Help: What would you cover?

[nsurit]

i was under the impression that the class was going to be more than 1 visit ..

in that case
what he said ...

snip:

It was not real clear as to the amount of time the "workshop" would involve, however irrespective of the time allotted, these three could be expanded to fit.

Turn the flash off = covering the subject of lighting, paying attention to the light the universe provides, how to capture an image that utilizes the light we are given. The light provided by the camera when contrasted with natural light (or perhaps somewhat altered/redirected natural light) usually makes believers out of most folks.

Get closer to your subject = filling the frame, paying attention to your composition, thinking about what your want your final image to look like, discovering the limits of the tool and expanding ones vision.

Take lots of pictures = discover the box in which you operate and expand that space. What is your vision, what will the tool do for you, how do you use the tool to create?

These concepts are not specific to film, however they will expand the possibilities of most, if not all, of his audience/class. Bill Barber

 

[dancqu]

Don't forget the Props

I only have 2 hours ...Ed Sanford

I'd gloss over the three phase traditional photographic
process; taking the photograph, processing the film,
and making the print. Might mention mounting.

Have plenty of props on hand including
an enlarger. Dan

 

[eddym]

What I've found is that those who show up are really there because they want to take better photographs. At some level they know the results they are producing are less than thrilling. One could develop a workshop around the following three topics and spend whatever amount of time allotted to doing so. My three are:

Turn off the flash.

Get closer to your subject.

Take lots of pictures.

Bill Barber

While true, I find that most of them have no idea what "better pictures" are.

That said, your three suggestions are excellent.

 

[nsurit]

While true, I find that most of them have no idea what "better pictures" are.

That said, your three suggestions are excellent.

Yes, and they generally know that most of their's are not getting the job done. Most would be happy with improving their batting average.

I teach a 6 week class about 4 or 5 times a year at a local art school /studio that consists of of about 14 hours of instruction/critique and three field trips.

Examples of my work, that of others and my students are used in flrshing out what works and what doesn't.

Each student is provided with an all manual Olympus OM 1/1n for the duration of the class. It is difficult to teach basics with a camera which has the benefit of "Mr. Automatic." Needless to say, we only use film for the duraton of the class. Bill Barber

 

[mabman]

Depth of field (and it's related aperture-based functionality, and it's relationship to shutter speed) - particularly shallow DOF, and how it looks - good for portraits, isolating foreground from background, etc.. In my local camera club there is a surprising lack of knowledge about something so basic - I haven't been at this very long and it's one of the first things I "discovered"

I've found a decent number of photography enthusiasts are just using their cameras' "program" modes, and don't really understand aperture/shutter speed/DOF relationships. Not necessary film-specific, but it's my understanding shallow DOF is harder to do with a sensor smaller than "full frame" 35mm.