Are you born with it?

[mishele]

bingo. whats really gonna throw you for a loop is the sleeping artist. growth mindset will always trump the fixed mindset.

After that statement, I guess it's time for me to brake out the popcorn........lol

 

[vfotog]

So we all practice to improve our abilities, regardless of wether its inborn or developed over time, we all go out and shoot pictures. There are many very skilled photographers on TPF and I would love to know how you practice?

For me lately I have been attempting to get better at shooting seascapes in manual mode with GND's. I go stand in the water, set up my comp, take several test shots. Look at the histogram and adjust exposure accordingly. Then I look at my composition and try to be really critical, does it look like what I had pictured in my mind? Is there any sort of water movement that I need to get just right to complete the mental image? If I am looking for water streaks for flow I will then adjust my ISO and aperature to get the shutter speed I want. Do more test shots and try to time the waves. Review the comp and histogram every few minutes and make sure its still what I want.

After thats done I go home and download them. I look at them on the big screen and again try to be critical about what I missed. Perhaps I was too slow on the shot, or too early. Or maybe I botched my focus. Or the lens flare from the sun was worse than I realized etc. After being as critical as my level of knowledge allows, I then process a few and put them on flickr and here looking for feedback. And you guys are great for pointing out things I missed (which I am very grateful for, I cant fix it if I dont see it). I also post to a PSA critique group. I will then edit the photo again if necessary and sometimes re-post for critique, or enter it in a contest to see what judges think of it. Then I take any additional feedback and try to remember that next time I am out shooting.

What steps do you take while practicing to improve your photography?

this sounds very methodical and mathematical and not very much fun. perhaps one of the disadvantages of digital. with film, you took your knowledge and then mostly just shot and learned even more from your mistakes. spontaneity in photography can bring about some wonderful results. I can't imagine shooting with a computer on hand and spending a lot of time looking at it and histograms. in the 30+ years I've been shooting, don't think I've ever done anything like this. guess I'm old school, cos I'm really glad I learned using film. people learn differently; glad this works for you.

 

[quiddity]

Lee Hadwin, the "Sleeping Artist"


http://www.dailypost.co.uk/videos-p...e-hadwin-drawing-in-his-sleep-55578-19858588/

 

[bennielou]

I just love discussions like this. Thanks for all the video and links. Cool stuff indeed. Really makes a person think.

 

[pgriz]

this sounds very methodical and mathematical and not very much fun. perhaps one of the disadvantages of digital. with film, you took your knowledge and then mostly just shot and learned even more from your mistakes. spontaneity in photography can bring about some wonderful results. I can't imagine shooting with a computer on hand and spending a lot of time looking at it and histograms. in the 30+ years I've been shooting, don't think I've ever done anything like this. guess I'm old school, cos I'm really glad I learned using film. people learn differently; glad this works for you.

I'll disagree with this viewpoint. All of those decisions are normal and natural for someone (and I include myself in this group) who has not yet truly mastered the art. I've been fortunate to have observed a number of very good photographers (some are pros, some are advanced amateurs) who have assimilated the mechanics of photography to the point that is recedes into their subconscious. They can focus on the creative part fully, because the technical part is already part of their internalized process. I've seen them put together a series of shots in a workshop or shooting session, in a very short period of time and I know that to achieve even approximately the same level of technical quality would take me much longer. When reviewing their shots, we'd ask why they would make this decision or that, and they'd usually answer that that was the right setting, or lighting ratio, or camera angle for that situation. I aspire to achieve that level of comfort and expertise, but it is clear that this level of performance requires both a very sound understanding of the principles, and lots of practice. This is similar to many other fields where skill is developed through repetition and constant practice to the point that the mechanics or basics are ingrained in muscle memory or subconciousness.

 

[spacefuzz]

In case you want to know his background........
Biography of Stephen Wiltshire MBE
Just an amazing story!!

That is pretty amazing. Cant speak about his memory but it did strike me that there was a lot of practice involved "The instructors at Queensmill School encouraged him to speak by temporarily taking away his art supplies so that he would be forced to ask for them."

So to me that explains the technical skill of his drawing. As for his memory I dont know enough about the brain and will bow out of that segment of the debate

 

[spacefuzz]

this sounds very methodical and mathematical and not very much fun. perhaps one of the disadvantages of digital. with film, you took your knowledge and then mostly just shot and learned even more from your mistakes. spontaneity in photography can bring about some wonderful results. I can't imagine shooting with a computer on hand and spending a lot of time looking at it and histograms. in the 30+ years I've been shooting, don't think I've ever done anything like this. guess I'm old school, cos I'm really glad I learned using film. people learn differently; glad this works for you.

