Famous Photographers

[farhanzx]

There are many best photographer....

But I still looking for my favourite one.....

 

[white]

On another note, I think this thread is a good idea. How can people who've never really looked at HCB or Capa or Adams or Frank etc etc really know what photography can do, or what compositional options are available? Not saying you have to copy people - but get a grounding or widen your horizons.

Amazing how many people will spend big money on gear, thinking it will make them better, when they barely really look at some of the greatest photographers' work.

After reading your high faluting opinion, I had to check out your photo page. I just say you have some good stuff !! Cocky though you may be, you do have talent.

His comment wasn't arrogance, it's just plain fact. The photography of the past is a wellspring of inspiration. Any photographer who doesn't take the time to learn about the masters is doing himself and history a disservice.

 

[Dominantly]

I have been trying to find a photographer who's work I saw a while back. The photos in his portfolio were athletes and bands/artists. He had a very dramatic, edgy style with some awesome lighting. The photos were dark and almost surreal. He has to be a famous Hollywood Pro, I just can't find his site. All I can find are **** photographers, and photo websites. I have never had such a hard time locating something on the net.

 

[fwellers]

On another note, I think this thread is a good idea. How can people who've never really looked at HCB or Capa or Adams or Frank etc etc really know what photography can do, or what compositional options are available? Not saying you have to copy people - but get a grounding or widen your horizons.

Amazing how many people will spend big money on gear, thinking it will make them better, when they barely really look at some of the greatest photographers' work.

After reading your high faluting opinion, I had to check out your photo page. I just say you have some good stuff !! Cocky though you may be, you do have talent.

His comment wasn't arrogance, it's just plain fact. The photography of the past is a wellspring of inspiration. Any photographer who doesn't take the time to learn about the masters is doing himself and history a disservice.

Taking your point a little further, what kind of disservice is it that so many people dare to shoot without having an art degree and understanding compositional theory on every level.

Yea sure, it's probably smart, and for me it's a good thing to look at lots of photographs, but I would bet you can be a fabulous photographer without even knowing who HCB is.

Or maybe they should give a person a quiz on the "Masters" before selling anything more serious than a cellphone camera.

 

[white]

After reading your high faluting opinion, I had to check out your photo page. I just say you have some good stuff !! Cocky though you may be, you do have talent.

His comment wasn't arrogance, it's just plain fact. The photography of the past is a wellspring of inspiration. Any photographer who doesn't take the time to learn about the masters is doing himself and history a disservice.

Or maybe they should give a person a quiz on the "Masters" before selling anything more serious than a cellphone camera.

Not such a bad idea, actually. Great art should be displayed everywhere.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

After reading your high faluting opinion, I had to check out your photo page. I just say you have some good stuff !! Cocky though you may be, you do have talent.

His comment wasn't arrogance, it's just plain fact. The photography of the past is a wellspring of inspiration. Any photographer who doesn't take the time to learn about the masters is doing himself and history a disservice.

Taking your point a little further, what kind of disservice is it that so many people dare to shoot without having an art degree and understanding compositional theory on every level.

Yea sure, it's probably smart, and for me it's a good thing to look at lots of photographs, but I would bet you can be a fabulous photographer without even knowing who HCB is.

Or maybe they should give a person a quiz on the "Masters" before selling anything more serious than a cellphone camera.

I think I'll vote for a parenting license first :lmao:

You are absolutely right. Especially since I believe that an artistic vision can be had from looking at other media. I have, after all, always told my students to look at paintings and illustrations, etc because they can learn as much there as they can from photos. But I do tell them to look.

And the reason is simple. Why re-invent the wheel?

You could learn proper technique without ever opening a book about exposure but why spend a year figuring it out on your own when you could do it in a few weeks with the help of a book.

Looking at other photogs is the same thing. It gives you an idea of what's been done, what is being done, etc. And it may make you realize that you may not want to pay too much attention to the artsy side of C&C.

I just recommended a book to another member and one of my arguments for it was that most photos in the book would get killed in C&C here on the forum. As Manaheim said in this thread http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...hoto-gallery/192755-giving-receiving-c-c.html
forums can be great for some things but they can kill you where the artistic side is concerned.

So, if looking at well known photogs can help save you from going so mainstream that you become boring, I'm all for it.

And btw, I don't have a degree in photo. I have a degree in life from the free university of sitting on a street corner and watching...

 

[fwellers]

You won't get any argument from me about looking at photos for inspiration and education. I do it all the time.
Even more important is actually taking pictures, editing them, obtaining feedback on them, and trying again.

I don't see a reason though that it should be considered as some sort of badge of entry into the photographer club to have studied the supposed masters. And I dislike the sentiment that you shouldn't buy good gear in order to help your pictures look better, before paying some sort of educational dues. It reminds me of snobbery.

 

[maddenvallis]

Annie Leibovitz is deff up there but ansel adams and richard avadon are also some of my favs.

