How long do you feel it took to learn the basics?

[pgriz]

First, the basics were the camera controls.
Then, exposure.
Then, light.
Then, depth of field
Then Flash.
Then Macro.
Then Micro.
Then I discovered Digital.
Then I learned about color, and depth.
Then came sharpening
Then came multi-light flash
Then modifiers
Then postprocessing.
and if I keep on going,
eventually
I'll find all the basics are covered.

Oh.

Forgot about
Composition
and emotion
and the decisive moment
negative space
positive space
viewer perception
and
Art (that's with a capital "A.

It's a long journey.

 

[robbins.photo]

First, the basics were the camera controls.
Then, exposure.
Then, light.
Then, depth of field
Then Flash.
Then Macro.
Then Micro.
Then I discovered Digital.
Then I learned about color, and depth.
Then came sharpening
Then came multi-light flash
Then modifiers
Then postprocessing.
and if I keep on going,
eventually
I'll find all the basics are covered.

Oh.

Forgot about
Composition
and emotion
and the decisive moment
negative space
positive space
viewer perception
and
Art (that's with a capital "A.

It's a long journey.

Right. Exactly. 6.

 

[pgriz]

First, the basics were the camera controls.
Then, exposure.
Then, light.
Then, depth of field
Then Flash.
Then Macro.
Then Micro.
Then I discovered Digital.
Then I learned about color, and depth.
Then came sharpening
Then came multi-light flash
Then modifiers
Then postprocessing.
and if I keep on going,
eventually
I'll find all the basics are covered.

Oh.

Forgot about
Composition
and emotion
and the decisive moment
negative space
positive space
viewer perception
and
Art (that's with a capital "A.

It's a long journey.

Right. Exactly. 6.

Good thing you didn't say 42. Because that's the answer to the OTHER question.

 

[Vtec44]

I learned proper exposure in manual mode in a few weeks. I'm still learning how to make beautiful pictures.

 

[Overread]

The biggest thing I find is not getting to a point where you're comfortable, but getting to a point where you stop forgetting the things that you are comfortable with.

That is to say the more comfortable you get with something the less you think about it. That's good, it leaves your mind free to think about other things. But you've got to temper that against reminding yourself of those things every so often otherwise what happens is that you quickly get more and more "lazy" with the thinking and soon you're in a rutt where you're doing the same sort of thing over and over because you've neglected the options for too long.

I find this takes effect lot with editing - its very easy to get "lazy" with that for a long while and then suddenly you've got to re-learn things!

 

[Bebulamar]

It really depends on what is the basic. The exposure triangle (I hate that term), depth of field, result of using different shutter speed, focusing those can be learned in about 1 hour. That how long it took me but it's been 38 years and there still things to learn.

 

[dennybeall]

Well, let's see. First look at my Avatar, now consider that the Speed Graphic was new.
And.....I'm certainly Not new now.
I'm still learning the basics of something, HDR, layers, pano's, luminance layers...........

 

[407370]

Basics keep changing. The hardware / software changes so my process has to change. Opinions on what a good picture actually looks like keep changing as well. Just enjoy the ride.

 

[sashbar]

Interesting that so many posters mentioned that they learn things quickly but then forget it. This is natural and happens to anyone, especially amateurs who do not shoot on a daily basis.

It brings me to a conclusion that many will disagree with, but please think twice before doing it.

I think it is counterproductive to try to learn as much as possible about photography.

By doing that you will know a bit about everything (and even will be able to talk about it on some photo forum), but you will struggle to put it to practice correctly.

That is, as I said natural, to remember things we need to put it to practice and I do not mean an occasional weekend shooting.

So, are amateurs doomed? I do not think so. We just need to get real and understand that the more you will try to broaden your horizon, the further this horizon will get.

Instead, we need to understand what kind of photography we are going to pursue and learn a relatively narrow set of skills that is needed for that.

Modern cameras pack a lot of functions and in most cases most of it is useless and not needed for a particular photog. They make us think that we need to learn how to use every possible option. But this is really not needed.

There are many amateurs who shoot everything, try to learn everything, feel proud about it and end up with mediocre, useless images that have no photographic value and are not worth the digital space.

Others get obsessed with their gear and try to learn every function and beyond that, and end up with - you guessed it - mediocre useless images.

The alternative is to figure out what kind of photography one needs to specialise, to develop the needed workflow, shootflow and learnflow, so to speak.

