self-defeating

[Dashur]

Perhaps there could be some benefit to reviewing the images at the time of their capture? Maybe you'd be able to review them quickly, and make changes that you might like more, at a later time? Perhaps the disappointment that you feel at later times could be avoided if there were some chimping done at the time of the photography?

Does not chimping add anything to the photographic process for you? Do you not have the time to review shots? How is not utilizing the rear LCD screen of benefit to you?

Because My camera's LCD does not show what my computer shows. it gives only a rudimentary view of what I actually captured. And when i shoot, I tend to be 'in a groove' and don't like to stop. So - if I had a "remotely modern" camera with a decent LCD Maybe I could get better use from it. But for me? A "new" camera is from like...I dunno...2010? I tend to not upgrade until the camera I have actually limits me. I use a circa 2005? 1D Mark II (N) and an old Rebel TSi-something-or-nother....the photo of my daughter was taken with the Rebel.

 

[Designer]

I think you're - just my first impression - a technical dude ..

I'm slowly learning digital technology, but I think I'm pretty good at seeing what is there (or not there).

 

[jcdeboever]

Understood - I was trying to convey I shoot then forget and move to the next shot. I don't read the exif and think about the shot I made and what it may be...I'm too fast (that'swhatSHEsaid). [emoji481]

I have read negative comments on chimping, who cares? Do what works for you. The technology is there for a reason, some cameras are better for it than others. Not a glowing feature on a Fujifilm X-T2, or X-Pro 2 and when shooting Raw or Raw + JPEG. It works good in JPEG fine however.

 

[Designer]

My camera's LCD does not show what my computer shows.

Agreed. I use it to check frame, focus, composition, eye-blinks, etc., and the histogram.

 

[runnah]

Understood - I was trying to convey I shoot then forget and move to the next shot. I don't read the exif and think about the shot I made and what it may be...I'm too fast (that'swhatSHEsaid). [emoji481]

I have read negative comments on chimping, who cares? Do what works for you. The technology is there for a reason, some cameras are better for it than others. Not a glowing feature on a Fujifilm X-T2, or X-Pro 2 and when shooting Raw or Raw + JPEG. It works good in JPEG fine however.

Folks who have' their heads up their asses complain about chimping and SOC nonsense.

 

[Gary A.]

Slowing down is soooo hard. I even purchased a medium format film camera that needs a tripod (an eight pound monster) ... I am reluctant to use it because it is soooo slow it drives me crazy.

Film slowed me down because nothing was automatic and I only had 36 frames before I had to stop and reload. So I slowed down to conserve film. Film made me anticipate and wait for the best expression or the peak of action before releasing the shutter. Digital is so easy and fast that the speed is addicting. I picked up a Fuji XP1, based entirely on the looks. I thought it was a damn sexy camera ... so I bought it without any review of any kind. (Yes, I'm that shallow.) It was a slow digital camera. It did everything slow, it focused slow, it wrote to the card slow, it chimped slow ... in low light that slow dog of a camera just got worse. (But surprisingly enough, it captured a great image, once it got around to it.) But instead of tossing that ol' dog away, I retrained myself to work with the short comings. It took me back to my film roots of anticipatory photography of taking my time, that one good shot is better than ten okay shots. Even though I am shooting the next generation Fuji with lightning fast focus and dSLR performance, I am shooting nearly everything in single frame ... it slows me down and lets me see what I'm capturing much better.

The 'N' is a nice camera. Getting a little long in the tooth, but a nice camera nonetheless.

 

[The_Traveler]

What I do not ever do is let myself be led to reject a picture for daft issues like sharpness, blown highlights and other non-issues that photographers get het up about.

Chimping has nothing to do with a good or bad image

Self-critiquing is necessary to climb up the learning curve of photography. After reviewing every shot, I keep telling myself that I can do better. That doesn't necessarily mean the stuff I got was garbage, but rather there is room for improvement.

I quoted these because just clicking agree isn't enough. They are dead on right.

Your critique is no better nor worse than mine, even if yours is more learned or experienced.

I quoted this because you are semi wrong.
You may eventually decide that critique is wrong but you need to consider it and balance it against what you thought before.
Everyone's critique is worth a lot because you are getting to read/hear what other people know and are seeing and thinking.
It may be that you don't know enough to 'see' that yet or that you can't even conceive that people actually think that.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

For example:

I don't care for this shot of your daughter.
The left side of the her face is effectively contourless; she still has a bit of baby-chubby there.
You need to back off, get the modelling of her chin, neck, her hair and shoulders in there; get her to face you a bit to provide some contour and interest.
Her eyes are great, get both of them working for the picture, you don't need all that cheek.
The image is a bit flat, no texture.
Also, it has a slight cold tinge.

