Black
Photographer.
Yes, yes. We all lead very busy lives, due to one thing or another. Jobs we throw our all into, family life we have to juggle, the mundane chores we have to endure. Yet, I look at a lot of post counts and can only compare them with available images to view and there seems to be something wrong with the equation. And again, I'll reiterate, its something I am equally as guilty of.
If you're taking lots of images and not publishing them then thats fine. Excellent, even. But the spectre of protesting too much is always in the back of my mind - but that shouldn't bother anyone here. Its down to each individual to decide whether they spend too much time talking about a subject rather than doing it. No exceptions, yet not directed at anyone in particular.
And for those who think they are above this and feel the need to "defend" their internet persona, I would suggest they need to stop believing their own hype and just get on with shooting. Let our images speak for themselves, rather than languishing over a keyboard too much.
Just my grain of sand in the wind. Let none of us get our sense of our own self importance out of perspective here.
And again, I am fully aware of the air of irony wafting over this post
Awaits the predictably predictable...
Robert Lai
Well-known
Some of us, like myself have as our subjects our family. I'm a dad who takes pictures of my children, age 1 and 4. I have no desire to paste their photographs on the internet.
I do try to get better pictures of them as I go along, though. I've come to learn that lighting is more important to the final picture quality than the camera itself. I shoot either during the dawn and dusk daylight hours, or I use a fill flash for the remaining hours. For this, the M7 with the ability to use high speed synch flash (with certain Metz flashes, such as the MZ 54 3,4i has been quite useful. This gets the highlight to shadow ratio down to a level that will fit into the tonal scale of my beloved slide films.
I've been learning a lot about portrait lighting by reading the books of William Mortensen. Yes, the man that Ansel Adams reviled and denounced as the "Devil" and "The Antichrist". He was a very successful portrait photographer in Hollywood during the first half of the 20th Century. His several books together form an integrated system of photography - lighting, exposure, posing the model, developing the negative, alterations during projection printing, and alterations of the final print. The man's recommendations are straightforward and practical. I really don't see why Adams hated the man so much - enough to persecute the man into oblivion. When Mortensen died, he felt he was such a failure in life that he burned his negatives and prints. Adams and the Newhalls had done such a good job of destroying him and his reputation. At any rate, from what I can see of his work, he was a very gifted portrait photographer. He certainly had theatricality, which is to be expected from Hollywood.
I do try to get better pictures of them as I go along, though. I've come to learn that lighting is more important to the final picture quality than the camera itself. I shoot either during the dawn and dusk daylight hours, or I use a fill flash for the remaining hours. For this, the M7 with the ability to use high speed synch flash (with certain Metz flashes, such as the MZ 54 3,4i has been quite useful. This gets the highlight to shadow ratio down to a level that will fit into the tonal scale of my beloved slide films.
I've been learning a lot about portrait lighting by reading the books of William Mortensen. Yes, the man that Ansel Adams reviled and denounced as the "Devil" and "The Antichrist". He was a very successful portrait photographer in Hollywood during the first half of the 20th Century. His several books together form an integrated system of photography - lighting, exposure, posing the model, developing the negative, alterations during projection printing, and alterations of the final print. The man's recommendations are straightforward and practical. I really don't see why Adams hated the man so much - enough to persecute the man into oblivion. When Mortensen died, he felt he was such a failure in life that he burned his negatives and prints. Adams and the Newhalls had done such a good job of destroying him and his reputation. At any rate, from what I can see of his work, he was a very gifted portrait photographer. He certainly had theatricality, which is to be expected from Hollywood.
Black
Photographer.
Just addressing the elephant in the room...
Just addressing the elephant in the room...
I can completely understand that, Robert. The thing is, simple statistics would equate evidence for what you have said. You've been a member since 2007 and only posted 400+ posts. So, you're probably like me and dip in and out of forums as it suits. You don't live there.
I think there is a necessity for a presence on the internet, if you (or me or anyone) wants to take their hobby quite seriously. Its an amazing resource. But being a presence on one or two particular forums will, for me in any case, always beg obvious questions.
For the record, its not up to me or anyone else to dictate who spends what amount of time where. But, I'm just putting it out there - if your post count is in the thousands on a photography forum and you're making it public about you do in your spare time and your commitments therein, it will logically only draw questions from others, using their life with similarly weighty commitments, as to how much water your* lamenting will hold.
*thats a metaphorical/generic "your", btw
Just addressing the elephant in the room...
I can completely understand that, Robert. The thing is, simple statistics would equate evidence for what you have said. You've been a member since 2007 and only posted 400+ posts. So, you're probably like me and dip in and out of forums as it suits. You don't live there.
I think there is a necessity for a presence on the internet, if you (or me or anyone) wants to take their hobby quite seriously. Its an amazing resource. But being a presence on one or two particular forums will, for me in any case, always beg obvious questions.
