What would Jesus do?

blansky · Jul 16, 2015

The mantra some Christians have that they keep in the back of their minds when confronted with life and daily interactions is “what would Jesus do?, which is obviously a mindset to attempt to emulate someone they worship/respect. And this is useful to them to help them fulfill their spiritual and personal goals.

Looking through the gallery a couple days ago was a snapshot of an attractive girl in a campy hat and glasses, which the photographer came upon and was intrigued by. My comment was to the effect, if it’s worth shooting, it’s worth controlling the elements. It’s worth the extra 10 seconds to nail the shot. Now I’m not picking on him because this is something every one of us has done. The “oh well who cares, it’s just a snapshot”.

But what if we walked around with our cameras with the mindset of, What would Ansel do? Or what would HCB do? Or what would Karsh do? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not talking about copying them, I’m talking about the state of mind of getting it right, to the best of our ability every time we look through the viewfinder. No excuses.

What if with every picture we took we told ourselves before we trip the shutter, “This is going in my book. This picture will represent me as a photographer”. Do you think then we may take that extra bit of time to make it great? Or at least better?

I get that lots of people here are amateurs and many are probably slightly intimidated by people, feel a little insecure directing people, and claiming their space when shooting. I realize that it can be hard to impose ourselves on the situation. But perhaps if we had the “what would ?????? do? Or the New Yorker, HEY, I’M WOOKIN’ HERE attitude, I bet it would probably elevate our game every time we are out “making” pictures.

Because every time we “settle” for a snapshot, that picture or situation will likely never ever be available again. And every time we settle for a snapshot we are no better than the guy with his camera phone.

Rick A · Jul 16, 2015

Exactly.

markbarendt · Jul 16, 2015

Great thoughts Blansky.

One of the things I do a lot might be called, What would Joe McNally do?

I'll put a strobe on top of the camera for just normal walk around stuff.

Little things like that can make a huge difference.

OptiKen · Jul 16, 2015

Funny....
I am totally an amateur and am only now beginning to settle on a couple of cameras....films...developers, etc, to attempt some consistency and familiarity so that I can concentrate more on the shot than the equipment. My return to film began with collecting so naturally I wanted to try every camera and every combination so that I would be able to experience it all.
I no longer collect. I pretty much know what I want and like.
Now I can shoot.
That being said, I KNOW I'm not a good photographer but I am now learning 'why' and trying to practice 'better'.
I will 'take' snapshots with my iPhone and occasionally a digital camera. My intent is to 'make' photographs with film.
About a month ago, the OP placed the following comment on a picture I had posted from a camera I was testing:
"These pictures show you were there, but I'm not seeing any of you in them. You're taking and not making."
I read the comment and had no choice but to completely agree with him. The picture was of a grass hut and the image I produced was just that...a picture of a grass hut. Period. "This is a grass hut".
Every picture I take now starts with the OP saying, "......but I'm not seeing any of you in them. You're taking and not making.", and I try to think more now to try to make every shot count or at least say something besides, "I was here".
My slogan now is, "NO MORE GRASS HUTS!"

Good subject, blansky. Good wake-up.

MattKing · Jul 16, 2015

Why do we need to always be better than the guy with a camera phone?

Snap shots are fun. The records they supply are valuable, and the memories they can trigger can often be joyful.

I am careful when I shoot snap shots, but only to the extent that a good snap shot is better than a lousy one.

But I am always open to inspiration, and when I see something that looks like I might get something better out of it, I go for it.

But thanks for the interesting thread idea. From now, if I see a good portrait opportunity, I'll just mumble to myself: "What would blanksy do"?

blansky · Jul 16, 2015

OptiKen said:
My slogan now is, "NO MORE GRASS HUTS!"

Thanks, but it's not the grass huts that are the issue. Or the castles or the rocks or the sunsets......

It's that we need to try to do "grass huts" in ways they've never been done before. Put our stamp on them.

I think you got that.

Rick A · Jul 16, 2015

For me, if I can't see the finished photograph in my head before i trip the shutter, I won't. Most times it works out for me, occasionally not. I used to think I had to "capture the moment" regardless of the outcome. It used to be the 35mm mindset, run and gun. I probably shoot less than 5% of the film I used to, but have many times more framed prints to show for slowing down.

