how to improve?

[nico]

In my case its sell the cameras and take up golf :bang: 😉

Ahaha!! 😀
If I try golf I'll surely hit my feet than the ball!! I remain on shooting .. less dangerous for me!!😉

 

[john neal]

Hi John,
I read your interesting reply and I agree with you about photography as a feeling and a way to express a vision. It's also difficult to say what's better or clever than something or somene else.
But I think photography - in some way - it's similar to the music; you can learn to play guitar without taking a music lesson and be Bruce Springsteen ( I think he never had a guitar lesson but for me he plays rock as nobody else except J. Fogerty...) or take lessons learn the music and then express your feeling. That is what I feel about photograph, I don't feel to be such a great photog and I'd like to learn, from a teacher, the basics, the tricks, the rules for shooting, developing and printing pictures. But, i don't have so much time and then this great resource called RFF could do something useful for the ones who would like to have some "lessons". There are many retired pro here and they could be helpful for this purpose. So when I'll learn some "rules" I'll decide how to use them to express my vision or to break them to the same goal...
Hope I've been able to express my thoughts clearly ... it's not easy for me, with my poor english ...
Bye
Nico


...what about RFF english lessons for non english speaking members?😀

I understand what you are saying - I would like to get to a level of proficiency in my photography where I no longer have to worry about the basics - exposure, focus etc, so that i can concentrate on composition and content. I have only been taking B&W pics for the last 47 years or so - one day I will have learnt enough to be confident of my technique (I hope!).

Incidentally, what is your mother language? I have a little schoolboy French and would love to get much better at that too......

 

[drmatthes]

Oh yes, desiderata...

As far as my humble self is concerned, I think I could improve by two or three things:

(i) Looking back into pictorial history.

How did Hubert van Eyck (no, not Peter van Eyck, you movie enthusiasts) compose the Madonna of the Chancelor Rolin? What is the mystery of the available light paintings by Caravaggio or Honthorst? Try and draw some sketches, too. That's what HCB did. Then go out and buy some cheap books about early masters of photography as well. How is it possible that Roger Fentons war photos have such minimalistic beauty? Why do Eugene Atget's photos have this symbolistic feel about them? What was the technique Erich Salomon used to obtain his candid camera pics of famous people? This could go on forever in the most different styles and approaches, take Man Ray, Nan Goldin, Sebastiao Salgado, Helmut Newton, Philip Lorca diCorcia, you name them.

Makes you feel even smaller...

ii) Doing what the professionals do.

Keep a Polaroid or, nowadays, a digicam with you as well and, for the appropriate situation and more "planned" shots, do pre-photography.

iii) Enjoying shooting.

Take the work-flow when it comes. I have obtained three or four acceptable shots neighbouring on a film this way - and rolls of rubbish without it.


Soon as you have become famous, exhibit, sign, and sell the pre-shots separately...

Just kidding

Jesko

 

[rool]

iiii) Start taking acid again

 

[back alley]

iiii) Start taking acid again

i can't find my stash man...

 

[rool]

I thought I could count on you!
I agree with all the complaints now: RFF is not what it used to be...

 

[back alley]

I thought I could count on you!
I agree with all the complaints now: RFF is not what it used to be...

i can't find my stash man...😉

 

[drmatthes]

Acid?

That's what I find in my cooking book of photography under "acid":

"Acidic fixation bath, for negs and positives:

Water 1000 mL
Fixation Soda 200 g
Potassiummetabisulfite cryst. 50 mL"

Anyone for that?

Hmm, there must have been a different acid in the good old RFF days.

I surely missed something.

Jesko

 

[nico]

I understand what you are saying - I would like to get to a level of proficiency in my photography where I no longer have to worry about the basics - exposure, focus etc, so that i can concentrate on composition and content. I have only been taking B&W pics for the last 47 years or so - one day I will have learnt enough to be confident of my technique (I hope!).

Incidentally, what is your mother language? I have a little schoolboy French and would love to get much better at that too......

Hi John,
let's go figure, sometime I still forget to check speed before shooting being used to shot with AE mode, so I have to work a lot on the basics before being able to concentrate only on composition and content!:bang:.
Anyway, I guess I can't help you with your French Schoolboy because my mother language is italian...sorry!
See you round here, 🙂
bye
Nico

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Anyway, I guess I can't help you with your French Schoolboy because my mother language is italian...sorry!

John was talking about 'schoolboy French' and you replied about a 'French Schoolboy'.

You usually end your posts apologizing for your poor English, when such an apology is not needed.

Today there was no 'please excuse my poor English' and I am sitting here wondering whether 'French Schoolboy' is an English error or Nico's humor...

