Why Your Pictures Suck

Sparrow said:
That link is blocked for me as ...

"We're sorry but this site is not accessible from the UK as it is part of our international service and is not funded by the licence fee. It is run commercially by BBC Worldwide, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the BBC, the profits made from it go back to BBC"

... the world has gone mad
Click to expand...
Good grief. That is WEIRD!

Not that there's much to the piece: mostly, just stating the obvious, that 10,000 hours is a random number that appeals to the simple-minded who like to look for a precision that doesn't exist. At least "practice makes perfect" is known as a platitude, but the "10,000 hour rule" or the "10,000 picture rule" aren't even generalizations or platitudes: they're just wild and not-very-bright attempts at looking clever.

Cheers,

R.
 
How does the 10,000 hour rule work with photography? What do you actually count?

Does walking around looking for pictures count? What if you walk 2 hours and take no pictures?

Or does the taking of the picture itself count? In which case, if the shutter speed is 1/250 on average , it would mean 9 billion shots before you can clock 10,000 hours.

In any case I don't think this number is meant to be taken literally.
 
starless said:
How does the 10,000 hour rule works with photography? What do you actually count?

Does walking around looking for pictures count? What if you walk 2 hours and take no pictures?

Or does the taking of the picture itself count? In which case, if the shutter speed is 1/250 on average , it would mean 9 billion shots before you can clock 10,000 hours.

In any case I don't think this number is meant to be taken literally.
Click to expand...
Unless it's meant to be taken literally, there is effectively no content at all in Gladwell's book.

I like the 9 billion shots.

Cheers,

R.
 
Invest 10K hours in "science" and will come out with brand new theory on how much it takes to become good at construction of theories 😀
 
Roger Hicks said:
Good grief. That is WEIRD!

Not that there's much to the piece: mostly, just stating the obvious, that 10,000 hours is a random number that appeals to the simple-minded who like to look for a precision that doesn't exist. At least "practice makes perfect" is known as a platitude, but the "10,000 hour rule" or the "10,000 picture rule" aren't even generalizations or platitudes: they're just wild and not-very-bright attempts at looking clever.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I just sent them a Mrs Trellis letter ...

... while I agree, but with a nod to what I imagine is in the original article, there was a point between 1971 and now that loading a M2 and using a manual camera became automatic ... and that does allows more time for the important stuff
 
Sparrow said:
I just sent them a Mrs Trellis letter ...

... while I agree, but with a nod to what I imagine is in the original article, there was a point between 1971 and now that loading a M2 and using a manual camera became automatic ... and that does allows more time for the important stuff
Click to expand...
Dear Mrs. Trellis,

You do realize that you have now blown your cover?

For non-English speakers: http://aardvarktheosophy.theosophywales.org.uk/MrsTrellis.htm

Cheers,

R.
 
Article is too clever. Preys on amateur anxiety.
Click to expand...

Thinking about it more I think you nailed it. I saw a quote once that went something like. "Most of your pictures suck, and most of MY pictures suck. But I've seen Cartier-Bresson's contacts, and most of HIS pictures sucked, too."

Imbroglio is exploiting this to attack his internet enemies, other photographers.
 

Attachments

  • looksism-estrich-salt-creature.jpg
    looksism-estrich-salt-creature.jpg
    17.7 KB · Views: 0
Ranchu said:
Thinking about it more I think you nailed it. I saw a quote once that went something like. "Most of your pictures suck, and most of MY pictures suck. But I've seen Cartier-Bresson's contacts, and most of HIS pictures sucked, too."

Imbroglio is exploiting this to attack his internet enemies, other photographers.
Click to expand...
That's from a great column by Mike Johnston, The Magic Bullet:

"To be honest, most of my pictures suck. The saving grace of that admission is that most of your pictures suck, too. How could I possibly know such a thing? Because most of everybody's pictures suck, that's how. I've seen Cartier-Bresson's contact sheets, and most of his pictures sucked. One of my teachers said that it was an epiphany for him when he took a class from Garry Winogrand and learned that most of Winogrand's exposures sucked. It's the way it is."
 
Roger Hicks said:
No they don't. The whole 10,000 hours thing is a fantasy that has gained widespread currency in the last (very) few years after being popularized by Malcolm Gladwell. It's basically drivel that starts with an arbitrary number that people want to believe. Here's just one piece debunking this nonsense: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121114-gladwells-10000-hour-rule-myth

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

But Malcolm Gladwell is an expert!

He is an expert at getting media attention (and high fees) for Malcolm Gladwell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

underlord
Are YOU a photographer?
2 3
Replies
47
Views
2K
BillBingham2
BillBingham2
E
Exakta VX v 4.2 Stuck Shutter Speed Dial Repair
Replies
4
Views
505
Valkir1987
Valkir1987
p.giannakis
Today i was told off
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
6K
Archiver
A
splitimageview
Contax RF mount vs Nikon S-mount
Replies
13
Views
2K
wes loder
wes loder
p.giannakis
Internet is dead (and a couple of HCB pictures)
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Archiver
A
Back
Top Bottom