 

[Dashur]

I quoted this because you are semi wrong.
You may eventually decide that critique is wrong but you need to consider it and balance it against what you thought before.
Everyone's critique is worth a lot because you are getting to read/hear what other people know and are seeing and thinking.
It may be that you don't know enough to 'see' that yet or that you can't even conceive that people actually think that.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

For example:

I don't care for this shot of your daughter.
The left side of the her face is effectively contourless; she still has a bit of baby-chubby there.
You need to back off, get the modelling of her chin, neck, her hair and shoulders in there; get her to face you a bit to provide some contour and interest.
Her eyes are great, get both of them working for the picture, you don't need all that cheek.
The image is a bit flat, no texture.
Also, it has a slight cold tinge.

View attachment 140138

And that's sort of my point. I read your critique. I place an internal value on what I read and I either accept it and think about incorporating the information or I ignore it. It's a little bit like somebody telling me what brand of whatever is "better" than the next.

And your critique has solid feedback I'm considering. And it has things I will let-be. Your critique is not better than anyone's because it's your point of view - and when I submit something for critique I consider the beholder and preferences and all that.

And I couldn't back off. I was physically as far away from her as possible.

 

[DanOstergren]

I do it fairly often. Simply put I think it's good to be critical of your own work because you need to train your eye to see what isn't working and be able to apply your critical eye to improve your work, but also you should look back at your old work and take some time to appreciate your progress. It can be re-affirming sometimes.

 

[Rahb]

I'm no professional, and do not strive to be honestly. I want to get as good as I can, and understand the process as much as possible. I rarely have a shot that just blows me away. I can appreciate other peoples work with no trouble, but I feel that is because I wasn't there shooting it.

At times there is an inherent lie in every photo I take. I see what's not seen by the person looking at the photo. Allot of times I judge my shots on that. Then, you find a shot you are somewhat content with. You post it only to have another person impart their views on what they would have done. Throw that in with what you haven't liked or wanted to change, and you feel like the shot is junk.

I shoot often when working with the youth at our church. Of course there are some very good photographers that attend our church and do professional work for the church and members at times. I was almost embarrassed to bring my camera if I knew they were going to have a crew there.

Then something happened that really helped me. I stopped worrying about it. Every time I take a photo when a friend or family asks me to, they are always pleased with the results. They surpass what their ability would have been, and they love them. The youth rarely gets access to any of the photos taken by the professionals, and my youth director pulled me aside one day. It's like he could since that I was willing, but uneasy about taking photos for him during our trips and events. He showed me photos he has taken at events on his phone, then he showed me how he has used them on their social media, and then an example of what he'd prefer it looked like with the spots he made using my shots. She said they are immensely better than what he can get. That's when I realized, I'm always going to be critical, but what's "not good enough" in my eyes could be very satisfying to someone who gets 90% of their photos from instagram, snapchat, etc.

Disclaimer, I'm not a professional, and not trying to make any money at this. I do it because I enjoy it, and won't take on a serious "job" because I don't want to take a gig from a professional. I focus on the hobby aspect, and the opportunity it affords me to better my skill in this.

Don't know if that helps at all...

 

[table1349]

Constructive Pessimism: Why Artists Are Never Happy

 

[The_Traveler]

Your critique is not better than anyone's because it's your point of view - and when I submit something for critique I consider the beholder and preferences and all that.

Just want to point out that this sentence is internally contradictory.

"when I submit something for critique I consider the beholder and preferences and all that" you are saying that you consider what you know about the person giving critique
'Your critique is not better than anyone's because it's your point of view" - everyone's critique is equal as far as you're concerned.

 

[Dashur]

Your critique is not better than anyone's because it's your point of view - and when I submit something for critique I consider the beholder and preferences and all that.

Just want to point out that this sentence is internally contradictory.

"when I submit something for critique I consider the beholder and preferences and all that" you are saying that you consider what you know about the person giving critique
'Your critique is not better than anyone's because it's your point of view" - everyone's critique is equal as far as you're concerned.

you are saying that you consider what you know about the person giving critique

Of course - I consider the person giving the critique; what do I know about them? I know they are not me. I know they have their preferences. I know their preferences are necessarily not mine. Thus their critique is no better (nor worse) than anyone else. Thus, everyone's critique is equal as far as I'm concerned. It's not internally contradictory - it's internally harmonious.

 

[Fred von den Berg]

I remember seeing a documentary years ago about a research station in the Antarctic where new arrivals were given a series of talks and presentations. One thing that was stressed is that in the case of an emergency or accident no one would be left for dead outside the station: you aren't dead until you're warm and dead. This is something I apply to the photos I'm not sure about - they get put away for a while and perhaps in time I will warm to them.

 

[Designer]

Of course - I consider the person giving the critique; what do I know about them? I know they are not me. I know they have their preferences. I know their preferences are necessarily not mine. Thus their critique is no better (nor worse) than anyone else. Thus, everyone's critique is equal as far as I'm concerned. It's not internally contradictory - it's internally harmonious.

That's just silly. It may make you feel good internally to be "nonjudgemental", but I think most people are judgmental, so what have you proved?