 

[Dougg]

Perhaps as well we should have a section in the gallery or forums asking for a critique rather than a 'rate my photo'. You could post a photo write a little about it and what you intended and then invite others to comment upon your work.

Toby I recall this subject arising very early in RFF's existence, and I think we decided then to add "comments welcome" in the description of any gallery upload for which we desired commentary. That went by the wayside quickly, and AFAIK we've (well, I have) been assuming that anything uploaded to the gallery is inherently asking for critique. It would be possible though quite odd for someone to add to his upload description "keep your thoughts about my photo to yourself!" 🙂

 

[ChrisN]

... Once you have mastered technique and composition, the hard work starts ...

What is meant by "technique" in this context? Please give examples.

Is this simply a matter of learning how to control depth of field, to have the focus sharp where ou want it, to expose properly? (These are technical - does that equal technique?) What else does it cover?

 

[Gid]

What is meant by "technique" in this context? Please give examples.

Is this simply a matter of learning how to control depth of field, to have the focus sharp where ou want it, to expose properly? (These are technical - does that equal technique?) What else does it cover?

In the context of my post, technique is more or less as you assume it - all those aspects which are technical in nature as opposed those that are to do with aesthetics. However, mastery of the technical aspects just allows you to exercise more control over the final image and to recreate at will (subject to the vagries of light) the type of image that you want to end up with. If you don't know how to deal with difficult lighting, or know how a particular focal length will affect the image, or how much depth of field is appropriate etc, etc, then your results will be less predictable. That's not to say that you can't take excellent shots if you have no technique - I know people who have taken some very good shots with auto P&S cameras because they have an eye for a good shot - they compose naturally. Ultimately its the eye, the flair for composition that, IMHO, is the most important element.

 

[ChrisN]

Gid - thank you. I've been reluctant to offer critique or comments on other's photographs, as I lack both knowlege of the criteria and the right vocabulary. I'm doing a bit of research to correct this, and came across a useful item at http://valleyviewfinders.org/vv_judging_guidelines.htm which included this criteria

Technique - different technique for subject matter; technique is foundation of photography but knowledge of art principles are very necessary; using creativity and abstraction can help; design brings abstract ideas into concrete form.

The description was not very useful. Again, thank you.

Now - what about "art principles"? 🙂

 

[MacDaddy]

Joe:
The member who has the "Shards of Photography" blog posted what I consider the ultimate suggestions:
1) List those projects you want to do.
2) List those goals you want to achieve.
3) Like Nike; just do it!

David Plowden's website gave me MY project idea (http://davidplowden.com/ ), which is to spend the next year (or two!) documenting what I consider to be a worthy topic-vanishing small town America. I have a working title for the project (more on that in a future post) and will be pursuing it.
As for goals, I want to be published in Arizona Highways magazine and create a photo blog. Now, I'm just going to do it and I'll keep you all posted along the way! I expect MANY missteps and fumblings, much frustration as I re-learn proper exposure and composition and LOTS of money spent/wasted fine tuning my craft. The Navajo believe if you speak a desire out loud it will come true. I've done that; we'll see. Wish me luck, and I'll see you all along the trail!

 

[BJ Bignell]

A question for you Joe: There have been a bunch of great and interesting suggestions here, so which one(s) will you try? The first step in getting better is deciding how to get better; let us know so that we can better monitor your progress, and then condemn those whose suggestions were ineffective! 😉 😀

 

[Nando]

I've been going through a free online photography textbook that covers a lot of what's been mentioned here. It's called "PATH: Ways of Working in Photography".

Here's the link:
http://textbookrevolution.org/general/four-free-photography-textbooks

The book is in PDF format.

 

[jlw]

What is meant by "technique" in this context? Please give examples.

Is this simply a matter of learning how to control depth of field, to have the focus sharp where ou want it, to expose properly? (These are technical - does that equal technique?) What else does it cover?

The way I see it, "technique" is the knowledge you need to get the images to look the way you want them to. It seems like a big mountain to climb while you're learning it, but eventually you DO learn it.

Then, once you can make the images look the way you want, comes the really hard part: figuring out what images you actually want to make. That can take the rest of your life, and you may never really get it.

Here's an analogy I borrow from author Isaac Asimov: The game of pool is really two games. If you want to play pool well, the first game you have to learn is that of how to make the balls go where you want on the table. That requires technique, and it's what most casual players struggle to learn. They may think that mastering this skill is all there is to the game.

But once they DO master it, they realize that was only the beginning. Now you're on to the second game, the game of strategy: knowing how to set up the shots you need, deny your opponent the shots he needs, plan your own strategy for the progression of the game, and respond to your opponent's strategic moves. This aspect of pool is every bit as cerebral as that of chess, but you can't even begin to play this game until you've mastered the first, purely technical game.


