|
nonanone posted:This is how I feel about it: if you want to get the photograph, don't half-rear end it, don't bring the camera along as a "just-in-case." If you want to enjoy the experience, don't bring the camera. That way neither your photographs or your experiences will be compromised. Or if you're like me you're going to not be happy with the shots if you bring a camera, or deeply regret not bringing it. 
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 20:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:03 |
|
|
@ xzzy I went through a patch where I hated every single thing I did, then I decided to convert a shot I knew should be good but wasn't into black and white (http://www.flickr.com/photos/learnin_curve/6036108706/), it hit me like a brick thrown by a portly builder, I "see" in black and white, (in the past I converted in black and white with a vague notion that I preferred it and not knowing why), this has made me slow down and be more selective with what I shoot as I'm not just snapping away any more and hoping it looks ok in lightroom. If it's about the colours then I shoot in colour, if it's about the subject then I go black and white. As a bonus, grey skies don't mean a jot, especially if there are cloud layers and, yay rain, time for some more layers. I'm still a rank amateur but at least I know what to concentrate on to improve. tl:dr give black and white a go.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
Medusula posted:@ xzzy I went through a patch where I hated every single thing I did, then I decided to convert a shot I knew should be good but wasn't into black and white (http://www.flickr.com/photos/learnin_curve/6036108706/), it hit me like a brick thrown by a portly builder, I "see" in black and white, (in the past I converted in black and white with a vague notion that I preferred it and not knowing why), this has made me slow down and be more selective with what I shoot as I'm not just snapping away any more and hoping it looks ok in lightroom. If it's about the colours then I shoot in colour, if it's about the subject then I go black and white. This actually goes back to sitting down and deciding what you want to shoot. Good for you that you stumbled upon it, but shooting black and white is just as much a style/preference as is shooting portraits or anything else. Look through all the photos you took. Which ones do you like the most, which ones do you dislike the most? Do you prefer black and white? Landscapes? People? Try to find something to focus on, and if that doesn't work, by all means put your camera down for a period of time and come back when you don't fell so confused. A clean slate might be all you need
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 20:29
|
|
|
nonanone posted:This is how I feel about it: if you want to get the photograph, don't half-rear end it, don't bring the camera along as a "just-in-case." If you want to enjoy the experience, don't bring the camera. That way neither your photographs or your experiences will be compromised. I was so much happier when I figured this out for myself. I'm still a proponent of "have a camera with you" as much as is feasible, but when I separated fun events by experiencing vs shooting, I got more out of both. It drives my non-photographer friends crazy when I'm on trips with them and not shooting anything, but I'm so much happier just enjoying the moment and not stressing about photography. When I want to focus on photography, I want to be completely absorbed in that aspect instead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 20:36
|
|
|
xzzy posted:The dorkroom is my photo class. I dunno dude, I don't think you should limit the shots you take. Take lots and lots of pictures. It is the only way to get better. Take the pictures, think about the pictures, think about what could make the pictures better and then go out and do it all again. You're going to get more joy out of something if you put work into it. If you half-rear end something you're going to get half-rear end results. It's not about being a "pro photographer". If you're doing it for that reason, you should quit (imo). It's about the pleasure of creating something you think is beautiful. I think if you do put the work in, and create the image you see in your head, it's gonna be a fantastic feeling. nonanone posted:This is how I feel about it: if you want to get the photograph, don't half-rear end it, don't bring the camera along as a "just-in-case." If you want to enjoy the experience, don't bring the camera. That way neither your photographs or your experiences will be compromised. Why would you not always carry a camera with you? Even if its just a 35mm point and shoot, I almost always have a camera on me. When I dont have a camera, I see some reason why I should have a camera. Always have a camera.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 20:43
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:I was so much happier when I figured this out for myself. I'm still a proponent of "have a camera with you" as much as is feasible, but when I separated fun events by experiencing vs shooting, I got more out of both. It drives my non-photographer friends crazy when I'm on trips with them and not shooting anything, but I'm so much happier just enjoying the moment and not stressing about photography. When I want to focus on photography, I want to be completely absorbed in that aspect instead. I understand what the though process is and how it would be beneficial to both shooting and enjoying the moment, but what about when you're going on a trip that you know will be beautiful, so you want to do both? Do you force yourself to choose one or the other, or do you divide your time? For example, I want to go to the east coast next year, for both photography and for a vacation. This will be the first time I visit, and probably the last, at least for a good while. How do you balance the two? Last year I went to Europe I had a really hard time separating them. I know that if I hadn't taken any pictures at all, I would have been really disappointed, but I did find myself concentrating more on photography than enjoying myself, and I do regret not living more in the moment. It didn't help that I barely knew how to use a camera, but the point is the same, I think. I just want to get the bost of both worlds...is that possible?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 20:48
|
|
|
A good quality film point and shoot like a Contax T2 or whatever is good to have as a "just in case" camera because it's small, compact and quick to use, but delivers great quality when called upon so you can enjoy yourself, but still get a photo if there's one of those "holy crap" moments. Also, phones are getting better and better as an option. I went to Europe and some of my favourite photos were taken with my iPhone 4 because it was silent, small and unobtrusive plus it was there when I wanted it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 21:17