I'll disagree with this viewpoint. All of those decisions are normal and natural for someone (and I include myself in this group) who has not yet truly mastered the art. I've been fortunate to have observed a number of very good photographers (some are pros, some are advanced amateurs) who have assimilated the mechanics of photography to the point that is recedes into their subconscious. They can focus on the creative part fully, because the technical part is already part of their internalized process. I've seen them put together a series of shots in a workshop or shooting session, in a very short period of time and I know that to achieve even approximately the same level of technical quality would take me much longer. When reviewing their shots, we'd ask why they would make this decision or that, and they'd usually answer that that was the right setting, or lighting ratio, or camera angle for that situation. I aspire to achieve that level of comfort and expertise, but it is clear that this level of performance requires both a very sound understanding of the principles, and lots of practice. This is similar to many other fields where skill is developed through repetition and constant practice to the point that the mechanics or basics are ingrained in muscle memory or subconciousness.

I agree that after 10 years of photography I have mountains of knowledge to still learn, which is why I practice ;p

but vfotog you say you learned more from your mistakes using film. I dont understand how that is. With digital you get instant feed back. I can see on location if I blew the highlights or missed the composition. I can then correct it immediatly and bam, learning achieved. I guess I dont see the advantage of waiting to develop the shot and then trying to remember any mitigating factors that were involved on the shoot and try to remember to correct for them next time. Of course would be easier for studio vs say a seascape since you have controlled lighting that you can replicate but....... Can you explain your advantage thought process better? I guess I also dont understand how digital reduces spontaneity.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

wow. you have NO concept of what it takes in the arts whatsoever. no art or music educator is ever going to agree with you. I'm now embarrassed for you. Engineering isn't a "talent" like art or music, so your example is utterly irrelevant. silly, even. we're talking creativity. OTOH, an aptitude for math might be useful to become an engineer. To think logically might be nice but apparently isn't necessary in all cases. I know someone with dyscalculia. It's quite a stretch to think she could be an engineer. OTOH, she decided to take up the clarinet to be with her friends in the high school marching band. after one semester, not only did she make the band, she was co-teaching beginning instruments at the school. She wasn't a musician but a singer. The point is that she could ALWAYS sing. Before lessons. It didn't take years of work. I specifically mentioned Sills because she was performing professionally at the age of 4. She always had musical talent. Of course, she further developed her technique, but the gift, the voice, was already there. You've obviously never been in an art class because you don't seem to display any knowledge of creativity or artistic principles. If you are serious about photography, perhaps you should take one. Mastering the buttons on your camera won't ever make you an artist. It's just silly that you can't accept that some people have innate talent which displays itself even at a young age. It's so well documented. In the US, talent is clearly recognized by our government and educational system. In California, we have the Gifted and Talented Education Program (GATE). Other countries have gifted and talented programs too. So they're all wrong and you're right? uh huh.... :lmao:

Wow, you have no concept what you are talking about. I'm now seriously embarassed for you.

You may be correct in that the average engineer is not much of a creative type. However that is also true of the average architect, scientist and, yes, photographer. But, thank god, not all engineers are average and it is the creative ones that have moved us forward where engineering is used. Your response makes me think you do not have much of a chance in photography because you are so stuck in this little box of negativity...

Stop posting stupid responses and go read a few hundred books.


And by the way, GATE is the biggest joke. Why are we promoting GATE at the same time we are cutting funding for all art programs in HSs? And before you spew some more knowledge, let me tell you, I spend quite a few years fighting, at the national level, the cutting of spending in art education in our schools so don't you throw some BS at me.

Guess you didn't learn any manners though, huh? Calling me stupid and telling me not to post isn't exactly mature or civilized. Mr. Fuzz was saying engineering doesn't require any talent, just hard work. I have friends who are engineers; I agree totally that creativity is part of what makes a great engineer. Creativity is a good thing, and essential in the arts. well, duh. I pointed out that GATE exists cos he seems to think that the majority of the world, science, etc all support his position that there is no such thing as innate talent. Obviously, government arts and education programs refute that position. Part of GATE IS arts education. I do find it funny that you say you're an advocate for arts education while jumping on ME for saying there is artistic talent. When kids have artistic or musical talent, without arts education or programs like GATE, they don't have many options. I don't think it's negative to stick up for talented people that already are limited in their choices by the undervaluing of the arts. Judging me or my future and your perceived lack of promise because I don't agree with someone is just plain petty and misinformed. I have a lifetime spent in and around the arts: art, photography, music. Sorry you felt the need to take the low road.

