Takes good pictures or Good Photographer?
There's probably no single, simple answer.
Fan of DA limited and old manual lenses
The great photographers are often professionals and can ensure that they go to the best locations and wait, sometimes for hours or even days, for the light and weather conditions to be just right. I love to go to North Wales and have taken some OK pictures when luck has been with me but there's a couple of local photographers who have galleries there and whose work makes your jaw drop. They live amidst the scenery and can pick and choose when to take a particular shot.
Of course, this applies to landscapes. If you can control the light in a studio you ought to be able to learn the art of composition, to take great portraits or stunning still lifes (lives?).
Subjects like motor sport or music events need the best equipment and lots of practice as well as access to prime positions (I imagine, never having done either).
Macro and bird photography again needs the right lenses and lots of patience as well as some specialist knowledge.
I think that specialising must make you better as well as studying the work of others who take similar shots. I expect others have different ideas.
Andrew
"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050 http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
1. Composition is one of the easiest things to get wrong - we are often so excited about capturing what is a beautiful subject to our eyes that we often forget that the composition changes as soon as we look through the viewfinder. Too often we will centralise a subject - try moving it to another part of the frame for a different impact, a simple technique but often very effective.
2. Where to focus is another thing we often overlook, it's easy to set a small aperture and get as much in focus as we can (which is effective for some subjects), but picking a key point of interest and ensuring there is just enough depth in front and behind of it draws the eye better.
And as Andrew said, study the work of others and learn from them
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
CHEERS Vic.
Creative
Consistant
Original
A Problem Solver
Technical Ability
Adaptable
Resourceful
Communication Skills
Luck
Timing
I am sure there are loads more things, but thats my starting point.
After that it is skill that makes your photograph happen. You may need different skill sets for different situations, lighting for studio, field craft for wildlife or PP for digital art, but those can all be learnt.
If you have that innate ability I think you have a head start, certainly on me.
https://pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/barrieforbes
https://www.flickr.com/photos/189482630@N03/
Fletcher8. I'm OK with all but the top 3.
The top 3 are the "THE EYE" the "IT" the (as Barrie puts it) innate ability to see the photo.
CHEERS Vic.
There are some really good photographers that contribute on this forum too, but the work of this guy demonstrates the simplicity of these two key points
I don't agree that a good photograph always comes from its content (although clearly it helps in many cases), just look at some of the Macro shots we often see posted here - the content of one photo is often very similar to another but the results can be stunningly different.
I think you can only become a good photographer on the basis of the good pictures you've taken.
They're two very different things. One is what you do, the other is how people judge you.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
I think it's all about seeing the photograph, having in your minds eye how you would like it to turn out. I think that is innate, it may be possible to teach it, but very difficult.
If you have that innate ability I think you have a head start, certainly on me.
This is correct, if you don't know the result how can you frame it. I am amazed sometimes at the amount of photographers who take a shot and then decide how it is going to look using PS or LR or other PP method. We where taught this at art college, shooting blindly can occasionally get you something but you need a vision to start with. Would a painter start throwing paint at a canvass randomly and step back and go hey thats good? Why should photography be any different?
Concert photography
Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
97 posts
9 years
Crewe,
Cheshire
"I have seen your pictures and they are great" she replied (well trained you see).
But I went on to explain that I feel that I have a natural feel for what makes a good picture and if I am lucky I can capture that on film/digital. But for me a good/great Photographer is one who can engineer the correct location/conditions to create a stunning picture.
Therefore as far as I am concerned ATM I am a man who takes good pictures but with time and teaching I hope to become a good photographer.
I guess I wanted to see what makes a good Photographer in you opinion.
Peace James