Hatchetman · Jul 16, 2015

This particular situation is my weakness. I cannot see the entire frame of a photo when I line up a shot. I constantly have ill-placed distractions in the background. It's like I get tunnel vision.

That being said I never think "what would XXX do?" when taking a shot. However, when looking through negatives, I ask myself "Is this really a GOOD shot? Would a GOOD photographer be happy with that?" usually the answer is no, and the negatives go in a binder likely never to see the light of day again.

Sirius Glass · Jul 16, 2015

I photograph what I want to photograph and I do not care what the gwc would do. I am on my own photo shoot.

bvy · Jul 16, 2015

There's just as much danger in overthinking a shot than just snapping sometimes -- your subject gets bored, the scene becomes uninteresting, the perfect composition becomes illusive and you walk away. Whatever. Sometimes the surprise of shooting without thinking is better than anything I could conceive. This is especially true of candids, the likes of which I've lost many opportunities waiting for something about the light or scene to improve, or fiddling with camera settings.

BrianShaw · Jul 16, 2015

blansky said:
... if it’s worth shooting, it’s worth controlling the elements. It’s worth the extra 10 seconds to nail the shot. Now I’m not picking on him because this is something every one of us has done. The “oh well who cares, it’s just a snapshot”.

But what if we walked around with our cameras with the mindset of, What would Ansel do? Or what would HCB do? Or what would Karsh do? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not talking about copying them, I’m talking about the state of mind of getting it right, to the best of our ability every time we look through the viewfinder. No excuses.

What if with every picture we took we told ourselves before we trip the shutter, “This is going in my book. This picture will represent me as a photographer”. Do you think then we may take that extra bit of time to make it great? Or at least better?
...

Yes, what if. What if we did that and still didn't succeed in satisfying either our own or some one else's quality standard. Would that meant that we didn't care, or didn't have the talent, or didn't get lucky, or simply wasn't able to control the elements at the time/place?

If only what you propose were possible all the time and by everyone. Boy, would we be engulfed in a lot of high-quality imagery.

If only...

(Interesting topic, BTW!)

Alan Klein · Jul 16, 2015

I think some of the problem is that many photographers feel that being creative means not being laden with rules, concepts, discipline or excellence. Somehow, photography is unlike other crafts and art. You can shoot from the hip, literally as well as figuratively, and all bets are off. "I'm shooting my inner self." You're an expert the moment you pick up a camera.

On the other hand, we're neither Jesus nor Ansel Adams. We are al limited; some more than others. But I do agree that our pictures would be better if we slowed down and paid attention to what we want to shot and how we execute it.

cliveh · Jul 16, 2015

blansky said:
But perhaps if we had the what would ?????? do? Or the New Yorker, HEY, IM WOOKIN HERE attitude, I bet it would probably elevate our game every time we are out making pictures.

I dont think it would, as we may try and emulate our heroes, but our own take on an image is unique to our own individuality.

Vaughn · Jul 16, 2015

FATAJDI

Forget All That And Just Do It

In 35 years of photographing I do not believe I have ever gauged my actions based on the thoughts and/or actions of other photographers and other artists. It is just not the way I think and create art. I have been influenced by many great artists, and also by family, friends and everyday events, but that all falls into the background when I create an image.

markbarendt · Jul 16, 2015

MattKing said:
Why do we need to always be better than the guy with a camera phone?

We don't.

We can though apply the "what would ..." principle to any camera.

bdial · Jul 16, 2015

Hatchetman said:
This particular situation is my weakness. I cannot see the entire frame of a photo when I line up a shot. I constantly have ill-placed distractions in the background. It's like I get tunnel vision.
....

Everyone suffers from that tunnel vision to some extent, it's the way our vision works. It's an easy trap to fall into, I know I have plenty of times.

Plus, some camera viewfinders facilitate it with the various focus aids and indicators at the center of the screen.
Knowing the hazard gets you most of the way in overcoming it though. Try to get in the habit of scanning to each corner of the frame and every edge before pressing the shutter. Sometimes a different focus screen may help too.

dpurdy · Jul 16, 2015

I never ever wonder what or how someone else would do it. I only wonder what I might do to make it more interesting to myself.

Sometimes I wonder if I am in a visual rut and should try to find a different way of looking. But I don't then start to wonder how someone else would do it. My own vision is all I am interested in using.

