the biggest non-technical failings of new photographers

The_Traveler · Dec 23, 2006

What do you think are the biggest non-technical failings of new photographers?

I am always surprised that there seems to be little attempt to look at the composition, to remove stuff that doesn't belong, to erect strong verticals or flattern horizons, to crop to an aspect ratio that fits the photo.

What thinkst thou?

fischerfotographik · Dec 23, 2006

The_Traveler said:
What do you think are the biggest non-technical failings of new photographers?

I am always surprised that there seems to be little attempt to look at the composition, to remove stuff that doesn't belong, to erect strong verticals or flattern horizons, to crop to an aspect ratio that fits the photo.

What thinkst thou?

The classic "telephone pole"/"tree" through the cranium shot... :lol:

mysteryscribe · Dec 23, 2006

subject on the right side with nothing at all in 2/3 of the left side, because everybody knows you have to use the rule of thirds.

Horizontal shots that should be verticle because this is the tv generation and you cant turn your tv on edge.

darin3200 · Dec 23, 2006

I don't think composition is a technical thing as much as aesthetic thing. Photographers have varying levels of natural ability for aesthetics, those can be refined or developed, but you can't really teach it. I think the biggest technical problems new photogs have is exposure and understanding how a light meter works. With c41 and RAW exposure really doesn't matter that much. But once you really get into B&W darkroom, being 1 stop off can really hurt.

The_Traveler · Dec 23, 2006

Photographers have varying levels of natural ability for aesthetics, those can be refined or developed, but you can't really teach it

I actually think that most people don't respond to esthetic issues in their own photographs because they don't natively 'see' the concepts. Once you show people examples of the issues and give them ideas what to look for, they can see the problems.

Once you point out the telephone-pole-thru-the-head defect, they can recognize it in the future. I've been thinking of trying to compile a list entitled: things to look for in your pictures so other people won't think you're a dunce.

I mentioned this to my spouse who immediately said that I was the proper person to compile that list, having perpetrated so many photographic horrors on my own.

jwkwd · Dec 23, 2006

Not that it would be a technical issue, but it seems that are quite a few people that feel that if they take enough photos of a subject, one or two are bound to be good. Being a film user, I would'nt think of snapping a thousand plus shot's on an outing. It seems common place these days to just blast away and hope for the best. People need to slow down, smell the coffee, what have you.

ZyxKor · Dec 23, 2006

mysteryscribe said:
subject on the right side with nothing at all in 2/3 of the left side, because everybody knows you have to use the rule of thirds.

Like this: http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=66858

:wink:

You got to learn (and understand) the rules before you can start to break them. I am doing my best to learn how to take a great picture without having to resort to post processing to make a great image. I don't think post processing is bad but the better image you have to start with the easier it is to make it great.

mysteryscribe · Dec 23, 2006

I thought this was the non technical issue thread. Composition is a non technical issue like the telephone pole in the head.

LaFoto · Dec 24, 2006

You're right, Charlie, this is about non-technical errors.
And mine has been to place my subjects into the very centre of the photo for ages. For years and years and years. And I did not get why after a while I began to find all my own pics boring. Flowers: nice DOF, blurred backgroud, flower in focus - but smack in the centre of the picture.

I still find today that when I have to focus with difficulty (low light/moving objects) I place them right in the centre of the photo (or have a person's eyes exactly on the dividing horizontal line of the frame). :roll: Oh yeah ... the chances to make such mistakes are neverending.

But I do take about 35% vertically framed photos, mind

. (Had to type that word for ONCE, just for our mysterious scribe whose spelling makes me think of .... ah, let's leave that...

).

ksmattfish · Dec 24, 2006

jwkwd said:
It seems common place these days to just blast away and hope for the best. People need to slow down, smell the coffee, what have you.

Of course, this is exactly what photographers said when roll film was introduced. Photographers used to coating and processing their own glass plates in the field considered film to be a crutch.

ksmattfish · Dec 24, 2006

I think photogs should spend more time and effort getting a background in art, art history, and photographic history, and spend more time at art museums and galleries looking at real prints, paintings, drawings, sculptures, etc... That's what helps and inspires me to improve.

Whenever I can I attend artist and photographer lectures. I don't really care what aperture or gear the guy used, but hearing about what was going on in their mind as they created the photo may teach me a lot.

Torus34 · Dec 24, 2006

One suggestion for the 'failings' list is not asking 'What do I want this picture to say?' when composing the exposure. At our best, we don't open our mouths to speak until we have something to say. [Arguably, one could predict the collapse of the cellphone industry if this was taken to heart and followed by most users!] The same concept can be applied to opening a camera's shutter. To carry the analogy a step further, many exposures taken without thought can be compared to the babblings of a baby.

On technical competence, I recall one art instructor noting, 'Give me a student who's willing to work and in 10 years I can give him the technique of a master. But what is he going to do with it?'

The_Traveler · Dec 24, 2006

My wife loves to cook and bake and, when inspired, turns out great food. I could never approach what she does because she has spent 20 years studying the craft of cooking and baking and brings to everything she does a huge store of imbedded knowledge that is invisible when you just watch.

To a startling degree, photgraphy is like that. At every level from choice of format, lens, iso, aperture and shutter speed through composition and post-processing there is so much imbedded knowledge required to create good pictures that it is an almost impossible learning curve to comprehend, let alone climb.

Just like sex, photography is best learned as a small but crucial bit of book learning followed by lots of practice - except of course, photography is virtually always done with the lights on and the best work is often done without the presence of a partner.

Alex_B · Dec 24, 2006

The_Traveler said:
Just like sex, photography is best learned as a small but crucial bit of book learning followed by lots of practice - except of course, photography is virtually always done with the lights on and the best work is often done without the presence of a partner.