My apologies to you. I sure didn't realize I should treat you any better than you treated spacefuzz.

 

[bennielou]

Hey cloud, I love your current siggy, and I think that explains a whole lot. We are all born with this amazing imagination. But unfortunately some people see imagination in a bad light, and sometime during our lives we try to become more rational. Imagination gets pushed to the side.

You cant live in the imagination all the time, just as you can't live in the hard core rational world all the time. I think it needs to be a balance.

 

[mishele]

In case you want to know his background........
Biography of Stephen Wiltshire MBE
Just an amazing story!!

That is pretty amazing. Cant speak about his memory but it did strike me that there was a lot of practice involved "The instructors at Queensmill School encouraged him to speak by temporarily taking away his art supplies so that he would be forced to ask for them."

So to me that explains the technical skill of his drawing. As for his memory I dont know enough about the brain and will bow out of that segment of the debate

Yes...incredible story.
But I think you missed some of the point. You can't be taught to do something NO ONE ELSE can do.......
Yes, he had a teacher that took him under his wing at about 6-7 years old.....but that was because he the incredible talent that this child had and wanted to make sure that it did not go wasted. No one taught him to see the world like he does. BTW.......try to teach a 5 year old autistic child, that can't speak, how to draw proper perspective. Let me know how that goes.
No "bow outs" on the brain part........:hug::I know I'm going to bore the hell out of people w/ the science behind this but it's interesting.
BBC News | HEALTH | Unlocking the brain's potential

In the end, I'm saying that if a savant can have an extreme talent, then the rest of us can have smaller ones.

 

[spacefuzz]

In case you want to know his background........
Biography of Stephen Wiltshire MBE
Just an amazing story!!

That is pretty amazing. Cant speak about his memory but it did strike me that there was a lot of practice involved "The instructors at Queensmill School encouraged him to speak by temporarily taking away his art supplies so that he would be forced to ask for them."

So to me that explains the technical skill of his drawing. As for his memory I dont know enough about the brain and will bow out of that segment of the debate

Yes...incredible story.
But I think you missed some of the point. You can't be taught to do something NO ONE ELSE can do.......
Yes, he had a teacher that took him under his wing at about 6-7 years old.....but that was because he the incredible talent that this child had and wanted to make sure that it did not go wasted. No one taught him to see the world like he does. BTW.......try to teach a 5 year old autistic child, that can't speak, how to draw proper perspective. Let me know how that goes.
No "bow outs" on the brain part........:hug::I know I'm going to bore the hell out of people w/ the science behind this but it's interesting.
BBC News | HEALTH | Unlocking the brain's potential

In the end, I'm saying that if a savant can have an extreme talent, then the rest of us can have smaller ones.

And I'm saying why waste that energy thinking about innate talent when its scientifically clear you can develop yourself to be good at whatever you want? Dont hold yourself back thinking there is some cosmic glass ceiling you cant break through. Have faith in yourself!

 

[mishele]

Space, on that note I guess I will agree to disagree. I had a great time w/ all this!! What can we disagree about next?

 

[imagemaker46]

Unfortunately people these days are being told what to imagine, children are told how to use their imaginations and not in the social ways I grew up with, and I'm sure many on here did as well. Computers, facebook, iphones, all the things we didn't have, kids don't have to use their imaginations anymore, there is an app for that. I grew up with cameras around me from the age of 4, 52 years later I still have cameras around me, I use them almost every day. My Dad is a photographer, I learned from him, he was never a technical photographer and I am not a technical photographer, but he understood how light worked, and I understand how light works. Was he born with the incredible photographic abilities that he has, I don't know, was I born with abilities, I really don't know. I have been in gifted arts programs most of my life, and I was far from gifted, but I was around friends that were brilliant in some areas of art, I have always been good with a camera. Was the ability within me, I don't know, I know I have always shot like my Dad, our styles are mirrors, we see things the same.

I don't honestly think this question can really be answered, only that there are people gifted with greatness that came at an early age, but did it take something outside to open it up, the right "switch"

 

[spacefuzz]

Space, on that note I guess I will agree to disagree. I had a great time w/ all this!! What can we disagree about next?

politics?
religion?
how to pronounce potato?

endless opportunities

 

[c.cloudwalker]

spacefuzz (love that name btw) and mishele, I think you guys are not really talking about the same thing. So of course you'll never agree. Except to disagree.

One of you is talking about average people (the point of this thread I think) while the other is talking about people who are wired totally differently. So differently in fact that no one that I've heard of really understands them. I think you guys are trying to compare apples and oranges...