Does anyone else take woeful photos? (all the time)

[fergus]

It's been great reading all the responses so far.

I am not un-happy overall with my photography as a process - I love it. It's just an honest appraisal that the actual photos themselves don't have any 'wow' impact or anything. For me the entire thing from start to finish is a brain-off type of activity, compared to my normal work especially. Very therapeutic.

Perhaps I am in that group of engineers... having a blast on the journey but producing little photorgaphy/art?

Several people here have offered advice, thank you. The main issue I face is that what I see before taking the photo is not what comes out on the film! Maybe I don't think in 2d well? Maybe I need to find a lens that is a closer match to my metal vision? Oooh, an excuse for an attack of G.A.S.!! 😀

On a side note - I agree with the 'wear a suit' philosophy.

Cheers...
Fergus.

 

[reagan]

Hot tread - interesting input. I clicked the "few" button. If I get a couple of shots a roll that I can play with a little and make something "good" [to me], that's pretty much the norm and I'm a happy snap-shooter. While I always appreciate and consider with an open mind any constructive criticism from others, the bottom line to me is, "Does reagan like it?" Nothin' else matters. And if reagan decides to throw the whole "woeful" roll away - hey, it happens. No biggie. I've got more rolls.

I like playing with my cameras: 80 yr. old junk Leicas and 50 yr. old Russian Iron and a handful of old lenses nobody else would bid on. I like taking photos, messing with them in Picasa and sharing them with folks who enjoy doing the same thing. (...which is mostly the folks here. My "real life" friends/family aren't as much fun. 😉 ) It's how I create. It's how I relax. It's how I have fun.

As long as I still enjoy getting those 1 or 2 or 3 shots out of a pile, I'll keep on "doing whatever it is that I'm doing."

 

[silvalis]

It could be that you just find the subject in the photo sort of boring, commonplace.

Or you haven't found your particular 'look' yet.

 

[Merkin]

fergus- In your case, I would actually offer advice directly contrary to the advice that many have given you. Many have said 'shoot more,' or a variation thereof. My advice for you would be to 'shoot less.' Let me explain.

Being an accountant and a writer of textbooks, you obviously (to me at least) have a very 'mathy,' technically oriented, precise, and (using the following term without any sense of derision whatsoever), a bit pedantic- one would have to be to be able to write accounting textbooks. Because of this, you should, in my opinion, play to those strengths. I would recommend picking up a 4x5 view camera, of a design that is built on a rail, with full movements. Think for a long time about your images before you trip the shutter. Be willing to wait for just the right light. Fuss over the adjustments until everything you see in the ground glass looks exactly like you want it to. Large format photography is inherently more 'mathy' than 'street shooting' with a rangefinder, and I think your brain might be wired in such a way that you would derive more pleasure from this style of shooting. Play to your strengths. Don't worry about quantity, focus first on your exact composition, don't be afraid to take your time. One image you are happy with is worth more than 1000 that you think are bad, or just 'ok.'

 

[climbing_vine]

fergus- In your case, I would actually offer advice directly contrary to the advice that many have given you. Many have said 'shoot more,' or a variation thereof. My advice for you would be to 'shoot less.' Let me explain.

Being an accountant and a writer of textbooks, you obviously (to me at least) have a very 'mathy,' technically oriented, precise, and (using the following term without any sense of derision whatsoever), a bit pedantic- one would have to be to be able to write accounting textbooks. Because of this, you should, in my opinion, play to those strengths. I would recommend picking up a 4x5 view camera, of a design that is built on a rail, with full movements. Think for a long time about your images before you trip the shutter. Be willing to wait for just the right light. Fuss over the adjustments until everything you see in the ground glass looks exactly like you want it to. Large format photography is inherently more 'mathy' than 'street shooting' with a rangefinder, and I think your brain might be wired in such a way that you would derive more pleasure from this style of shooting. Play to your strengths. Don't worry about quantity, focus first on your exact composition, don't be afraid to take your time. One image you are happy with is worth more than 1000 that you think are bad, or just 'ok.'

