How do you know you’ve “got it”?

[akptc]

The shot, that is. This is probably a silly question but I am dying to find out – how do you know, once you’ve pressed the shutter (or before), that you’ve got (will get) a properly exposed / composed shot? I am referring mainly to film photography.

Personally, unless I am using my G2 whose exposure smarts I’ve learned to trust 99% of the time, I tend to want to bracket the pants out of a shot, just to make sure I have at least one properly exposed frame. The composition is another story entirely; since I am still learning, I tend to be rather forgiving of my mistakes  But, at the same time, there is nothing more frustrating to me than to see a bunch of well exposed frames with crappy composition.

So I guess what I am asking, at which point in your photographic life have you gotten to a point where one shot was all it took to get what you wanted/expected? I realize that such abilities come from experience, but if you could dissect and describe the process you go through when taking the picture, what would be the key “milestones” marking the path to a satisfactory image at the end?

I hope this question makes sense and would love to hear your thoughts.

 

[Crasis]

I don't know that I could say so, and for my age, I'm not sure you'd listen to me since I lack many many years of experience. I started off, though, with a very strict criteria of what I shoot. From the very first roll of film, I've always brought the camera up and not taken shots that were subpar. What's subpar? I guess I have a good intuition on how a final print would look from the scene I see.

Also, I purposely restrict myself to a single shot per scene, unbracketed. If I took the shot and think I could have gotten something better, I resist the urge to take another shot. I consider it a self failure for screwing up the first and only one. I am of the mind that challenging yourself in such a way will lead to greater improvement than constantly bracketing shots, because sometimes that shot that would have made your day was only around for the briefest of moments. Those shots, you can't bracket unfortunately, so bracketing would be a crutch for me.

Anyways, usually, I know I've gotten something spectacular when a big grin shows up on my face after I release the shutter. As I've said, I'm inexperienced so you can possibly just ignore me. 🙂

 

[JoeFriday]

usually I get the shot after I've got it.. and I can tell I've got it when it hurts to pee 😀

 

[akptc]

Brett, judging by your gallery, you must be in a lot of pain all the time... 🙂) Ah, the price of true art!

 

[kaiyen]

John Shaw talks about shooing like a large format photographer even with 35mm. With LF, you spend like 45 minutes setting up the shot, checking composition & focus, looking at all edges, making moves, metering, remetering if the light has changed, etc. Then you take one shot. You could bracket, but I go out in the field with only 12 sheets of film. that's _12_ shots.

I think this is good advice. But it can be distilled, at least initially, with some basic tips:

-what is your point of interest? Is it exposed properly so that it won't be overpowered by other objects? Did you use the right focal length to produce the right perspective for it?

-Check your edges. Make sure nothing is creeping in that will be distracting

-Consider classic composition techniques - rule of thirds, etc - then consider breaking them. Try both.

Those are good starting points, at least for me. I do all of those very quickly and it helps a lot. I still take multiple shots of a single scene though - which insn't bracketing, since I don't change exposure between them.

allan

 

[JoeFriday]

Brett, judging by your gallery, you must be in a lot of pain all the time... 🙂) Ah, the price of true art!

I'm gonna take that as a compliment, Andy 🙂

and if I can be serious for a moment.. something we're all probably wondering.. I'm not sure I ever know if I got the shot I was hoping for.. I'm better at judging with certain camera/lens combinations.. it's a matter of knowing intimately what your setup will do in various circumstances

I almost always know what I'll get out of my Contax T, and can use it very casually with great results.. often, scale focusing and taking wild hip shots that more often than not are what I was envisioning

on the other hand, I doubt I could create a decent hip shot with my M3, regardless of what lens is on it.. the camera itself works magnificently, but I have to see the framelines in order to see the shot itself

essentially, it's all a zen thing.. drink herbal tea and talk with a foreign accent (preferably something from the far east.. or scandinavia) and you're guaranteed to be a better photographer

 

[Crasis]

I guess it all depends on what you want to shoot. Landscape? Stills? Portraits? Bracket the **** out of your shots, exposure-wise and composition-wise. Why not? It's not like the scene only lasts a few seconds. You've got time to prepare, etc. It seems that's what you want to shoot or like to look at.

Sometimes, you people confuse me greatly.

 

[kaiyen]

Crasis,
It's a legit question. Someone is seeking feedback from others about how they approach an issue. If that's not the point of these forums - sharing knowledge/approach/techniques/etc - then I don't know what is.

allan

 

[ray_g]

Wasn't it Doisneau that said something like, "If I knew how to make good photographs, I'd make one every time?"

That being said, I think bracketing is still important, but not as important as it used to be, with the latitude of b/w film and the ability to post-process in PS.

Taking several photos of the subject, however, is different. I think it is important to try different viewpoints, landscape and portrait orientation, etc. Even HCB's contact sheets show that.

Bottom line is, you may instinctively "know" that you had gotten a good shot, but if you took only one, you won't know if you could have gotten a better one.

 

[Crasis]

Crasis,
It's a legit question. Someone is seeking feedback from others about how they approach an issue. If that's not the point of these forums - sharing knowledge/approach/techniques/etc - then I don't know what is.

allan

If the issues were made clearer, and the questions more concise, I'd at least know which threads to stay out of. I gave my original suggestion on the basis that he was shooting unobtrusive street photography. I was wrong. For those of you who shoot street, you'll know that sometimes you don't get a second shot at all. The scene has been disturbed by your presence.

Let me put it bluntly: I had assumed that he was asking because he wanted to know how to take a better shot. I had assumed (and keep assuming very wrongly) that since he is using an RF, that he wants to shoot spontaneous or street photos. If I had known that he wanted to shoot landscapes, stills, basically anything where you can spend time getting your shot, I wouldn't have cared much.

