getting better?

back alley

back alley

IMAGES
Local time
9:32 PM
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
41,289
who thinks they are getting better as photographers?

who has improved, say over the past year?


to what do you attribute this gain in talent?

and if you feel that you have not improved...do you know why not?

i ask this seriously...
 
My hand immediately goes up! Just looked over some images in the old archives and was immediately struck by the differences in my work over the last 1-2 years. Not surprising since I am shooting full-time now and getting more at ease with my present gear doing documentaries.;)

Shooting, shooting and more shooting with a specific goal in mind has been my biggest help.:)
 
I guess I feel that I've become better but I still feel that I haven't taken a single good, or even decent, photograph.
 
I believe I have improved as a photographer in the past year. I believe it has been due in some part to my participation in this forum. There is a tremendous amout of knowledge here. I believe it is also due to simply being more active as a photographer. I have just been much more critical of my own work. When I cull through images and narrow down to a few I like, I have tried to consider what it is I really am attracted to about the images; also what weakens the images. I then try to make use of that knowledge in the future.

It's really an interesting question because no one else may agree that improvement has been made but I am more content that I am improving. As far as lack of improvement - if I am really honest it is due to fear or laziness. I am either reluctant to try something or shrug an idea off as too much trouble. Both reasons are foolish but it is what it is.
 
Over the last few years I've done a lot of testing of films, cameras and lenses and flashes. My pictures have improved technically as a result, but now I need to settle in and shoot in order to get back my "content" groove.
 
I think I am getting better, mainly because I shoot pretty frequently, and because I look critically at my photos - I am especially sensitive to those instances (many!) where I screwed up and ruined a good image.

My two biggest flaws - 1) not getting close enough (I guess that's a classic!) ; 2) screwing up framing, focus or exposure when trying to rush get a candid shot, and where I am afraid the subject will move and/or notice me.

I still screw up a lot, but I feel I have a better percentage of keepers on each roll.

Randy
 
Yes, my photography has improved during the last few years... Before my career, all or most technical details from film to composition to gear to printing were already resolved, and during my career, the most important field to improve (very hard!) was visual narrative...


So a few years ago (after working in photography and having shot for 25 years) I thought I had little to learn from a technical point of view... I was wrong, and the last years of learning did start for me as an accident... I was travelling, starting to like street photography more than any other kind of photography, and I just had two cameras with me: the digital one, a Pro DSLR, suddenly just wouldn't turn on and I never knew why (later, after a month, it did turn on again and it's been perfect since...) so all I had with me was my Nikon FE2 with 20, 50 and 105... My small square bag for that system -a few days after that- fell down and rolled down maybe 50 stairs: my camera's needle (meter) doesn't move since... So, I didn't want to buy a cheap digital (I wanted film images from the trip) and I took my DSLR to be serviced and just kept the FE2, but soon I couldn't know its metering in any way, though after some testing I discovered it was metering perfectly so I could use AE...


That accident was the beginning of the most exciting years to me as a photographer: these last 5 years... When I found myself without my DSLR, without handheld meter, and with a camera I thought wasn't metering as it didn't show me its metering, I discovered I had been a photographer for 25 years and I had been a pro photographer for a few years, but I didn't know how to handle light without metering it! I was shocked! I just never really NEEDED that before!


Then I had to learn to expose without metering... I had to start all that quickly (test and develop at least to see contrast on negatives) to be able to shoot again as soon as possible... I started first with direct sun, and then with shadows on sunny days, and then with overcast and indoors (not easy) trying to be able to shoot without metering... Those days taught me the huge difference in tonal range (and acceptable exposure error margin) depending on development time/film contrast... I hadn't felt that alive as a photographer for years...


Soon I got back my DSLR, but photography to me was a new thing: it was about knowing the light, instead of metering it... The process of learning continues, of course... Then, for the last two years of RF use, all my efforts could be entitled “how to be able to create the image I want instead of the image the light/film ISO recommends”... I got tired, after many years of doing it, about not being able to use the aperture I want, just because “there's too much light” and things like that: filters help but are not enough sometimes...


