"Threshold concepts"- In photography?

[Film dino]

I'm interested in whether, in "learning photography" we can identify concepts / topics which fit the criteria of being "threshold concepts, topics or skills"

The notion of threshold concepts comes from higher education & fulfil some or most of these criteria-
(a) Once understood, a threshold concept changes the way in which the individual views something,

(b) "troublesome"- the learner is likely to find a threshold concept difficult becuase it's (for example) counter to commonsense- like "price" in economics - bearing little realtionship to cost of production (except for Leicas?)

(c) irreversible - like basic arithmetic- difficult, if not impossible to unlearn. Includes skills- e.g. riding a bicycle; reading

(d) Integrative- Once learned, the concept is likely to bring together different aspects of the subject that previously did not appear to be related.

Thanks for reading this far!
I'm interested because this is the area of my PhD work (in healthcare education)

So, are there concepts in photography which, once grasped, forever change the way you look at photography?

David

 

[ferider]

Great question.

Several ideas:

(a) 3D to 2D mapping
(b) Looking at a scene in B+W
(c) Selective focus
(d) classic composition techniques, including use of color

Roland.

 

[Charlie Lemay]

Authentic seeing - seeing what's actually there instead of what we expect to see. Seeing light rather than things, seeing how light and shadow, positive and negative space, what's in and out of focus and the gesture of dynamic lines all interact to create design within the frame. It is not achieved by learning anything new, but by shedding preconceptions. Once you shed all the filters you have been given by society you don't discover TRUTH, but rather your own truth, your unique personal vision.

 

[charjohncarter]

Great question.

Several ideas:

(a) 3D to 2D mapping
(b) Looking at a scene in B+W
(c) Selective focus
(d) classic composition techniques, including use of color

Roland.

Under (a) and (b), learning how tones will be placed in an image. A blue and green object may be separated/distinguished greatly in color, but have very little separation in B&W.

 

[antiquark]

Rule of thirds. It's more of an intermediate concept though. Once you've mastered it, you're likely to ignore it.

 

[Nikkor AIS]

The decisive moment is the one thing that comes to mind.



"Learn the rules and then break them all"


Gregory

 

[Finder]

Yes, there are, but "photography" is a broad field and it would be difficult to list them all. A common one would be the difference between exposure and contrast in printing. The relationship between primary and secondary colors is another. Resolution vs. resolving power, depth of field / depth of focus, aperture and numerical aperture. orders of diffraction and numerical aperture.

 

[lawrence]

For me, the most important was the relationship between (1) exposure and shadow detail and (2) development and contrast. In monochrome photography understanding these is crucial to consistently good results.

 

[Sparrow]

Not believing everything one reads on the interweb, was one such for me

 

[Doug]

Yes, I can recall one early revelation in learning photography: Concept of exposure reciprocity; the reciprocal relationship between lens opening and shutter speed.

 

[gho]

For me some important basic concepts I had to learn and am still learing are:

1.) Relationship between light, shutter speed, aperture, depth of field and film speed.

2.) Basic rules of composition. With some practice the image in the viewfinder may just 'snap in'. Hard to describe.

Having managed 1. and 2. I guess one is pretty much set with the basic techical stuff and has room for thinking about what one wants to achieve with ones photographs and where to go from here. There are plenty of ways.

3.) Getting the technical side out of the way as much as possible.
Personally I try to get the technical side out of the way between me and the picture as much as possible, but ignoring the technical side is not the way to go either, as I like to have more or less predictable results in the final image. Using a simple, manual rangefinder camera is really helpful in this respect, as I do not have to think too much about a ton of parameters, just shutter speed, apperture, and focus. With some techniques, such as prefocussing, it is possible to simplify this parameter range even further, getting your head free for what is going on around you while still being in control of the image.

4.) Using a meterless camera. This is really a hard one and needs some confidence, but after some month I can say, it works. Sure, I have a handheld lightmeter for sanity checks, but it is not necessary to meter each end every frame, at least if one is using black and white film. A quick check of the light in a given situation is enough and one is good to go for some time. Having a firm grip of point 1.) helps to adjust manually for changing light situations. For me this is clearly a threshold concept and the analogy of learning to ride a bike or learning to swim fits very well.

5.) Getting close. This is a point I am currently working on in different respects.

 

[Roger Hicks]

For years I stuck too slavishly to the manufacturers' recommendations on exposure and development -- not least because the gurus' recommendations were clearly even less use, on most occasions.

I also believed too much that a picture has to 'mean' something and that almost all picture elements had to be either inside the frame or out of it, not chopped up by the frame.

It can be hard to accept that your photography changes. You may want to take (and be more successful at taking) different kinds of pictures at 20, 40 and 60.

Finally, it's useful to be able to ignore others' hurtful comments.