It's not an issue. Use an entire roll of film on a landscape. The only thing that will suffer is a little of your pocket book for the use of more film. Take different angles, bracket exposures, etc. Take your time and study what exactly you want to get out of the photo. Use the zone system. Buy and study Ansel Adams 'The Negative' and 'The Print'.

That's my honest suggestion. You'll learn more from 'The Negative' than you will from any other single source.

 

[wolves3012]

I never know I've got the shot till I see the image on film! Saying that I usually get what I want. I think most of us are guilty of failing to see the tree growing from the subject's head in a portrait, or something similar. Hopefully, we learn from this.

Bracketing is something I rarely do but that's personal choice of not wanting to waste film! If a shot is very important to you and you're far from home, bracket. If you can easily return for another go, don't bother.

Knowing your weaknesses is important, what mistakes do you make most often? Mine is failing to account for some factor in exposure, and I'm a lousy judge of light levels, so I tend to check & re-check exposure and analyse the scene carefully, if I have time. Sometimes the shot only exists for a few seconds or less - then you take your chances.

Landscapes can be made or broken by fleeting cloud formations or lighting conditions, so they aren't always "permanent".

 

[iml]

The shot, that is. This is probably a silly question but I am dying to find out – how do you know, once you’ve pressed the shutter (or before), that you’ve got (will get) a properly exposed / composed shot? I am referring mainly to film photography.

Exposure comes down to practice, composition likewise. I learn by taking lots of pictures. I can now guess exposure to a very high degree of accuracy 95% of the time (there are some tricky lighting conditions that are still best approached for me by bracketing), and am constantly looking for good compositions, even when I'm not carrying a camera.

Ian

 

[telenous]

I don't know how but every single 'important' shot I ever got I knew I would get even before I raised the camera to my eye. I have left a few of them go for lack of courage but I can see them when they happen to unfold before my very eyes. Framing is important but then I have them already previsualized in my mind. As for exposure, I use a camera without a meter but with B&W film, so I always cross my fingers that I will be forgiven for whatever exposure sins I have just committed. With my M2 I usually do not have the time to bracket, but if I did have I would.

That's for the 'important' shots. Sadly there are a few hundreds of metres of burnt film between each one of them, mostly due to boredom and my 'itchy' index but not because I cannot foretell the uninspiring results.

 

[kaiyen]

Actually, I don't think it the subject has been made clear. I brought up Shaw's large format example as a way of thinking, not as an indication that Andy is doing only landscape photography. Unless I missed it, this very well could be fleeting street photography.

_However_, I presume that the moment has to be at least sufficiently enduring as to be able to do _something_ about the composition. Otherwise, yes, it would be an issue of restricting one's self, looking at results, and forcing one's self to be better at working within those confines.

allan

 

[akptc]

Kevin, I like your idea of disciplining the brain to focus on getting the right result by allowing yourself only one shot per scene, I have a feeling it just might work!

Brett, it was a compliment – I enjoyed browsing through your gallery. I think you’re on to something with the zen thing though. I can play my guitar better and take better pictures (not at the same time) after a couple of beers, no kidding here 🙂

Alan, thank you for your advice. Not checking the edges for distractions gets me all too often, still, especially in the excitement of photographic people / activities.

Ray, thank you. I am hoping that one day soon my technique will catch up with my instincts - way too often I “know” I’ve gotten an awesome shot only to find out later how off I was! Thank goodness for cheap film..

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

To be honest, I'm not sure when "I've got the shot". I know when something may turn out to be wonderful the moment I take it, but the shot isn't just when you take it. It's the whole process: cooperating equipment, "right" exposure (for what you want), development, and post-processing.

If I had a formula, I'd write it down and take it with me all the time.

I guess what I'm saying is: it's a feeling; it's dedication; it's chance. It can be either, or a combination.

 

[kaiyen]

Based on the prints that I've sold and that have won a couple of contests, I would say it's all chance. Almost none of them were taken in the deliberate manner I described.

Kinda sad, actually 🙂

allan

 

[akptc]

...I had assumed (and keep assuming very wrongly) that since he is using an RF, that he wants to shoot spontaneous or street photos. If I had known that he wanted to shoot landscapes, stills, basically anything where you can spend time getting your shot, I wouldn't have cared much.

Que?!?! Huh??? What? did I miss something? what landscape, what stills, .. ok.. I give up..

I certainly didn't mean to consfuse or upset anyone. Ok, off to pnet now 🙂

---
(later), oh, I get it. It's all good.

 

[Crasis]

Brett, it was a compliment – I enjoyed browsing through your gallery. I think you’re on to something with the zen thing though. I can play my guitar better and take better pictures (not at the same time) after a couple of beers, no kidding here 🙂

One beer before playing guitar is good to work out the shakes before you're in front of an audience. More beer.. and .. well it depends on your body type. You may 'think' you're playing really well, but the screams of terror, and the babies clutching their ears will tell you otherwise.

I know this for a fact 😉

Also, the diciplining thing is good if you have the inclination. What this allows you to have is 36 shots (on a 36 roll) that are different from one another by subjects. This means that you aren't looking through 5 shots in a row and picking the best one. You're now looking through 36 shots and saying "Which are the best 12?". Then looking through those and saying "Which are the best 6? Best 3?".

If you actually discipline yourself in such a way, even your throw away shots from the roll will be very good. They just won't be your best 3 from the roll. Oh, and the zen thing, the zone thing, eastern philosophy.. it all has the underlying undercarriage of discipline, which is a difficult thing for western culture 😉

 

[kaiyen]

Oh no! We've driven someone to PN! 🙂

Declared PN'er,
allan