So my last years I've been using different films on different bodies AND knowing the light surrounding me, to be prepared to act quickly on both sides of the street: sun and shades... AND to be able to shoot an image with great DOF AND with selective focus depending on what I prefer... It implies organization and at least three bodies with fast and slow film, but the price is visual freedom, and I feel a lot better this way and it's a lot more fun to me...


It's an inmense pleasure knowing I can shoot at 1.4 or 8 on overcast or sun quickly. I find it priceless from a visual narrative point of view: sometimes selective focus can be more important than composition, as it's one more way of communicating what's relevant in a scene, and composition alone can't -sometimes- isolate subjects as much as selective focus can... The same for comparing, contrasting two different situations or subjects: when focal length and point of view can't do it as much as we'd want, those are nicely related with different amounts of focus...


So my photography has improved a lot since I have the technical ability to quickly decide aperture no matter the light.


Cheers,


Juan
 
Last edited:
In the past two years I have learned to process my own film (b&w, c41, and E6). My scanning has improved.

I've purchased and learned to operate TLR and Rangefinder cameras, adding to my existing knowledge of SLR and DSLR cameras.

My knowledge and skills with using a light meter have definitely improved.

I have a much better understanding of composition and lighting.

Interestingly enough, I do not think I have taken as many really good pictures over the past couple years. I'll attribute that to being in a learning mode with a bunch of unfamiliar gear, rather than in a full out "picture taking for keeps" mode. I'll shift gears here, any day now, and go for more keepers. :)
 
back alley said:
........................... to what do you attribute this gain in talent? .................................
Click to expand...

Yes, I believe I have improved substantially. I am now putting together an exhibit "Cuba y Sud Apopka - dos culturas similares" (Cuba and South Apopka - two similar cultures) for an exhibit in Havana. I did most of the South Apopka work from 2005 - 2009 and the Cuba work in the last two years. (both are ongoing). There is little question that the more recent work is better.

I believe I understand why my work has improved. It is from continuing very critical editing. I am convinced that critical editing, not shooting, is the key to advancing. I have also changed my perspective. A roll with 36 very good photos is a failure. A roll with 35 images that stink and one with potential to knock your socks off is a success.

Example: two years ago, I went to Cuba and shot 25 rolls. Along the way, I determined the story I wanted to tell and shot accordingly. When I returned, I edited down to 30 photos from those 25 rolls to tell the story.

Two months later, I returned to Cuba for the express purpose of improving my telling of the story. I shot another 25 rolls specifically for this purpose. When I returned home, I re-edited and selected 30 photos from the now 50 rolls total.

I have repeated this process six times returning to Cuba. Each time, where I go and what I photograph is for the specific purpose of improving the quality of 30 photos total to tell that story. Except now it is 30 photos out of some 160 rolls. Every time I raise the camera, I subliminally ask myself if this photo will be so good that I will be willing to delete one of those 30 best in order to include it.

I am also currently working on a series at home about religion in South Apopka. This morning (Sunday) I asked myself what church I should attend to photograph and what lens choice I should make to increase the odds of improving the story I am telling about the subject. Every week I shoot and then re-edit the entire body of work. Every week it gets a little better.

So I think I have been able to improve by constantly and critically evaluating my work to focus only on shooting the very best photos to tell the story I want to tell. That also means I have learned accept there is no difference between merely very good, good, mediocre, or bad photos. They all fall into the same category of "nice try" or "learning experience".
 
Yes - but I am in the camp that could really only improve. It is difficult to look through a lot of my work from last year very closely!
 
yes.
doing my own souping and scanning helped me become a better editor.
being a better makes me a better photographer.
inspiration provided by some people here is even more important.
 
Last edited:
Bob Michaels said:
Yes, I believe I have improved substantially. I am now putting together an exhibit "Cuba y Sud Apopka - dos culturas similares" (Cuba and South Apopka - two similar cultures) for an exhibit in Havana. I did most of the South Apopka work from 2005 - 2009 and the Cuba work in the last two years. (both are ongoing). There is little question that the more recent work is better.

I believe I understand why my work has improved. It is from continuing very critical editing. I am convinced that critical editing, not shooting, is the key to advancing. I have also changed my perspective. A roll with 36 very good photos is a failure. A roll with 35 images that stink and one with potential to knock your socks off is a success.

