How to deal with photography deniers?

[Berkeley Mike]

"Never allow considerations of composition to interfere with or prevent you from getting a spontaneous picture.
- Bruce Downes Ed. Pop. Photography - Jan 1950"

I work this hard in my classes. The discovery of a vision is precious. A pure perception can be lost to cognition. It can die if one overthinks it; is it worth doing, what is my exposure? Something catches the eye and I press my students to embrace that and come to terms with exposure quickly and without belaboring it and get to work. It is much easier in small format work.

However, highly experienced LF folk Lugging the 810 into the Humboldt forest might retain a perception with certainty durable enough to last until the camera is set up.

 

[Sirius Glass]

"Never allow considerations of composition to interfere with or prevent you from getting a spontaneous picture.
- Bruce Downes Ed. Pop. Photography - Jan 1950"

I work this hard in my classes. The discovery of a vision is precious. A pure perception can be lost to cognition. It can die if one overthinks it; is it worth doing, what is my exposure? Something catches the eye and I press my students to embrace that and come to terms with exposure quickly and without belaboring it and get to work. It is much easier in small format work.

However, highly experienced LF folk Lugging the 810 into the Humboldt forest might retain a perception with certainty durable enough to last until the camera is set up.

A photograph without composition is like a cake that a car drove over. Very, very, very flat.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

People have different immediate access to aspects of our craft. For me, composition is second nature; I don't really think on it, I just do it. That is just luck. Bye and large, the images produced in an entry-level class are throwaways; grist for the learning process. This is distinctly different than the method used by more experienced shooters.

In the learning setting the quality of capture/exposure is paramount or you got nothin'. Once the file is seen in development, the values of composition become clear and building composition comes next. The problem is then owned by the shooter and motivates them.

The biggest problems at the entry-level are hardly composition. In order to appreciate this you have to start people from zero and see what happens over a semester as they learn to used the camera for the best exposure. THEN you can see what they had in mind. It is an exciting prospect. We have subsequent classes for composition and they are quite elegant. But you can do nothing without a good exposure and subsequent digital file management.

 

[John Koehrer]

RE: original post. Smile and nod. The way I do when listening to my wife.

 

[removed account4]

some compositions you need to look to see them in the photograph, some people might not see it or see it right away but others might see it completely, like a "magic eye" image. it shouldn't be the fault of the person who made the image if viewers don't have his or her mindset and are unable to immediately "see" the composition, should it ?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

"Never allow considerations of composition to interfere with or prevent you from getting a spontaneous picture.
- Bruce Downes Ed. Pop. Photography - Jan 1950"

I work this hard in my classes.
...

I like that. The key point is that you don't want to miss a good spontaneous photo while thinking about the rule of thirds, keeping the horizon level, or whatever. Rules are guidelines - that's all. In a spontaneous photo situation, get the photo.

 

[Helios 1984]

"Never allow considerations of composition to interfere with or prevent you from getting a spontaneous picture.
- Bruce Downes Ed. Pop. Photography - Jan 1950"

+1

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

You can take more time with landscapes, so you can get it right in the camera. Landscapes have more to do with capturing awe. Spontaneity occurs more often in street shots. The objective is different as well. You're photographing relations and trying to tell a little story.

 

[NJH]

Going back to the OP, I haven't ever been denied like that. I have however had a few conversations along the lines of darkroom work being too hard, not in a bad way just the other side of the conversation saying they found it really hard to do the dodging and burning etc. Oddly this has twice been with young pros whom I think still have to do darkroom work here at colleges in the UK. I only mention this because I am the opposite, I find it really hard to dodge and burn on the computer without the end product looking obviously fiddled with, but conversely fairly easy to get better looking results in the darkroom.

 

[GLS]

I find it really hard to dodge and burn on the computer without the end product looking obviously fiddled with

Using 16-bit luminosity masks makes this MUCH easier, and exceptionally precise. Generate a range of luminosity masks for your image (there are free tools available to do this in Photoshop), then use the appropriate ones to target specific tonal ranges for the dodge/burn operations. Apply the luminosity mask to a curve adjustment, then put that layer in a new group. Mask the group with black, then use a soft white brush to paint back in the effect only in the areas and to the degree you want.

