I have noticed something. Have you?

[Neil S.]

You brought up the subject of Bruce Lee to support your comments. My comments were directed at this statement, obviously. I simply reminded you that even Bruce Lee had a mentor at some point in his life and his talent evolved from there.

You do have me there.

Touché

What I was trying to say though, is that it is possible to teach yourself. Even as far as to become the best in the world at something.

In fact how could you ever attain that status without elevating yourself there? Other people aren’t going to make you the best at something, you have to do it yourself.

I am sure you can agree with that.

 

[inTempus]

In fact how could you ever attain that status without elevating yourself there? Other people aren’t going to make you the best at something, you have to do it yourself.

I am sure you can agree with that.

I do agree, completely.

 

[Derrel]

Joshua,
A good discussion your post spawned! Lots of spirited, earnest,passionate replies--something this forum needs more of, I think.

Anyway...I keep mentioning books on this web site. I recently bought a classic, Ernst Wildi's book "the Medium Format Advantage". Wildi was one of Hasselblad's best spokesmen and ambassadors for many years, and his skill with the Hassy,and his mastery of medium format photography was pretty widely acclaimed "back in the day". I would suggest this book to those who want to learn more about how cameras and lenses can best be used. The book contains many very nice diagrams and illustrations,and very clear explanations of technical matters.

Continuing, photography books are a huge resource, with many thousands of titles available. In my original reply I mentioned those who are self-taught as having "no books". It seems like people missed that. There are many new social media "professionals" who seem to have read not a single book about photography, posing, business, or any other photographic sub-field. Unlike the world wide web, books are created by companies that have editors, and most books are the work of more than one or two people, and IMO, books are more trustworthy than web posts and web videos, especially WRT to technical matters,and matters of esoteric importance. I have seen many,many,many web posts detailing how to do one thing or another--wrongly. While the web is very handy,and **is** a wealth of knowledge, it is also a wealth of misinformation. Cases in point: bokeh, aperture number versus size, which way is "up" and "down" in aperture, depth of field, depth of focus, Guide Number. Those six terms are often used 100 percent, totally INCORRECTLY. Hundreds of times a week, by people who are self-taught and or inexperienced.

Anyway, a good discussion your post spawned Joshua!

 

[Boomn4x4]

Cases in point: bokeh, aperture number versus size, which way is "up" and "down" in aperture, depth of field, depth of focus, Guide Number. Those six terms are often used 100 percent, totally INCORRECTLY. Hundreds of times a week, by people who are self-taught and or inexperienced.

Does using those terms incorrectly make their pictures any worse?

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

What I was trying to say though, is that it is possible to teach yourself. Even as far as to become the best in the world at something.

What I haven't seen entering the equation, is the fact that some people are naturally gifted. I will always argue, that if there is not some degree of talent/creativity/gift, no matter how hard you try, you will never be "the best" at anything.

However, I do see it as a sliding scale from true genius at one end, and absolutely clueless at the other. For example, a baby photographer could have quite a sucessful business by simply following Anne Geddes' lead, that photographer may never, ever, develop their own style, and become the next Anne.

 

[inTempus]

I agree, the internet can be a source for misinformation. But I've also seen books and magazines printing erroneous and often times completely inaccurate information.

I've been a firearms collector for many-many years. I invest in high quality and often times rare firearms. I've gone to countless shows, owned hundreds of firearms, and spent God only knows how many hours studying the mechanics and even the history of some of the most notable designs ever made.

I have found many published reference books with completely inaccurate information in them. I know the information is inaccurate from hands-on experience with the firearm they're discussing, yet there it is - in black and white - presented as if it were Gospel.

I've also read a number of magazines published by large and well respected companies that printed out-right wrong information or gave advice many others with considerable experience consider to be "bad".

It happens.

People make mistakes and novices often find themselves behind the keyboard. Just because someone finds their way into print doesn't make them 100% right on any given subject. You have to consume knowledge with a inquisitive eye. Ask questions, try things out, see what works for you, find other texts that support or refute the copy in question. If something doesn't work, as many times it may not, figure out how to make it work. That's how we learn.

But yes, the internet gives an unedited voice to the masses. That doesn't negate your responsibility to consume the information responsibly, nor does it automatically mean the posters opinions are invalid, inaccurate or worthless.

I remember when the main stream news media outlets were bashing the internet news bloggers. They dismissed their reporting as being irrelevant and not properly vetted... all the while the same major news organizations were being called to the mat for unscrupulous reporting practices (editing images, planting stories, publishing unvetted stories, etc.) themselves.

There is just as much good information online as there is in any print media. Heck, there's probably more because it is unfiltered, unapproved and often times spontaneous. There are some very talented people out there sharing information that otherwise would never be shared simply because they have access to the internet. I see it as an invaluable tool.

But please don't take this as a rip on print media, it's not. I see value in information regardless of the source and I have many great books on photography that were worth every penny paid.

 

[inTempus]

Cases in point: bokeh, aperture number versus size, which way is "up" and "down" in aperture, depth of field, depth of focus, Guide Number. Those six terms are often used 100 percent, totally INCORRECTLY. Hundreds of times a week, by people who are self-taught and or inexperienced.

Does using those terms incorrectly make their pictures any worse?

Not necessarily, but it does make them poor instructors.

 

[Neil S.]

Ya I got to agree that some good stuff was put down here, all around.

Good info on photography, business, learning methods, life lessons, etc.

To be honest this isnt really what I expected at the start of this thread lol.

Bravo to the OP :thumbup:

 

[JG_Coleman]

What I was trying to say though, is that it is possible to teach yourself. Even as far as to become the best in the world at something.

What I haven't seen entering the equation, is the fact that some people are naturally gifted. I will always argue, that if there is not some degree of talent/creativity/gift, no matter how hard you try, you will never be "the best" at anything.

However, I do see it as a sliding scale from true genius at one end, and absolutely clueless at the other. For example, a baby photographer could have quite a sucessful business by simply following Anne Geddes' lead, that photographer may never, ever, develop their own style, and become the next Anne.

I have mentioned this very thing in a similar past thread... some people are simply pre-disposed, for one reason or another, to excel at certain things. They make leap and bounds in progress at rates that are almost unimaginable even to people that have trained for a long time.

These people are rare... no doubt. But, think about this: there are 6.6 billion people in the world! So even if the "natural-born" photographer is only a 1:100,000 phenomenon... that still means there are 66,000 of them out there! Hell... even if they occur at an astronomically low ratio of 1:1,000,000... that still means that there are about 6,600 of them out there... ready to completely blow your mind as far what they are capable of doing without much, if any, formal training and with what seems to be scant experience.

Even if we said... hey, they only occur every 1:10,000,000... that still means that there are almost 700 of them out there, each with access to the internet, each with more tools at their disposal than ever before to reach the public.

Rare is a relative term... and we are packed into the world like sardines!

 

[Joshua_Lee]

So I guess the general consensus is this:

Photography is basic supply and demand. The photography industry is driven by what every industry is driven by and that is what the consumer is willing to pay for a service or product. What is art to a professional photographer may not be art worthy of buying to a consumer and the other way around. Only an elitist photographer would think that his/or her work is only worthy of being photography based on experience and schooling. Which makes since, because I have seen photographs by professionals in a studio that I wouldn't pay $2 for. Also, brought to my attention by my wife, we paid $3000 for our engagement, bridal, and wedding photos and may have 5 out of them all that we really like. Also, some people are naturally gifted and have an eye for things that others do not. They don't need training in order to succeed. Ex. A parent pays hundreds to thousands of dollars for their child in baseball training, all the while the best kid on the team has never needed to be trained and is still better than that parents kid. So the natural ability argument makes since. I also agree though, even with natural ability practice and training will make you that much better. Some great theories were put on this forum, but like everything else in this world, the majority will decide. The majority being the paying customer. So I guess at the end of the day, kudos to my friends who people are paying for their photographs. Time will tell if it pays off or they lose business. Quality not price will distinguish who survives in the photography world. That being said, me personally, I am still going to wait to take on the stress and responsibility of a professional photographer. Thanks to everyone for your comments!

Cheers,