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:
I have a phone camera for things like "omg that's so funny" and "look it's a memory," but to me, capturing memories versus making photographs are 2 totally different things, and if you worry all the time about making your trip (or whatever) look really beautiful, you're going to either not enjoy yourself as much you could, or not make as good of photographs as much as you could. Now, I'm not saying that a camera isn't a good thing to have sometimes "just in case", but if you let it weigh on your mind like you gotta make good photographs all the time, it can really ruin a good time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 23:12
|
|
|
nonanone posted:...capturing memories versus making photographs are 2 totally different things... My thoughts exactly. I used to carry my camera around when I first started taking photographs, but I don't do that anymore. When it's time to make pictures it is my main focus (hurr) and the camera stays at home if not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 23:44
|
|
|
McMadCow posted:My thoughts exactly. I used to carry my camera around when I first started taking photographs, but I don't do that anymore. When it's time to make pictures it is my main focus (hurr) and the camera stays at home if not. Yeah, for me there is a huge difference between creating/making an image you conceptualise from just taking a picture of a thing - both I think are valuable but there is a key distinction between the type of photographer you are based on that. I don't find myself taking pictures or even having a camera out with me unless it's for my shoot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2011 23:53
|
|
|
xzzy posted:What bugs me is that when I spend a couple hours hiking and end up at a gorgeous scene, it only looks good when seen with the eye. Point a camera at it and take a picture.. it loses everything that made it worth remembering.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 00:30
|
|
|
I took a picture of this guy the other day: In a heavy accent he commented on my Hasselblad. After I took the photo he asked if I could email him the photo and gave me his business card. Turns out he's a member of parliament in Sweden (where Hasselblads are made). Go figure! Just some guy reading the paper and he's a fairly major politician. Who knew?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 04:24
|
|
|
HPL posted:A good quality film point and shoot like a Contax T2 or whatever is good to have as a "just in case" camera because it's small, compact and quick to use, but delivers great quality when called upon so you can enjoy yourself, but still get a photo if there's one of those "holy crap" moments.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 04:34
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:Go figure! I had a fairly prominent (locally anyway) artist approach me at the convention I was shooting last weekend and ask me about the Crown Graphic. Someone got their technologies mixed up and told him I was shooting tintypes, but after a few minutes talking we got that straight. Right away he asked if I could do a portrait of him and his wife. This is the test shot I took with my Nikon just to make sure I was getting the exposure correct. Still waiting on the negative to get developed. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 05:16
|
|
|
squidflakes posted:I had a fairly prominent (locally anyway) artist approach me at the convention I was shooting last weekend and ask me about the Crown Graphic. Someone got their technologies mixed up and told him I was shooting tintypes, but after a few minutes talking we got that straight. Right away he asked if I could do a portrait of him and his wife. This is the test shot I took with my Nikon just to make sure I was getting the exposure correct. Still waiting on the negative to get developed. Awesome! Vintage cameras can really spark some interesting discussions. That's an awesome photo, too! Can't wait to see the full scan. ... On another note, I was looking at the people who added this photo of mine to their favorites, and one person in particular stood out: http://www.flickr.com/photos/32476442@N03/favorites/with/6289587005/#photo_6289587005 ...creeeeepy. I wonder what form of lung cancer he has.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 05:26
|
|
|
Has anybody ever submitted photos to a website like Shutterstock? If so, made any money? Is it a good idea? Is there anything better?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 05:36
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:I took a picture of this guy the other day: Everything in this post owns.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 06:40
|
|
|
Yeah, that's a cool story, Mannequin 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 07:08
|
|
|
Mannequin posted:Awesome! Vintage cameras can really spark some interesting discussions. That's an awesome photo, too! Can't wait to see the full scan. Yeah, I uploaded this picture of a friend a while back:  DSC_0941 by spikespikespike, on Flickr And got invited to this group: "MALES:GOOD Quality PORTRAITS of male CIGARETTE smokers." People on flickr like people who smoke I guess?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2011 16:39
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:
Fixed that for you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 05:26
|
|
|
Awkward Davies posted:People
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 08:33
|
|
|
Here is a thing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9dMn2CbrpQ How it's Made 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 22:22
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Here is a thing Awesome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 22:34
|
|
|
Shmoogy posted:Or if you're like me you're going to not be happy with the shots if you bring a camera, or deeply regret not bringing it. I bring the camera and don't worry too much about the shots, especially when alcohol is involved. For example I ended up with a whole lot of terrible shots on my mates engagement party, but had a really great time getting them. Discovery of the weekend: a 5DII and 50m f/1.8 gives you a lot more wiggle room when you're drunk and in poor lighting than my 30D with 50mm f/1.8 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 23:33
|
|
|
Even though I sold it, I kinda think I'll buy another 50/1.8 as a walk around lens. It is so much lighter than a 50/1.4!
