Really bad photographers

Keith said:
Because I only picked a camera up about three and a bit years ago I suffer a strange syndrome and I wonder if it effects others in a similar position ... I'm well into my fifties!

I try to do too much a lot of the time to make up for lost experience or lack of experience and really hit a low when it all goes wrong ... as occasionally it must obviously if you're going to learn. My photographic highs are very rewarding but the lows are gut wrenching and I often feel like burying all my photographic gear in a hole in the yard when this happens!
Click to expand...

While a bit of self doubt is a good thing you’re being too hard on yourself, it’s been a real pleasure watching your photographs improve over the last few years and you should be justifiably proud of them.

ps I get the gut thing when I screw-up too
 
kbg32 said:
Jeff Wall. For me, really, really bad.
Click to expand...


That's funny. For me Jeff Wall is one of the (if not the) best living art photographers. I say "art photographer" because I have different standards for commercial/editorial photographers.

Anyways, back to the topic. I often think the stuff I shot last month is crap. I did a shoot two weeks ago for my portfolio and was pretty pleased with myself at the time. This weekend when I started editing and retouching the shots I got pretty disappointed. The make-up artist just didn't do a good job. Sure, I could say it's not my fault but it is because I should've told him to start again. Oh well!
 
I think that is exactly how one should feel about themselves. If you aren't in some way better than you were five or ten or twenty years ago you've stopped growing as a photographer and perhaps it is time to hang up the camera....
 
Keith said:
Because I only picked a camera up about three and a bit years ago I suffer a strange syndrome and I wonder if it effects others in a similar position ... I'm well into my fifties!

I've been using cameras since I was ten. My only reqret is I didn't shot more. And maybe more images where I was really trying to be creative.
Click to expand...
 
I think I am making better pictures today than ten or tenty years ago.
A good thing about photography is the nice feeling/feedback.
Would you have asked me twenty years ago what I think about the crap I was doing, I would have replied that HCB is almost as good as me, but not quite the same league.
Try this with violin lessons.
If I only knew how much I stunk back then, boy , I would never have continued shooting.

Another thing is the eye:
I am a better editor now than then.
Some pictures that are not as bad as the rest, I just put aside back then, and rediscovered them now.

Third thing: never level out! I still get critiques of my pictures, how limited they are in certain ways, how I am prisoner of certain visual conceptions etc.
That's the fun about it...always try to improve, and reach new (to me) style.
 
By all means, if one's vision/work doesn't improve with age then why bother.

I've read this on a number of occasions (roughly quoted):

"(William) Eggleston best period of photography was in the 70's and early 80's..."

We all know he still photographs to this day. And I don't think anyone here thinks the man is wasting his time.

Just a thought...

Harry.
 
I shot the best picture of my life 38 years ago (I know that because my son was two, and now he's forty.) It's in black and white, over-exposed and out-of-focus. Nevertheless, that snapshot may be the best thing I've done. Makes it hard to tell whether I've gotten better or worse.

I'm a selective Jeff Wall fan. I like some of things a lot, and some not at all.
 
i figure i am a much better photographer now, as far as technique, skill, and "talent"... this does not mean i produce more/better pictures, but i do have some from time to time that really stand out, IMO.
 
I started out as artist who needed some way to keep an image so I could finish my drawing later when I got home. I was interested in perspective and it's effects on my subjects. So to get better reference photos I needed a better camera than my Hawkeye. So my photos always were my sketch book.

So as an artist...by nature you never see any of your own work as the be all to end all. If your lucky..you keep making baby steps forward. Or you switch to a different medium to work around a creative block. Some people just run out of gas. So forcing my self to keep shooting is like taking time every day to draw..even if it's something I do not like. A great artist can make the most unattractive objects beautiful. There is always some pain in looking a work that reflects your own immaturity or lesser skill levels at past point in time.

So being satisfied is the poison that kills creative growth...I'm never satisfied with my own work. The day you make the decision to stop climbing is the day you start walking down hill. That is why I just keep trying to take one more baby step higher every time I pick up a camera.
 
raindog61 said:
By all means, if one's vision/work doesn't improve with age then why bother.

I've read this on a number of occasions (roughly quoted):

"(William) Eggleston best period of photography was in the 70's and early 80's..."

We all know he still photographs to this day. And I don't think anyone here thinks the man is wasting his time.

Just a thought...

Harry.
Click to expand...


A few years ago I went to one of Roy DeCarava's last shows. He was exhibiting "recent" work. The photos would not have gotten him a passing grade in a college photography course. It was really sad to see one of my heroes produce such lousy work. So yes, I think he was wasting his time, at least in that sense though I think he contributed a great deal during all the decades he continued to teach and lecture.

I think people should keep photographing if it makes them happy regardless of whether or not they are growing or getting better. First and foremost photography is a personal pursuit. Whether you should subject anyone else to your work is something everyone has to judge for themselves...
 
Roger wrote: "Of course all judgements are subjective, but I do sometimes wonder, when looking at some pictures, whether it's some deep aesthetic that I'm failing to understand, or whether it really is a rotten picture after all: a dull snapshot with wobbly colours."

I was introduced to the wonders of black and white photography when I was eleven; when I was fifteen I developed artistic pretensions to which I continue to cling. Why? For the posthumous recognition I so richly deserve! -George
 
There are a few that I like from 5 years ago... but not many. There are even more where I remember the photo looking better in my mind's eye than the actual photo does when I go looking for it :D.
 
I think the more you learn about photography and the more sophisticated you become as a photograher and photograph critic, the more things you find to dislike about photographs. Look at my nickname, for example: "watch your backgrounds." We all know it's correct to avoid posts or trees emerging from heads, and to blur out distracting backgrounds by controlling dof...but igorance can be bliss, too.
People look at pictures of themselves and like them if they don't look too wrinkled or fat, and the background or composition, or even (to an extent) the exposure doesn't matter.
Now, I'm not saying, "Take photos to please dummies." I am saying that a technically lacking photograph that pleases a friend or loved one....is a fantastic photograph!"
So, learn the minutia and let your personal standards increase over the years, but not to the point where you sit around thinking you're a crappy shooter. It's hit and miss out there, folks. Give yourself a pat on the back now and then!
 
watchyourbackgrounds said:
I think the more you learn about photography and the more sophisticated you become as a photograher and photograph critic, the more things you find to dislike about photographs. Look at my nickname, for example: "watch your backgrounds." We all know it's correct to avoid posts or trees emerging from heads, and to blur out distracting backgrounds by controlling dof...but igorance can be bliss, too.
People look at pictures of themselves and like them if they don't look too wrinkled or fat, and the background or composition, or even (to an extent) the exposure doesn't matter.
Now, I'm not saying, "Take photos to please dummies." I am saying that a technically lacking photograph that pleases a friend or loved one....is a fantastic photograph!"
So, learn the minutia and let your personal standards increase over the years, but not to the point where you sit around thinking you're a crappy shooter. It's hit and miss out there, folks. Give yourself a pat on the back now and then!
Click to expand...

Absolutely! Just don't fall into the trap of "I took better pictures in those days." If you've already taken your best picture, you might as well give up now!

Cheers,

R.
 
I took a color photograph of a frosted window when I was 18, almost 40 years ago, that may be my best still life photograph. (I used a SLR thus I never posted it to the RFF.) I took another photograph of a boy standing in a Parisian courtyard when I was 25 that is the best portrait I have ever produced, and posted it some weeks ago to RFF (even though I used a TLR). I still carry a camera every day, still try to frame my experience in the world, still hope to create what I know is art even if no one else agrees with me. If I were a teacher, I would hope to communicate this passion for the work. -George
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom