Best Photography Books

[fjrabon]

I have read it and I'll be happy to say that it is wrong. After seeing Understanding Exposure recommended so frequently here I picked up a copy. I read it and threw it in the dumpster. I think it's an overall positive book for beginners, but it does contain serious errors. Photography can get a little technical and there's a tendency when trying to explain more technical subjects to beginners to oversimplify to the point of using generalities that in the end are wrong. For example, DOF distributes unequally around the plane of focus with more DOF in the back and less in the front. Precisely how that works gets a little complicated so I imagine a long time ago someone was trying to explain this to an art major and just got exasperated and said, "just think 1/3 front and 2/3 back." Understanding Exposure does that kind of stuff. In fact it hands out that silly 1/3 front 2/3 back DOF rule which is fact fallacious.

Understanding Exposure can help a beginner get up and running and help them grasp the key concepts well. Given that I can endorse it. But it's a real shame that, if they read it carefully and really get serious about photography later, they'll have material to re-learn.

yep, and unlike some of the other 'aimed at beginners' books, understanding exposure doesn't let you know it's giving you quick and dirty rules of thumb, and to read further in other books if you want more in depth. It presents the material as if that's all there is to it.

 

[Ysarex]

I have read it and I'll be happy to say that it is wrong. After seeing Understanding Exposure recommended so frequently here I picked up a copy. I read it and threw it in the dumpster. I think it's an overall positive book for beginners, but it does contain serious errors. Photography can get a little technical and there's a tendency when trying to explain more technical subjects to beginners to oversimplify to the point of using generalities that in the end are wrong. For example, DOF distributes unequally around the plane of focus with more DOF in the back and less in the front. Precisely how that works gets a little complicated so I imagine a long time ago someone was trying to explain this to an art major and just got exasperated and said, "just think 1/3 front and 2/3 back." Understanding Exposure does that kind of stuff. In fact it hands out that silly 1/3 front 2/3 back DOF rule which is fact fallacious.

Understanding Exposure can help a beginner get up and running and help them grasp the key concepts well. Given that I can endorse it. But it's a real shame that, if they read it carefully and really get serious about photography later, they'll have material to re-learn.

yep, and unlike some of the other 'aimed at beginners' books, understanding exposure doesn't let you know it's giving you quick and dirty rules of thumb, and to read further in other books if you want more in depth. It presents the material as if that's all there is to it.

exactly -- better than my long explanation. How do you hand a book to a beginner and say, "Here, read this it's just what you need, only make sure and skip the parts that are wrong."

Joe

 

[TheInformer]

I have read it and I'll be happy to say that it is wrong. After seeing Understanding Exposure recommended so frequently here I picked up a copy. I read it and threw it in the dumpster. I think it's an overall positive book for beginners, but it does contain serious errors. Photography can get a little technical and there's a tendency when trying to explain more technical subjects to beginners to oversimplify to the point of using generalities that in the end are wrong. For example, DOF distributes unequally around the plane of focus with more DOF in the back and less in the front. Precisely how that works gets a little complicated so I imagine a long time ago someone was trying to explain this to an art major and just got exasperated and said, "just think 1/3 front and 2/3 back." Understanding Exposure does that kind of stuff. In fact it hands out that silly 1/3 front 2/3 back DOF rule which is fact fallacious.

Understanding Exposure can help a beginner get up and running and help them grasp the key concepts well. Given that I can endorse it. But it's a real shame that, if they read it carefully and really get serious about photography later, they'll have material to re-learn.

yep, and unlike some of the other 'aimed at beginners' books, understanding exposure doesn't let you know it's giving you quick and dirty rules of thumb, and to read further in other books if you want more in depth. It presents the material as if that's all there is to it.

exactly -- better than my long explanation. How do you hand a book to a beginner and say, "Here, read this it's just what you need, only make sure and skip the parts that are wrong."

Joe

lol thats so right

 

[thierry]

Have any of you read scott kelby's new book on studio light? It looks awesome! i really wanna pick on up here soon

 

[thierry]

^ TTT

 

[thierry]

Well I just ordered... I'm excited to read it...I'll let you all know how it is

 

[TheInformer]

How was it Terry?

 

[enzodm]

I have Light: science and magic and also, more on the funny side but technically interesting, the Hotshoe diaries. Both worth reading (in order, which was not what I did).

 

[thierry]

Lol I got it but have not started reading it yet.. I will let you know as soon as I finish it Lucas

 

[TheInformer]

I have Light: science and magic and also, more on the funny side but technically interesting, the Hotshoe diaries. Both worth reading (in order, which was not what I did).

I will check that out... thanks... I'm still working on my original list lol

 

[KreGg]

Anyone has read both The Photographers Eye by Michael Freeman and Learning to see creatively by Bryan Peterson.
Looking at the index of both, they kinda seem to talk about the same basic principles.

I would like to purchase one. So if anyone can compare both I would appreciate.

 

[MTVision]

Anyone has read both The Photographers Eye by Michael Freeman and Learning to see creatively by Bryan Peterson.
Looking at the index of both, they kinda seem to talk about the same basic principles.

I would like to purchase one. So if anyone can compare both I would appreciate.

I've only read Petersons but...I'd say it was a waste of money. Do a google search for compositional strategies or search this forum and you will find everything in that book.

 

[unpopular]

I am so glad to hear people criticizing Understanding Exposure. I also agree that this book is very underwhelming.

I would suggest Take your Photography to the Next Level by George Barr. Although it reads a little bit pretentious at times, it's not overwhelmingly so.

and ... get ready for it .....

The Negative by Ansel Adams. Yes, I do recommend this book. Yes, I do recommend it to digital photographers. Yes I do recommend it to beginners. 75% of this book absolutely applies to digital photography and half of the rest can be adopted once you have more experience in the digital darkroom. It's the non-feely touchy version of Understanding Exposure.

 

[thierry]

:/

 

[TamiAz]

Great...I have both of Peterson's books and now your saying I'm wasting my time?? Grrrrrr...As a beginner, how do you know what your reading is incorrect. It's funny, I had a hard time getting through Understanding exposure, but I'm really liking Understanding Flash Photography.