Once you start thinking this way, you probably can think of other examples. For you golfers, remember how difficult it was to learn just to hit the ball? Then once you could make contact more or less consistently, you had to start learning how to hit various kinds of shots: drive, fairway wood, long iron, short iron, pitch, chip, sand shot, putt, etc. You felt that if only you could learn all these shots, you'd be a real golfer. (Many of us never get beyond this point!)

But if you did eventually master the shots, only then did you realize you were only beginning to be ready to play the real game, the game the pros play: That of devising a strategy for attacking the course, planning how to tackle each hole, and modifying your plan when things went wrong.


A more compact example: When I began driving cars on a road-racing circuit, I struggled to learn the basics of car control: the technique of driving at the limit of adhesion without sliding off the track. It was only after I had learned this that I could even begin to think of learning what racing drivers need to know: How to create a strategy for driving the whole track, how to plan a line through each corner, how to modify these plans as conditions change, how to manage fuel, tires and brakes, and how to compete successfully against other drivers who are sharing the same space and trying to accomplish the same objectives. It's grasping these things that defines the difference between a good driver and a good racer. Every good racer is a good driver, but the converse is not true!


Likewise, every good photographer is to some extent a good technician: Even if you're indifferent to technique, you have to be able to operate the camera well enough to make the image you have in mind. Yet, not every good technician is a good photographer! You may struggle for years to master the techniques of photography, only to realize that's just the beginning.

I suspect that's the root of many photographers' dissatisfaction. To return to my original pool analogy, they thought that learning to roll the balls around was all there was to the game. They've worked for years to master that skill. To extend their sense of mastery, they may have studied all sorts of obscure trick shots, hoping to give their work that "extra edge." They've invested heavily in custom-made cues and other equipment. They feel that with all this work they've put in, they SHOULD be experts. And yet when they encounter a real expert, he invariably "runs the table" on them.

At first they don't understand why. And then eventually, maybe, they realize that all their learning has only equipped them to BEGIN to learn the second game, the real game.

At that point some people are more challenged, and redouble their efforts. Others become discouraged, and give up entirely. Others decide simply to remain where they're comfortable and are content to be expert techicians (who, after all, are highly useful people!) But reaching this realization is a milestone, and it always involves making a potentially uncomfortable choice.

 

[ErnestoJL]

The feedback for this thread is really wonderfull.
There are (IMHO) several factors to take care of:
As we are individuals, every answer contains a lot of Us, the way we think, the way we shoot and what works or not for any particular person, however I can see a general evidence of the need to improve our skills.

There are two parts in photography, the equipment and the photographer.
Equipment may or not be limited in terms of type of camera, lenses, maximum aperture, shutter speed, etc. but the most important is not to be limited inside us. This is (for me) the key of everything. I choose the "one camera, one lens and one film" concept as a starting point. It´s a good way to force oneself to get the most of it, using the best tool we allways carry.

Shooting, developing and printing is also a good way to see where we failed to achieve what we wanted, but other´s opinion is also helpfull: it gives you another pair of eyes to see the same scene.
I started to watch carefully some photgraphy masters works in order to get knowledge of the other man vision. This gave me a lot of knowledge, but it was´t allways shown in my pictures. There´s still some elusive factor I´m not taking into account.
As a result, I never got a picture of the quality of Ansel Adams, nor any good picture "a la HCB", however I got a little bit closer.
It doesn´t mean the "lessons" were useless, simply I didn´t get yet the right point. And that´s inside me, nowhere else.

Then What means improving for any one of Us?
All the opinions in this thread show something a little different, allways focused on different aspects of picture taking. This is the point.
In what we fail?
Knowing this is the starting point. Once found this, the rest should be easy (I hope). Jan Normandale´s idea of taking 100 pictures, and discard those which do not satisfy Us, and next week discarding some others would give an idea of what´s wrong.
I wellcome a new forum on this topic.

Ernesto

 

[nico]

John was talking about 'schoolboy French' and you replied about a 'French Schoolboy'.

You usually end your posts apologizing for your poor English, when such an apology is not needed.

Today there was no 'please excuse my poor English' and I am sitting here wondering whether 'French Schoolboy' is an English error or Nico's humor...

Hi Jon,
this is a sort of slapstick situation 🙂 because 'please excuse my poor English' is (the other italian guy) palabras' motto above his signature ... not mine but there was not humour at all in my reply, i must have really misunderstood what john neal wrote me ... i'm glad for your reply but now i'd like to know what john neal meant and, by the way, if i've been unpolite with my reply😕
Confused regards...
Nico