I think this isn't entirely without merit. On the other hand, people who successfully work this way tend to have already done their learning about composition and depth, whether in 35mm or drawing or painting. It could certainly be worth a try! But if the OP would go that route I might suggest taking it one step further, and putting photography on hold for a bit for some drawing courses.

 

[raid]

I try to get at least two good images per roll of film. Sometimes, I like most of the images in a roll. It varies from lens to lens. I keep on trying out lenses to see if the images get more interesting [to me]. Without taking risks in photography, I would have had a higher proportion of images that are acceptable to me. With family photos it can get easier to accept a high proportion of images simply because the people in the images are family members, and I may find in a roll of film each gesture/pose/smile/facial expression ... etc. of interest to me. Others may feel differently about it. My wife discrimnates carefully between what she feels is "good" and what is not.

 

[fergus]

... I might suggest taking it one step further, and putting photography on hold for a bit for some drawing courses.

Now that would be a challenge! I am hard-pressed to draw a stick-figure that looks ok.

Made me laugh though 🙂

 

[fergus]

...a bit pedantic

Pedantic? Accountants? How on earth did we get that reputation? 🙄

Actually punctilious might be more accurate!!!

I would recommend picking up a 4x5 view camera...

You know, that's a very interesting idea. I'd probably go 5x7 to get a more comfortable working size and a bigger slide.


Cheers...
Fergus.

 

[Merkin]

Keep in mind that 4x5 is already somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 times larger than 35mm, and you would have a wider choice of films. Also, most 5x7 cameras that I have seen at reasonable prices have been press cameras, not view cameras with full movements. To get the really precise results, you need a camera where you can move the lens plane and the film plane independently of each other. A 4x5 camera kit such as this can be had on craigslist pretty commonly for 4 to 6 hundred bucks. You will then just need a good tripod and a spot meter. If you are interested in going down this road, I recommend that you pick up some reading material. Pick up Ansel Adams's trilogy "The Camera," "The Negative," and "The Print," for starters. Also, if, at the institute of higher learning at which you teach, there is a Photography program, ask the photo professor to recommend you a couple of books on composition and 2d design. Heck, see if your school has a 4x5 camera that you could try out before you buy one.

 

[fergus]

Merkin, thanks for your ideas.

I've got a couple of view camera books floating around on the shelf somewhere, and have played with a 5x7 some years ago. I like size. I like the 6x6 slides from my TLR compared to those from 35mm, much easier to see on the lightbox 🙂 Actually 4 x 10 appeals too, I can see this turning into a G.A.S. attack of some sort.

I always liked the 'field' cameras eg Canham, although the investment is a lot higher. Craiglist? Must be a big thing o/s, here I haven't seen much on it. I'll have to have a look.

I did check out the photography courses here... at the uni(s) I teach at, nothing apart from some part-time lecturers in the fine arts department. At the tech' colleges, one of the teachers uses 8x10 but the classes seem to be slr-based.

I think you're onto something with the time involved per shot, the technical side of the setup, etc... I lurk a lot over at the large format forums too, it seems to be a nice way of working.

I did not start this thread looking for any 'solution', but this large format idea might start something once funds permit.

Cheers...
Fergus.

 

[reagan]

With family photos it can get easier to accept a high proportion of images simply because the people in the images are family members, and I may find in a roll of film each gesture/pose/smile/facial expression ... etc. of interest to me. Others may feel differently about it.

This is very often the biggest factor in me deciding something falls into the "good" category. I know the people or the event or experience around the photo was special for whatever reason, etc. I post some real crap here and on the blog, but they're posted because I liked the moment the photograph represents.