There are a myriad other ways of doing it, but I have found no easier or more precise method of dodging/burning in PS, and the best thing is it is all non-destructive.

 

[wahiba]

Going back to the OP, I haven't ever been denied like that. I have however had a few conversations along the lines of darkroom work being too hard, not in a bad way just the other side of the conversation saying they found it really hard to do the dodging and burning etc. Oddly this has twice been with young pros whom I think still have to do darkroom work here at colleges in the UK. I only mention this because I am the opposite, I find it really hard to dodge and burn on the computer without the end product looking obviously fiddled with, but conversely fairly easy to get better looking results in the darkroom.

I am exactly the opposite. I do not miss the faffing around necessary with an enlarger. Spotting is one area of digital post processing that I find useful. I use Photoshop Elements 7 and other than cropping tend to let the auto correct have first go on most negatives. I must confess to never dodging, burning etc. I have always been happy to use old tec with new tec. I would suggest that it is ability to scan and computer post process that encourages many to have fun with old style picture taking. It seems to be the same in cine where the original is film which is immediately digitised after processing. Projected films are a rare event these days. (note: l live near the UK national media museum so actually have the option to see projected films regularly)

 

[firemachine69]

I've never owned a film camera (besides a 110 I had as a child). I basically jumped straight into digital photos from the get-go (I'm 34yo, so there's still some time there), and my first "real" camera was a Nikon D300. I actually jumped into film because my composition was lacking at times, and having limited numbers of shots (I don't carry spare rolls out of town), it really forces me to "make the shot". My wife is not a photographer, and she herself has noted background, lighting, composure, etc. have substantially improved since I've picked up film (and I'm only about six-or-seven rolls in). Whereas digital was extremely forgiving, the same cannot be said for film, not to mention, you don't instantly see your results.


That being said, my wife was extremely confused when I initially told her I was picking up a cheap film body. She could not see the logic and had all sorts of false assumptions (like if I could actually get film processed at a reasonable price), but eventually decided that $60 wasn't that big a deal.

 

[faberryman]

I actually jumped into film because my composition was lacking at times, and having limited numbers of shots (I don't carry spare rolls out of town), it really forces me to "make the shot"

Why don't you apply that same mindset when shooting digital? It really does not matter what kind of camera you are using. It is a question of self discipline.

 

[firemachine69]

Why don't you apply that same mindset when shooting digital? It really does not matter what kind of camera you are using. It is a question of self discipline.

It's too easy to jump for the ISO button or crank up the shutter speed to 1/8000, and on a camera that can shoot 6fps... When you have a "get it done" workaholic mindset like mine, it can be hard to overcome that temptation.

Film teaches patience. Not so with digital.

Besides, the texture is something that just can't be matched

 

[faberryman]

It's too easy to jump for the ISO button or crank up the shutter speed to 1/8000, and on a camera that can shoot 6fps... Film teaches patience. Not so with digital.

So basically you are saying you don't have any self-control.

 

[firemachine69]

So basically you are saying you don't have any self-control.

I edited up and explained a bit better. When you live 100% of today's world of get it done NOW, it can be a bit challenging to step back and focus on the basics. When you get presented with challenges such as my F75's limited shutter speed of 1/2000, flash sync of 1/125, or a fixed ISO, you need to get creative how you will still capture "that moment". I love that phase of discovery.

 

[GLS]

Why don't you apply that same mindset when shooting digital? It really does not matter what kind of camera you are using. It is a question of self discipline.

In principle you can of course, but in practice it's easier said than done when shooting frames essentially costs nothing.

I also learned photography on DSLRs, and that mindset of "take hundreds of photos and then flog the best files afterwards" easily takes hold. I'm exaggerating to some degree with the last part of the quote of course, but the point remains. I can honestly say my photography has improved quite markedly since getting into MF film, partly because I prefer the look of the larger format, but largely because I take much more care when making the images in the first place (and the cameras also force a slower pace of working).

