When you know it’s in the can, or do you?

[cliveh]

Some years ago I use to think that sometimes when taking a photograph, that I knew I had got the image I wanted seconds after pressing the shutter. However, I’m not sure that always proved to be the case and now I never seem to know, but am sometimes confronted by surprises good and bad. Do others ever get that feeling and if so, are you in most part right or wrong?

 

[blansky]

The more experienced you are the more you "know" what you got.

That being said. the difference between "experiencing" a scene, or especially a person, and what was captured on the film or card is often a long ways from what you thought you got.

People are an enigma to how they come across in film/digital. You're never really sure although you know you got the elements right like lighting etc. you really never know how much the camera 'loves' them.

 

[erikg]

You don't knows until you know.

 

[bobwysiwyg]

I'm never really sure. But then for me that's a plus for film. I get three anticipatory opportunities. Taking, developing the film and finally a print. Each step may be days, weeks or even months apart so I get a lot of mileage out of a single exposure.

 

[Ian Grant]

In numerous cases when I pressed the shutter, and luckily I've not screwed up yet, it's very rare I make two identical negatives but if I can I do when I have that deep gut instict - as I mostly shoot LF I process one first before the other.

Ian

 

[removed account4]

You don't knows until you know.

+1

thanks yogi!

 

[Dr Croubie]

I think it works both ways for me, in good and bad ways. Sometimes I get 'a great shot' after I click the shutter, but when I develop and scan and look at it, it's no good.
But then, sometimes as I take a shot I see someone start to change their expression or position (I take a lot of photos of people on stages in dimly lit rooms, they're performing and moving, and shutter speed are low) just as I press the trigger, and think it's wasted. Then when I get home and look at the result, i'm pleasantly surprised and it's the best shot on the roll.

Surely more skill on my part would negate both of those, but I'd rather lose some good shots to have the pleasant surprises than to just have more decent with no surprises.

 

[blansky]

Surely more skill on my part would negate both of those, but I'd rather lose some good shots to have the pleasant surprises than to just have more decent with no surprises.

No matter who you are or what your skill level, in photography there are always surprises.

 

[wildbill]

I like suprises but often there are those shots that I know will be excellent. Then i process the film to find scratches or something along those lines

 

[BrianShaw]

Generally speaking, yes. Sometimes, though, there are surprises - both kinds: shots "known" to be great that were lousy and shots believed to be "lousy" that turned out OK.

 

[Truzi]

I basically "know" what I am getting in a sense. Whether it will be any good is another story. In the past, any truly "good" photos were accidents; I always captured the image/subject I intended to, just usually not how I wanted it. I'm not good with light or composing, so most of what I take are "boring" snapshots; I get the subject I want, but I really don't know how to make it interesting.

I'm getting better, though.

 

[Dan Henderson]

Usually I know when I have a good composition that will make a satisfying photograph. If I worked my exposure out right, and if, as Vinny said, unexpected scratches and other negative defects do not appear, I will be able to produce a satisfying print.

 

[eddie]

I'm never really sure. But then for me that's a plus for film. I get three anticipatory opportunities. Taking, developing the film and finally a print. Each step may be days, weeks or even months apart so I get a lot of mileage out of a single exposure.

Well said... I often find that what motivated me to expose, in the first place, can change as I start printing. The time between exposure and printing allows me to approach the negative unhindered by a preconceived notion of the final result. Like Bob, I also consider this a huge plus.

 

[David Brown]

I knew I had got the image I wanted seconds after pressing the shutter. ... Do others ever get that feeling ...

Every time.

... and if so, are you in most part right or wrong?

Maybe.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I almost always know whether or not I got. If I am not sure that I got I may take a second shot. Even when I got it I look to see if there is another composition that I like better.

 

[Tony Egan]

On a few occasions shooting gigs I knew I had something special and couldn't wait to develop that roll to confirm my beliefs. A certain body shape or facial expression or movement that I was anticipating and got the timing right. Perhaps 10 or 12 times in shooting thousands of images. Mostly my feeling was "not quite there" and I haven't been positively surprised often. A bit disappointed often, yes!