I think it is absolutely crucial for an amateur if he wants to develop his skills (as opposed to playing with his camera, shooting kids, cats, family and some random landscapes) to really think about what is it he wants to capture, what kind of photography he/she wants to pursue, and the narrower is his/her genre the bigger is her/his chance to succeed.

The whole process must be targeted - learn what you need to get the images that you want and ignore all the rest. Do not learn things that you will not be putting to practice repeatedly and often enough to be able to master it. Otherwise you will be doomed to learn and forget the "basics".

That approach will also help you to put the creative side ahead of the technical stuff that really has to be just a tool to achieve your creative goals.

 

[Overread]

sashbar I get what you're saying and agree with it, but I think you're presenting it slightly the wrong way; and in a form that favours the intermediate over the beginner.

I think a beginner has to learn with a broad approach, because unless they have a very singular very focused interest chances are that they are going to want to do a bit of everything at some stage. In addition learning different things gives you more potential tools to work with.

The more tools - the more experiences - the more difference you have the more potential you add. The more you can adapt, even within a niche having experience outside of it will give new possibilities or just make you look at things differently - or be ready for that time when something within your niche does something different.

Yes the more you learn the more you realise you don't know. For most people they don't just learn and learn and learn - they reach a point. A maximum. Typically this will be a point at which they can perform their chosen interest area(s) and get results that they find pleasing. Those of us online (esp active ones) tend to represent those who might find that we don't reach that point as readily or as fully - we see a little further because we are the "keen" ones; so its harder to imagine someone who reaches a "yeah this is enough" point so readily.



We are going to forget things - heck I would say that pros are in even worse a position than amateurs. A pro is likely (in most fields) to be doing the same sort of thing every day. They will have a style and a working formula and will produce to that style. All day - every day.
Now sure most will have different niches and some will cover several so its not always identical; but they key is that for every season of style that they have (and that might be years or months long) they in essence shoot within a niche. So they've a great potential to get into that niche and not come out.

An amateur - or a pro with more creative freedom than most are allowed - has the bonus that they more so choose their niche as they wish. If they feel like change they just change -a pro with a long term style has to seriously consider change (esp if its significant) because that could lose them their market corner.





In all this though we are talking of ideals; ideal concept people (pro - amateur) and in reality they don't exist. Reality will take bits of these ideals and will come close or far to them.

Really what it comes down to is the individual - and I'd always say the best advice you can give them is to keep that broad view - to keep learning - to keep experimenting - enjoying and doing their hobby. Yep they are going to forget stuff - if they are AWARE of that they can better prepare themselves. They can refresh - they can try something new etc....

 

[sashbar]

Overread - I hear what you as well. But I think at some stage one has to chose between wandering in the forest and choosing a path and follow it. There are lot of things in this forest to enjoy, but ultimately there is a danger that at some stage you will ask a question "What the hell am I doing here?" . I think that most photogs want to achieve something beyond recreational pleasures and the only way that I see is to specialise.

 

[Overread]

Yep and most will - even the generalists will typically start to find a focus to their learning. The key is to not teach them that focusing is the only way forward. Yes focus brings the potential of increased quality and performance and indeed its a fantastic way to learn specific skills.

But I'd never say "ok now you can use the camera pick a subject and shoot that and only that". I think that each of us finds that what we shoot changes - we have general inthe background - we've our current focus(es) - and then we get shifts. New things come along and we learn a new segment

Or maybe we find our niche and we love it so much we never or hardly leave - that's a choice for the person really .

 

[pgriz]

I find the last few posts between Overread and Sashbar both interesting and informative. I tend to think closer to Sashbar's point of view, but I also appreciate Overread's ideas. It IS true that knowledge acquired, is lost if not used frequently enough. Well, if not lost, then sufficiently rusty that it's almost useless. "Knowing" something on an intellectual level (book-learning) is not the same as knowing something well enough to make the application almost instinctive. When we don't use the knowledge or skill, it gradually degrades and if not used long enough, we have to relearn almost from the beginning. It's really a case of "use it or lose it". For instance, I spent many hours doing my own development and printing, so that on an intellectual level I know the process, but on a practical level, I'd have to relearn pretty much everything (even though I "know" what is supposed to happen), because I haven't done it for many years.

 

[Bebulamar]

I don't think I ever forget anything I learned about photography. There are many things I try to learn but never get it like posing people. I just don't get it not forget.

 

[D7K]

I think it's a constant learning curve, You can know the basic but I don't think that you ever stop learning how to use them effectively to create something that you're happy with..