 

[Theo Sulphate]

My photography (composition, subject isolation, the basics...) improved considerably after a few midnight to 6am printing sessions when I realized I had - at most - just three "ok" prints.

 

[warden]

It's too easy to jump for the ISO button or crank up the shutter speed to 1/8000, and on a camera that can shoot 6fps... When you have a "get it done" workaholic mindset like mine, it can be hard to overcome that temptation.

It is hard to overcome that temptation, but if it were me I wouldn't bother, and would just shoot digital one way and film another. If I had a decent digital camera I'd use any feature that suited me, from changing iso willy-nilly, to super fast shutter speeds, to machine-gunning 30 pics of the same subject from different angles. That's what those cameras excel at. It sounds fun and useful to me, every once in a while, to just photograph the shit out of something and see what I got when I get home.

With film I'm more limited than the above, but it suits me. And I'm sure I've missed many shots that I could have achieved with a quality digital camera but I'm cool with that.

 

[DonJ]

It's too easy to jump for the ISO button or crank up the shutter speed to 1/8000, and on a camera that can shoot 6fps... When you have a "get it done" workaholic mindset like mine, it can be hard to overcome that temptation.

Film teaches patience. Not so with digital.

It can also stifle experimentation and delay the learning process for some people. It depends on the person. If you're improving by shooting film because it helps you control your urge to "spray and pray", then definitely shoot film.

 

[removed account4]

I edited up and explained a bit better. When you live 100% of today's world of get it done NOW, it can be a bit challenging to step back and focus on the basics. When you get presented with challenges such as my F75's limited shutter speed of 1/2000, flash sync of 1/125, or a fixed ISO, you need to get creative how you will still capture "that moment". I love that phase of discovery.

Why would anyone need a shutter speed faster than 1/1000s ( or even 1/500thS )?
Auto winders have been around forever. Sorry I am confused by your reasoning..
As far as I know, I have lived 100% in every time period I have had a camera ...
I agree it can be easy to be carried away, but still it can be easy not to. Most cameras and shuttered lenses I have
owned maxed out at 1/1000 flash sync at 125 or 60 ( if at all )
or they had 2 shutter speeds "I" or "T" and they never really let me down...

Don't forget to have fun !

 

[markjwyatt]

Why would anyone need a shutter speed faster than 1/1000s ( or even 1/500thS )?
...

Agree most of the time, but I grabbed some shots out of the back seat of a car moving at ~40mph, and having higher shutter speeds likely helped (1/1000th MAY have been enough). This was taken at 1/8000th s (Fuijifilm XT-2; dual shutter), ISO 3200. All my other cameras are 1/1250th s or less, and it is usually no issue (I tend to shoot around 1/50th to 1/250th s a lot).


RR Walker by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

Later, as light was fading fast I dropped the speeds. This was taken at 1/500th s, ISO 1600. You can see some motion blur, especially in the foreground.


Shack by Mark Wyatt, on Flickr

 

[Sirius Glass]

Why would anyone need a shutter speed faster than 1/1000s ( or even 1/500thS )?
Auto winders have been around forever. Sorry I am confused by your reasoning..
As far as I know, I have lived 100% in every time period I have had a camera ...
I agree it can be easy to be carried away, but still it can be easy not to. Most cameras and shuttered lenses I have
owned maxed out at 1/1000 flash sync at 125 or 60 ( if at all )
or they had 2 shutter speeds "I" or "T" and they never really let me down...

Don't forget to have fun !

How are you going to shoot ISO 3200 film at box speed with the lens wide open?

 

[markjwyatt]

How are you going to shoot ISO 3200 film at box speed with the lens wide open?

Another good point- even at f22 in daylight it is an issue. ND filters...

 

[faberryman]

How are you going to shoot ISO 3200 film at box speed with the lens wide open?

A lot depends on the level of ambient light. I might even need a tripod.