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2011 23:42
|
|
|
dissss posted:I bring the camera and don't worry too much about the shots, especially when alcohol is involved. I personally think this is the perfect camera for the alcohol affected user: https://www.lytro.com/camera Focusing after the fact.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 00:25
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Here is a thing Holy christ, did you see the lens one? I know it leaves a ton out, but  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7_wL0ZZi6k Now I know the nifty fifty is cheap as dirt...
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 02:12
|
|
|
Menorah on Fire posted:Holy christ, did you see the lens one? I know it leaves a ton out, but That's nothing. Here's a three-part video showing how they make Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM lenses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkWsk9rXpcU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T7BDeMU_Ks http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpkAWZTwqI4
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 02:42
|
|
|
William T. Hornaday posted:That's nothing. Here's a three-part video showing how they make Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM lenses. The hand-crafting of Leica glass  http://vimeo.com/26251829?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+hakandahlstrom+(Håkan+Dahlström+Lifestream)
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 02:56
|
|
|
Here's a message I got on my personal fb this morning: " Hey would it be possible for you to take some professional pictures of me sometime? I want a couple for self promotion. I'd pay you some if you want it. If so just let me know, I would appriciate it. Thanks! "
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 14:13
|
|
|
Anti_Social posted:Here's a message I got on my personal fb this morning: Am I missing something here?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 14:36
|
|
|
Anti_Social posted:Here's a message I got on my personal fb this morning:
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 14:54
|
|
|
One time someone offered to pay me for my services and I responded by telling them I'd rather be hosed in the rear end by a rabid horse than accept their filthy money. Then I posted about it on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 15:54
|
|
|
RangerScum posted:One time someone offered to pay me for my services and I responded by telling them I'd rather be hosed in the rear end by a rabid horse than accept their filthy money. Then I posted about it on the internet. You posted on the internet, I went out and found a rabid horse*  *It was actually a donkey, but let's not get hung up on the details.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 16:07
|
|
|
Sevn posted:Am I missing something here? It was the "id pay you some if you want it" that struck me. If it was someone I actually was friends with, sure, I have no problems with a freebie for a small shoot. But the message struck me as a "i kind of know you, want your pictures, but I don't want to actually pay you much if at all." Maybe I'm just used to wedding clients and how that whole process works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 16:47
|
|
|
Sevn posted:hung
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 16:48
|
|
|
I took a bunch of pictures of our new Learning Commons for the library newsletter. I weeded out the throwaways, batch processed the rest, and sent them as small previews to the head librarian and asked her to tell me which ones she wanted fully processed. That was two weeks ago and I haven't heard back. I'm sure she didn't just forward the whole zip file to whoever asked for the pictures, and even if she did, nobody would be dumb enough to actually send a bunch of 800x1200 jpegs out to print, right? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 18:38
|
|
|
Anti_Social posted:It was the "id pay you some if you want it" that struck me. Those kind of people quickly disappear when you tell them your rates haha. GWBBQ posted:I'm sure she didn't just forward the whole zip file to whoever asked for the pictures, and even if she did, nobody would be dumb enough to actually send a bunch of 800x1200 jpegs out to print, right? That is definitely large enough to print in a newsletter... Sevn fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Nov 7, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 19:00
|
|
|
Sevn posted:That is definitely large enough to print in a newsletter...
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 19:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:03 |
|
|
GWBBQ posted:Yeah, at least they'll probably keep with tradition and not credit me. How did they pay you? Did they pay you for the shoot, or not at all? Next time watermark all your pictures.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2011 19:25
|
|