Example: two years ago, I went to Cuba and shot 25 rolls. Along the way, I determined the story I wanted to tell and shot accordingly. When I returned, I edited down to 30 photos from those 25 rolls to tell the story.

Two months later, I returned to Cuba for the express purpose of improving my telling of the story. I shot another 25 rolls specifically for this purpose. When I returned home, I re-edited and selected 30 photos from the now 50 rolls total.

I have repeated this process six times returning to Cuba. Each time, where I go and what I photograph is for the specific purpose of improving the quality of 30 photos total to tell that story. Except now it is 30 photos out of some 160 rolls. Every time I raise the camera, I subliminally ask myself if this photo will be so good that I will be willing to delete one of those 30 best in order to include it.

I am also currently working on a series at home about religion in South Apopka. This morning (Sunday) I asked myself what church I should attend to photograph and what lens choice I should make to increase the odds of improving the story I am telling about the subject. Every week I shoot and then re-edit the entire body of work. Every week it gets a little better.

So I think I have been able to improve by constantly and critically evaluating my work to focus only on shooting the very best photos to tell the story I want to tell. That also means I have learned accept there is no difference between merely very good, good, mediocre, or bad photos. They all fall into the same category of "nice try" or "learning experience".
Click to expand...

i have long known that editing is key to improving...never let them see you sweat...

for me, it's the act of shooting, the visualization of the initial image that i work on. even with shooting digital now, i still do not take many photos during an outing.
i do not make images that i like...they mostly fall under the heading 'pretty pictures' which i hate. others take photos that i like much better...more gritty with tons of texture to them.
 
Yeah IMO I'm getting better. I'm changing from the usual 'flickr' type photos to things I actually find interesting.
I comes from practice but also largely due to inspiration.
 
back alley said:
........................ i do not make images that i like...they mostly fall under the heading 'pretty pictures' which i hate. others take photos that i like much better...more gritty with tons of texture to them.
Click to expand...

Joe: could it possibly be that you are subconsciously only doing the comfortable photos because you don't want many losers? I think you have to act like you are in a home run contest. You have to think that a base hit, a double or even a triple is the same as a strike out, only home runs count. And no one is tracking your batting average. No one cares how many bad photos you made, even the good ones. Only the ones with potential to be great count.

Take chances. Convince yourself there is nothing wrong with shooting all day and editing everything out. No one cares about your 3th best photo of the day or your 50th best of the year, you shouldn't either. Be thrilled with the day where you busted your *ss all day and got one photo you really like.
 
Knowing and working with a few good critics and setting targets along the way helps to move ahead incrementally. Looking into the void and not blinking can lead to a quantum jump.

Casey
 
I've thought about this quite a lot, and honestly I think I've been getting worse - or at least standing still - since about the time I discovered RFF (there may or may not be a direct link :(). I first got seriously into photography in about 2004, and had a very intense couple of years shooting with a Nikon D70 with standard zoom and a 6mp Fuji digicam, and I think I got quite good quite quickly and developed quite a distinctive personal style.

Then I moved out of London, which as a place to shoot was a big inspiration to me, had some more kids and was under a lot of pressure with work, and (in hindsight) I got completely sidetracked screwing around with film, developing, and buying and selling cameras, a lot of that fuelled by RFF, and a lot of it really displacement activity because when you're busy with work and family it's easier to go onto Ebay and buy another camera than it is to actually carve out some time to go and take pictures. I also spent a lot of time looking at other peoples' photography online, which was useful in some ways but also I think diluted my personal style.

I realised the other day that I've spent a huge chunk of my "photography time" over the last 4 or 5 years mucking about with film cameras and rangefinders, but if I actually analyse where most of my best shots have come from the vast majority of them are from digital cameras, and most of those from SLRs.

So what all the evidence suggests would make the most positive impact on my photography is to sell a bunch of cameras, finally give up on film (and probably rangefinders) once and for all, stick to one DSLR and maybe an X100/Panasonic G3, and find myself some proper projects to shoot.

And if I could just find a couple of extra days in the week so I could carve out some real time that wasn't either work or family time that would be good too :bang:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom