Can someone convince me about the professionalism of photography?

[W.Y.Photo]

Well I hope that you can understand why this misunderstanding occurred as people on internet forums are constantly expecting trolls to show up and sow discord. If so I think you could learn a lot about your questions by spending some time on here and learning about what it really is to be a photographer.


You can click on an administrator or mod's name and then click "start a conversation" to PM them about deleting it if you'd like

 

[fjrabon]

I was like anyone using the non- professional digital cameras and mobile camera to take shots of anything I want to keep or record. Several days ago I decided to buy a DSLR camera, a powerful camera that can really take good shots and compatible with a lot of lenses that can do many things.

Nice, that's very exciting.

My question is:

What is the professional photographer can do more than an amateur one?

The question might seems to be silly, not logic or even provocative to someones, and I know well that there might be a lot of reason and answers,

Yes, there are a lot of reasons and answers. It isn't especially logical and as you found out, it does provoke harsh words to question many people on here's life work's value.

my question was based on that any camera, is provided with preset modes that can allow you to take photos for sports, landscape, daylight.....etc, in each of these presets the camera which is extracted from a very complicated physics science adjusts everything and all parameters to suit the scene, weather and surrounded environment.

I am quit sure that the camera will adjust it self in an automatic mode in a way far more accurate than the best photographer can ever do.

The science that scene modes use isn't all that complicated. Mostly they just either expose for middle gray overall, or on a very specific point. Some will tend towards higher shutter speeds (sports mode), some will tend towards lower ISOs and greater depth of field (landscape). None of them are very complex and none know what it is you're trying to communicate with a shot.

It is like trying to simulate an ABS system with threshold in a car that doesn't equipped with ABS, the ABS system is more accurate and understand the road conditions in a way much more you can sense. The same in cameras, they are very complicated and they can sense the light surrounded, the object and even now cameras can detect the faces and objects, how could possibly a professional photographer be more accurate and sensitive like a camera sensor, lens and overall system?

No, This is an awful analogy. ABS systems have a very simple job: making sure that your brakes don't lock up, and use very simple inputs to achieve that. ABS systems have one, very explicit goal, to stop your car quickly. Photography doesn't have one goal. What you're essentially talking about here is getting an acceptable exposure. That's literally the easiest part of photography there is. Anybody who is above a mediocre amateur rarely worries about getting a proper exposure. Exposure is something we rarely have to think about, other than in very exceptional cases, in which case a scene mode wouldn't likely work anyway.

I believe according to what I know which is not much in the photography world that the good looking photo which receive thousands of likes on a photos networks depends on a very good scene shotted with a very good camera and suitable mounted lens, and then may be edited via a photo editing software.

And also the photographer found the scene, waited for the moment, framed it just right, from the right perspective, cut out elements in the frame that were distracting from the image's purpose, and distilled elements that enhanced the image's purpose.

Iso: to be decided by camera according to the light conditions, aperture, focal length and shutter speed.
Aperture: depends on the lens and the lens focal length used in the shot
Focal length: decided by the user according to the desired zoom
Focus: done easily by lens auto focus, can change to manual and to focus on the object, the background or the overall image.
Shutter speed: can be decided by the camera in static shots, while in fast moving objects can be adjusted by user.

These are overly simplified, but basically kinda sorta right. But again, this is the easiest parts of photography. Getting something in focus and properly exposed is very easy. When evaluating professional photographers nobody evaluates whether they missed focus or got the exposure right. Those are givens. That would be like evaluating a professional baseball player on their ability to play a game of catch.

I don't want to specify much details but in general all the above mentioned parameters affect each others.

May be some situations needs a human entry but I don't think they exceed 5% otherwise the good camera with suitable lens and auto mode will perfectly do the job.

Thanks

The devil is in the details.

 

[zolito]

Well I hope that you can understand why this misunderstanding occurred as people on internet forums are constantly expecting trolls to show up and sow discord. If so I think you could learn a lot about your questions by spending some time on here and learning about what it really is to be a photographer.


You can click on an administrator or mod's name and then click "start a conversation" to PM them about deleting it if you'd like

Many thanks for your kind explanation and sincere support.

With all my respect.

 

[W.Y.Photo]

I don't want to specify much details but in general all the above mentioned parameters affect each others.

May be some situations needs a human entry but I don't think they exceed 5% otherwise the good camera with suitable lens and auto mode will perfectly do the job.

Thanks

The devil is in the details.

To expound upon this.. in many situations 100s of the images a professional takes won't be considered "keepers" in the first place, and its usually those 5% of situations which create the most dynamic and interesting images, the ones the photographer would consider to be "keepers", so even if a camera is capable of predicting the exact exposure a photographer would want 95% of the time that 5% of the time it didn't would be a huge burden on the photographer while he was doing his job, to make great images for people.

 

[Vtec44]

I'm always late to a fun party lol

 

[W.Y.Photo]

I honestly don't know how I'm not... apparently my attention span matches those of others at work. hahahah

 

[imagemaker46]

I'm surprised this thread went as long as it did, mostly quite civil, considering the opening statement the Op made. My original reply was far less polite.

 

[Life]

I stand by everyone who disposed auto from the Get go. Lol.

 

[snowbear]

Which is funny because my camera body has no auto or picture settings.

It only has M, A, S and P just like every other professional camera body.

One of mine only has ASA and shutter speed.

 

[Life]

Oh and browse 500px.com, about 90% of all photos there are not done in auto mode, but rather Manual. Auto is basically snapshots. Un interesting. You mess with the ISO, shutter speed, Aperture, and you get very interesting results. You change the entire DoF with aperture, a lot of manual shooters shoot 1 - 2 stops lower shutter speed than the light meter says, as it creates nicer contrast etc. Auto mode shoots recommended everything, so it generally doesn't "pop" as if it were 2 stops below.

 

[Bebulamar]

I dunno but I paid extra money to have a camera that doesn't the scene mode so perhaps I wouldn't know how well they work.

 

[pgriz]

Auto mode = paint by numbers. Most decisions already made for you. In the hands of a beginner, auto modes get you better results than if the beginner tried to figure it out. In the hands of a good, experienced photographer, auto mode is good because he/she already knows what the camera will come up with in that/those modes, and is fine with the settings, so can spend more time on the composition and other aspects.

But why is the human component important? Because what the camera does is usually only a small portion of the image-making. There's the staging of the shot, picking the right perspective and angle, choosing the light and modifiers, deciding on the best framing, thinking about what aspects need to be emphasized to tell the story (Deep DOF or shallow? Fast shutter or slow? wide-angle or telephoto?). Is a grad ND filter appropriate? If so, what kind? What about the timing of the "key moment"? Then there's the processing after the original image is made. Decisions whether or not to use HDR, selective sharpening/blurring, dodging or burning, etc.

 

[Derrel]

Perhaps we ought to look at the Google Street View photographs as examples of how an automated photographic system works. There are a lot of photos shot by their car-cameras, from a lot of places. I really have not seen a lot of their images, perhaps only 200 or so. Those photos would be mostly "automated" in terms of their origin, I would think.

 

[snowbear]

Auto mode = paint by numbers

I might just have to grab this for my signature!

 

[pgriz]

Auto mode = paint by numbers

I might just have to grab this for my signature!

Cool! Does that mean that I get automatic "like" royalties for anytime someone likes your posts?