Sirius Glass · Jul 16, 2015

MattKing said:
Why do we need to always be better than the guy with a camera phone?

I do that so automatically that it is never a concern.

pentaxuser · Jul 16, 2015

Vaughn said:
FATAJDI

Forget All That And Just Do It

I am glad that you explained FATAJDI. It sounds vaguely like an Arabic expletive or curse. Without such an explanation somebody in a building in Virginia would have been checking this and you out

pentaxuser

Theo Sulphate · Jul 16, 2015

Perhaps the message here is simply "maximize your chance of success".

A few months ago I made some portraits that turned out great. The people knew I was photographing them, but I didn't have 10 seconds to get things right - maybe two seconds before the shot would be gone. But I'd selected the exposure and focus beforehand (the camera was totally manual) and just had time to frame and shoot.

tkamiya · Jul 16, 2015

When ever I am shooting at a tourist area or sometimes even landscape, I don't always wait until everybody is clear out of my frame. My thing is, if I wanted a picture of something without people, I can go buy that.... or look at a brochure. Most tourist attractions have people there and so does famous/well known landscape.

So I try to use people in my scene.

Otherwise though, I don't have such a formalized rule or ideas. I take what I want to take. I want my image to represent what I saw, not what was there.

My late photo instructor said, "I see you have a good idea on composition but I don't see YOU in it". (then he adds, this is not to be taken literally....) I'm not an activist type. I don't have a grand purpose for my life. But all of my images does represent my mood at the time. That's ME in MY photograph.

I don't try to emulate anyone else. But I take ideas from a lot of people. For instance, Clyde Butcher. He purposely puts a "hole" in his images where he wants the audience to stand and be part of the scene. I often "carve" a path in my image where I want someone to walk. But, I don't like other things that he does, so I do something totally different. I learned from him. But I am not thinking what would Clyde Butcher do?

Ko.Fe. · Jul 16, 2015

Not aware exactly of what J was doing. The only thing I know for sure, no cameras on his time.
HCB became photographer because it was only few photogs, but crowds of artists.
GW was taking a lot, without deep and long thinking and no big intention to develop and see it right away.
All three represents different times and different situation around photography.
Different times, different thinking. Only those who are not copy monkeys might have chance to get something worth of the book.
Think. Not like, not about. Just think.

KenS · Jul 16, 2015

blansky said:
(snip) Im talking about the state of mind of getting it right, to the best of our ability every time we look through the viewfinder. No excuses.

Some 60+ years ago, my mentor had a black cardboard 'viewer' (to which he had a 'knotted string' attached) that he used to 'frame' his intended photograph. At the time (I had just hit my early teen years) I used to think 'what a waste of time'... dammit!!! ... let's get it over and done with). It was not until later that I learned the true time and film-saving value of using a home made 'pre-viewer'... it was so much quicker to 'compose' for the lens-in-use than just setting up the tripod mounted 10x8 and having to 'make the 12+ inch moves' to 'edit'/re-edit/re-select lens/make final adjustments.. on the ground glass.... and THEN make the exposure(s).

His mantra was 'edit to suit your own eye'.... it is going to be 'YOURS' for as long as you have it.

Ken

Vaughn · Jul 16, 2015

pentaxuser said:
I am glad that you explained FATAJDI. It sounds vaguely like an Arabic expletive or curse. Without such an explanation somebody in a building in Virginia would have been checking this and you out

pentaxuser

I was going to use FATADI, but that is the name of a Nigerian footballer (soccer).

Theo Sulphate · Jul 16, 2015

tkamiya said:
When ever I am shooting at a tourist area or sometimes even landscape, I don't always wait until everybody is clear out of my frame. My thing is, if I wanted a picture of something without people, I can go buy that.... or look at a brochure. Most tourist attractions have people there and so does famous/well known landscape.

So I try to use people in my scene.

Only recently have I started doing that. In addition to landscapes and such, I photograph motorsports and also concours (bunch of cars on a very big lawn). For many years, other photographers and I would wait patiently for minutes on end for that one second moment where the spectators had dispersed and the car was by itself. Eventually, I realized that people were part of the event and I didn't need to have the car in total isolation.

What would Jesus do?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency