there are performers.
However, this does not negate the fact that if we appreciete something we will think more highly of it.

Now, about the last question, fake or real: No one can claim to know his mind and total sums of his motives. You can practice self exploration and even the Zen Masters consider total understanding futile. The more we learn, the less we know. I do not claim to know myself to an absolute degree, however, I doubt that a man of good will will expend his precious time to perpetuate a fake existence. We are what we are and we can be deep or shallow at different times and as we age our ambitions change along with our goals. We are the children of providence, we just do not know the coming winds that will change our fate. In this case it is always better to be as true to our nature because we are known to reap what we sow.

04/08/2005 05:50:05 PM · #15
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
if we appreciate something we will think more highly of it....we are known to reap what we sow.

Thank you Daniel for a beautifully stated post on the art of learning. I especially appreciate your emphasis upon admiration, a sense of wonder. "Unless you become like a little child..."
With gratitude,
David
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 01/02/2026 07:37:52 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/02/2026 07:37:52 AM EST.