For the record, its not up to me or anyone else to dictate who spends what amount of time where. But, I'm just putting it out there - if your post count is in the thousands on a photography forum and you're making it public about you do in your spare time and your commitments therein, it will logically only draw questions from others, using their life with similarly weighty commitments, as to how much water your* lamenting will hold.
*thats a metaphorical/generic "your", btw
Last edited:
swoop
Well-known
My work like the past three months has been absolutely awful. I can't seem to get a decent shot to save my life.
The thing is that we have a huge range of experience here from beginners to pros. We have people that have been making images for 2 months and others that have been doing it 50 years. While some may feel the need to do something with their work, others don't even care if they make photos often at all. Many of the Pros here will not post their photos because it could be money out of their pocket. Others don't post because they are working on long term projects that aren't ready (I'm in this category). Others simply might not feel the need to validate anything.
The thing with this site is that some people love photography (more than cameras), some people love cameras (more than photography), and some people love both. We allow all of the aforementioned to enjoy themselves here without feeling the need to prove anything.
Nobody is photographing 24/7...nobody. Some don't have a wife or kids. Some have boring day jobs. Some have huge amounts of expendable cash. That leaves time for the internet and for playing with cameras.
I have to ask. What exactly is wrong with someone owning a camera and sucking at photography...BUT still enjoying themselves? Is the only reason to partake in any activity to be the best and if you aren't you shouldn't bother?
BLKRCAT
75% Film
Almost every photo I see online makes me re evaluate my "work".
Life is a learning experience. Photography to me is just another extension of that. I should always be trying to learn by seeing then doing.
Life is a learning experience. Photography to me is just another extension of that. I should always be trying to learn by seeing then doing.
Sparrow
Veteran
When people offer opinions on techniques or aesthetics I generally weigh those opinions against their published images ... it seems pretty reasonable to do that to me
Yes, me too. It much easier to take criticism from someone who you know is clearly seeing photographically with results to match.
daveleo
what?
Let me disagree a bit with you two guys (sparrow and jsrockit).
Lots of people know much more about let's call it Art and beauty and the connections between images and emotions or intellect. So, just because a person cannot paint the Mona Lisa, doesn't mean you should disregard what they have to say about art . . . similarly regarding photographs.
For example, I consider myself a better viewer / critic ( ) than I am an image-maker. In fact I can't crunch out images because I am too critical !
Lots of people know much more about let's call it Art and beauty and the connections between images and emotions or intellect. So, just because a person cannot paint the Mona Lisa, doesn't mean you should disregard what they have to say about art . . . similarly regarding photographs.
For example, I consider myself a better viewer / critic (
) than I am an image-maker. In fact I can't crunch out images because I am too critical !
True. I guess I was referring to the inexperienced photographer giving critiques (anyone who has taken a class has dealt with it). Good counterpoint and reminder to keep an open mind.
grapejohnson
Well-known
looking at diane arbus' work always reminds me that the most important thing is the subject, and that other things like composition, depth of field, whatever, they're all secondary if you have a really great shot of someone or something really captivating.
Well, the content and the framing (composition) are equally important. Bad framing of a great subject still doesn't work.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
As for myself - one photograph informs another. Which informs another. Then another. And so on.
Inspiration can come from anywhere. As long as you're doing the work, that is all that matters.
Inspiration can come from anywhere. As long as you're doing the work, that is all that matters.
daveleo
what?
As soon as I typed that up, I decided that I overstated a bit, but I think we got to the equilibrium point I was aiming at.
Black
Photographer.
^ Nothing. Never said anything like you're suggesting in the last line of that post
Also never said that people should/could photograph 24/7 - in fact, I categorically stated that most people have similar commitments like jobs, kids, etc.
Fair enough. If people enjoy posting more and talking more about photography than actually doing it, then whatever floats their boat. Either way, it has no effect on myself. Equally, people don't need to justify anything because of what some stranger says over the internet. But, as you have quite rightly said, lots of people come here to post, with lots of differing personalities and views, and this was mine. The topic was open and I offered my grain of sand into the wind.
Black
Photographer.
For example, I consider myself a better viewer / critic (
Yes. You don't need to be a chef to be a food critic. To distinguish that food tastes nice, you don't have to be able to make that food.
^ Nothing. Never said anything like you're suggesting in the last line of that post
I didn't say that you did. I was just wondering.
However, you did wonder why some people post so much.
The topic was open and I offered my grain of sand into the wind.
Yep, and I'm only giving mine.
one90guy
Well-known
I enjoy reading posts and have found inspiration and improved my photography, IMHO, I rarely post photos. My computer skills limit my photo posting abilities.
David
David
Sejanus.Aelianus
Veteran
I wish more people would understand that.
Sparrow
Veteran
... I think I would trust a chefs' opinion more than a food critic any day, or a dancers or a painters or ... whoever really