Cheers,

R.

 

[shimokita]

Interesting thread, thank you...

I was thinking of multiple images in a series and the processing behind putting together an interesting series of images that is somehow also more than the individual shots.

This might also relate to a body of work or a period of work and the growth that comes out of that cycle of doing and reveiwing. I find that by reviewing a specific series, the quality of individual image making might improve.

Casey

 

[bgb]

The decisive moment ... in life, love and photography.

 

[Particular]

Visualization (and by extension the decisive moment), i.e. seeing an image as it will/could be once printed (2d). This is the most fundamental skill to learn, but also a hard one to master. It is a skill that takes practice. It is learning a new way of seeing, and is hard to unlearn. It is also a skill that is transferable to other forms of image making, and even to other forms of abstract thought.

 

[Film dino]

(Pre) Visualization

(Pre) Visualization

Visualization (and by extension the decisive moment), i.e. seeing an image as it will/could be once printed (2d). This is the most fundamental skill to learn, but also a hard one to master. It is a skill that takes practice. It is learning a new way of seeing, and is hard to unlearn. It is also a skill that is transferable to other forms of image making, and even to other forms of abstract thought.

Thanks for all the interesting responses.
I find visualisation the most difficult; I can't claim to have really grasped it.

A fundamental question is - if threshold skills are that important, why we don't structure courses around them (instead of stuffing courses with other less important material) & whether teaching effort is appropriately proportioned to make sure students "get it"

David

 

[Roger Hicks]

Thanks for all the interesting responses.
I find visualisation the most difficult; I can't claim to have really grasped it.

A fundamental question is - if threshold skills are that important, why we don't structure courses around them (instead of stuffing courses with other less important material) & whether teaching effort is appropriately proportioned to make sure students "get it"

David

Dear David,

For visualization, imagine you have taken the picture and printed it, and are holding the print in your hand. Why doesn't it look like what you saw? How can you change that?

As for courses, the answer is easy. Most 'higher education' is a means of disguising youth unemployment. The vast majority of photography 'graduates' won't have a hope in hell of working in photography, except perhaps behind the counter at Jessops. At best, for most people, university/art school/whatever is a way of keeping the wolf from the door for a few years while you grow up. The ones who 'get it' will 'get it' anyway, and the rest won't.

It therefore doesn't matter much what you teach. That's why my brother (sometime merchant banker, CFO and company director) has a degree in botany, I have a law degree and my wife has two degrees in theatre and theatre management.

Cheers,

R.

 

[le vrai rdu]

Thanks for all the interesting responses.
I find visualisation the most difficult; I can't claim to have really grasped it.

A fundamental question is - if threshold skills are that important, why we don't structure courses around them (instead of stuffing courses with other less important material) & whether teaching effort is appropriately proportioned to make sure students "get it"

David

because you can't teach every thing, it is a personal threshold, therefore you can read as much as you want, go to many classes, that won't help you that much, and nobody can teach you wich way to go, you just need to find your way

 

[Film dino]

....The ones who 'get it' will 'get it' anyway, and the rest won't.

It therefore doesn't matter much what you teach....

Cheers,

R.

Roger, I like this. I would say "only teach what you know is important" & in the final analysis it's what people learn for themselves, often by themselves that matters. My experience is that those who will "get it" would do so anyway, despite the teaching or the teacher 😛.

David

 

[Arjay]

Visualization (and by extension the decisive moment), i.e. seeing an image as it will/could be once printed (2d). This is the most fundamental skill to learn, but also a hard one to master. It is a skill that takes practice. It is learning a new way of seeing, and is hard to unlearn. It is also a skill that is transferable to other forms of image making, and even to other forms of abstract thought.

I second this. This is about understanding the difference between how we perceive a scene as it enters into our perception and memory in contrast with the way it appears as a technically reproduced image.

Our brain has learnt to subconsciously strip any image we see of the elements it considers irrelevant, only retaining the important elements. As a photographer, we have to consciously learn to see all those things that are normally discarded in the process of perception and intentionally keep or exclude them from a picture:

Stuff in the background, lines that cross a person's head in the background, irrelevant things in the neighborhood of our main image object(s), graphical elements that lose their separation during the reduction of a three-dimensional image to 2D (requiring an appraisal of luminance or color for compensation) etc. All of these elements have to be seen before or during framing so that they can be taken into account or excluded in order to create images that "pop".

Likewise, the photographer has to identify spatial or contextual relations of image elements that constitute an image's salient points and arrange them such that they produce a clear and understandable message in the two-dimensional domain of a photograph.

To me, these perception aspects are much more important than any technical issues that constitute the craft of photography (such as exposure DoF, shutter speed etc.). The craft aspects can be learnt, the percepction aspects need to be experienced, and once mastered, will fundamentally change one's photography.