Halifax Wedding Photography

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I don't see a reason though that it should be considered as some sort of badge of entry into the photographer club to have studied the supposed masters. And I dislike the sentiment that you shouldn't buy good gear in order to help your pictures look better, before paying some sort of educational dues. It reminds me of snobbery.

As was said before, I don't believe this is what was meant. I can't help if you are feeling a personal attack in his post, but I really don't see it.

Same with you're gear argument. Buy whatever you want, it's your money, but if you're spending $10,000 on a camera and a couple lenses to take snapshots... you're probably more of a show off than a photog. The camera does not make the photo. Period. Those responses are not a way to belittle the person asking, it is a way to save them money. Now if the person just wants to spend, hey, its their life. Whatever.

I've been at the game for over 30 years. For a good chunk of those years I worked with gear that was not "pro" but, guess what... I sold.

I've also mentioned a couple times here on the forums that one of my best selling art photo was shot with a Brownie with a bad lens.

All those posts mean is that you are never going to replace a $10 camera and an artistic eye with $10,000 worth of gear and nothing else.

 

[fwellers]

I don't see a reason though that it should be considered as some sort of badge of entry into the photographer club to have studied the supposed masters. And I dislike the sentiment that you shouldn't buy good gear in order to help your pictures look better, before paying some sort of educational dues. It reminds me of snobbery.

As was said before, I don't believe this is what was meant. I can't help if you are feeling a personal attack in his post, but I really don't see it.

Same with you're gear argument. Buy whatever you want, it's your money, but if you're spending $10,000 on a camera and a couple lenses to take snapshots... you're probably more of a show off than a photog. The camera does not make the photo. Period. Those responses are not a way to belittle the person asking, it is a way to save them money. Now if the person just wants to spend, hey, its their life. Whatever.

I've been at the game for over 30 years. For a good chunk of those years I worked with gear that was not "pro" but, guess what... I sold.

I've also mentioned a couple times here on the forums that one of my best selling art photo was shot with a Brownie with a bad lens.

All those posts mean is that you are never going to replace a $10 camera and an artistic eye with $10,000 worth of gear and nothing else.

I don't take it personally. The statement bothered me, but I am not feeling attacked by it. Your statement bothers me too.
I actually get you that you can take great pictures with lower end cameras. But you go too far when you say "if you're spending $10,000 on a camera and a couple lenses to take snapshots... you're probably more of a show off than a photog."

If you don't see the snobbish conotation in a statement like that, then there's nothing much left to say. NO biggy you're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to thing it's stuck up.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

No, I don't see any snobbish anything. Didn't I say that your are entitled to spend your money however you want? My thoughts come from the fact that I am cheap. I will not spend a $100 where I can do with $5. Once again, it is your money and you spend it as you wish.

Because I don't know you, if I see snapshots and you're talking about spending $10,000 on a camera, I will tell you that you can do the same with a $500 one.

If trying to save someone money is being a snob, then I am. Amen.

 

[fwellers]

And here I was considering upgrading my d90 for a d700 so I can have more latitude for clean pictures in low light and get more DOF abilities. Instead I should sell it and use my cell phone. Or get rid of that fast lens I have and put the old kit lens back on there.
Just wondering though, at what exact level does someone's image taking stop being snapshots and become worthy of being called photography ?
I'd post a picture of mine for your review but since I shot it with a $1000 camera and a $1800 lens, I would be afraid you'd just call me a showoff.

But aren't we all a little bit of a showoff ? Isn't that usually the nature of ( at least non-pro ) photography, to show it off ?

You don't have to answer this Cloudwalker, I'm just in rare sour mood. :meh:

 

[c.cloudwalker]

Yes, you are in a sour mood. And maybe you need to learn some english. The modern YOU can be understood as two things. A very personal one or the very general one. I get tired of typing "one" instead of "you" but my post wasn't about you. It was about the "you-one" person. Get over it.

Next, I haven't seen your photos but this "here I was considering upgrading my d90 for a d700 so I can have more latitude for clean pictures in low light and get more DOF abilities" says you are not the kind of person I was talking about so why are taking it son personally?

The kind of person I was talking about would never even know how to say that. This is not about you. Get over yourself, buddy.

And enjoy whichever camera you get next. Over and out.

 

[CWyatt]

Interesting to read the feedback on that post. To clarify, I'm not saying you need to study the 'greats', whoever you think they may be. What I'm trying to say is that looking at others' work is natural and a way of learning (even non-photographic imagery). Not to copy (as Petraio Prime pointed out is a problem), but just to gain a better understanding of what can be achieved with the photographic medium. Even looking at photographers that are acclaimed but which you don't like, makes you think. And as was pointed out earlier, there is no substitute for going out and taking your own photographs, and working on improving them.

I have no problem with someone who hasn't 'learned' composition. I don't go in for rules. But I personally think it'd be cockier for someone to think that they're so talented they can become a great photographer without worrying about really looking at the work of the great photographers of the last 150 or so years.

 

[Petraio Prime]

Annie Leibovitz is deff up there but ansel adams and richard avadon are also some of my favs.

Halifax Wedding Photography

No, no, and no.