 

[dazedgonebye]

Been giving this some thought...
My hit rate is about like most I read here. I got 2 off a recent roll of 12 that I like...but really only 1 that I think is worth showing off. Even so, somehow I manage to like just about every shot I take.
Even when they're crap, I find them to be useful and instructive. It's actually kinda hard to imagine a frame that would cause me to say "Gee, I wish I hadn't taken that." I wish I'd done this or that better...sure, but not I wish I hadn't taken it.

In the end though, just like any other way you choose to spend your time, as long as you're getting what you need out of the process, I suppose the results really don't matter.

 

[colker]

I have been thinking about this for a while now...

My background - I teach accounting, and write accounting textbooks, I have had a successful professional career, and now at quite a young age work part-time in academia. Time is not a problem - it used to be, when I was a work-a-holic, but not anymore.

Photography is an artistic outlet, I drive my friends crazy with cameras and photos on trips and on weekends... but, almost everything I take is woeful, woeful, woeful. Truly horrible. I don't much like looking at them myself.

Yet, I really enjoy the process, the thought involved, applying what is (for me) a very different thought process and skillset.

So I find myself with a great hobby, yet there's nothing to show. I don't have anything worth uploading, and thankfully apart from various photos that document events my friends don't ask for any.

I'm curious... how many others love their photography but not the results they get?

Cheers to all...
Fergus

i teach photography at the university.. so i will give you my 2 c: i suggest you look at lots and lots of photographs. start w/ masters of photography.com and chose which photographer you like.... next you chose some of his pics and make the exercise of remaking those images. that's how advertizing photograohy works all the time: remaking images. a pre established plan.
you will grow tremendously out of this project: you will learn how creativity is about a dialogue w/ important artistic references. good luck.

 

[reagan]

I see a lot of puzzling avatars featuring cameras next to bottles of beer or cups of coffee. Maybe if people weren't practicing "drunk photography" or "buzzed photography", or "kawaii camera pictures next to intoxicants" they would have better pictures. What's the idea of cameras with coffee or beer photos?

Sorry you don't get that, Ahmed. I guess you just had to be there. 😱

 

[Kozhe]

I think my "that one was ok" ratio is around 1/15 and my "hey, now that´s one I like!" is...

...

1 to 100 ??

And most probably others will think even these ones suck so who cares. Having fun so far 🙂

 

[Thardy]

I'm off to take some woeful photos before the day gets away.

 

[reagan]

I'm off to take some woeful photos before the day gets away.

... and it's a perfect day here to do just that. Hey! Wait a minute. Maybe ol' Fergo has stumbled onto our next contest. "Woeful Photo of the Month." There would have to be boundries/rules. The photograph has to have a recognizable subject, i.e. it can't just be a frame filled to the edges with blackness. (So there goes most of my shots 😱 ) As a reward, the winner gets to give all his cameras and gear away to the losers and free himself forever from this burdensome quest of becoming A Photographer. :angel:

 

[Al Kaplan]

I feel liberated! I knocked my M3 against my elbow too hard. The bruised elbow will heal but it broke the flanges clean off the plastic foot on my 21mm VC viewfinder. I have 6 or 7 frames of Tri-X still in the camera. I'm not going to worry about the lack of a finder! I'm just going to go and shoot great pictures, one frame of each situation, until the lever stops winding.

 

[Yoricko]

I like all my photos, even those ugly, blur, badly exposed ones.

 

[Ahmed Poltroon]

What about cameras next to panes of blotter acid or bloody noses dribbling coke? Or cameras next to automatic weapons?

I'm just confused about what the precise symbolism pertaining to the state of mind a cup of coffee or a bottle of beer next to an old rangefinder camera (with $400 leather strap and designer vulcanite attached) is supposed to convey?

I suppose this is supposed to telegraph some sort of male menopausal satisfaction about totems invoking some sort of representation of the "fulfilled philosophical life", in which photography and coffee somehow portrays an electronic tableaux vivant? The illustrated mindset of the "creative" bourgeoisie?

Sorry you don't get that, Ahmed. I guess you just had to be there. 😱