If You're a Good Photographer, Can You Photograph Anything Well?

[JerryPH]

Thanks, but you got that wrong, I am not the photographer, but the model!

ROFL! I cracked up when I read that.

 

[Rock]

I think you can be good at one type and not so good at another. I do however agree that technical skills should allow for a technically good photo most all the time. Artistic, not so much but technically good, yes.

 

[Sideburns]

they could be technically correct, and probably "good/great"...but not "OMG BEST SHOT EVER!!!"

You have to have inspiration...and if I draw my inspiration from pretty ladies under studio lights, I may not get awesome pictures of flying birds in the forest.

 

[S2K1]

I think being good in one thing certainly helps in others, so yes, but being an expert in landscapes won't help you with weddings and dealing with people, so no.

 

[Alex_B]

.but not "OMG BEST SHOT EVER!!!"

Hmm, I hardly ever see such shots anyway ... not even by the really good photographers in their special field.

OMG-shots only happen on rare occasion IMHO ...

 

[nossie]

When I went to Sicily people asked me did you see Mount Etna, I said yes. Did you go up on it? they asked, I said no. They said why not? I said "It's a mountain, so what? Do I have to walk up every mountain I see?" - Clearly I've no interest in walking up mountains but can I do it if I want to.

Can you take a good shot? Yes. Would you care to? Only you know. For some people taking pictures of clouds floating over mountains is an inspiration while for me it is mind numbing but if I was contracted to do it I'd suck it up and get on with the job.
You all know about exposure, light, rules of whatever, so you know how to fill the frame. You might not be over excited about taking a photo of a laser drill silicon wafer cutting machine but you'll fill the frame and get on with the job if the price is right, right? If you have to do a wedding you'll pull out all the stops and get the major shots right? If mount Etna needs to be documented you'll do it anyway right?



As photographers the frame is your canvas and I believe that you all know how to fill that canvas and you will do it with your own style even if you're not passionate about the subject.

 

[JerryPH]

Basically, if you are a good photographer, you will be able to take any picture correctly from a technical standpoint, but from the artistic standpoint it would be a total failure.

That is what I meant in my earlier post about "quality". Yes this is subjective, but when done well, it is clearly and obviously evident.

If you have no cares about quality, any technically competant photographer can get a clear, focused image of anything in film or digital image... but does it inspire or evoke emotion? Not in the least. Becuase they do not know how.

They may take breath-taking landscapes that make your jaw drop and be able to do nothing more than clear focused snapshots of a wedding. Very few photographers are good at more than one thing.

Yeah, we can all fill that frame and move on... but what's the reason? If I cannot invoke a sense of awe or desire to purchase that laser drill silicon wafer cutting machine, then I as a photographer have failed in my mandate of portraying the subject in a desireable manner... or illiciting an emotion that the person who is paying me to take that shot wants to attain.

 

[dipstick]

A cab driver and a nascar driver are both drivers, but I dont think either of them would do a great job if they switched jobs.

Same thing with photograpers, even though equipment and basic techniques are the same, the circumstances and requirements are very different from one type of photography to another.

Im not saying the cab driver could never become a good nascar driver and vice versa, but anything that you want to do with excellence requires specific skills and practice.

A good photographer should be able to produce decent images under most circumstances, but to be able to do any type of photography great, you need skills and practice in that particular area.

 

[nossie]

...but from the artistic standpoint it would be a total failure. that's a guaranteed fact because all shooters are utterly limited by ??? uhhh errrmmm stuff that means they can't do things with a photo frame.

That is what I meant in my earlier post about "quality". Yes this is subjective, but when done well, it is clearly and obviously evident. In your own head coz you're painting the whole world and every scenario with the same brush

If you have no cares about quality I'm calling a BS on this bro coz i do care, if it's a monkey, a druggy, a nail, spider dining, I care, any technically competant photographer can get a clear, focused image of anything in film or digital image... but does it inspire or evoke emotion? Not in the least. Becuase they do not know how. Can he realistically be expected to?

They may take breath-taking landscapes that make your jaw drop and be able to do nothing more than clear focused snapshots of a wedding. Very few photographers are good at more than one thing. Sez you

Yeah, we can all fill that frame and move on... but what's the reason? To satisfy the clients needs and not our own sense of art boloxology If I cannot invoke a sense of awe or desire to purchase that laser drill silicon wafer cutting machine, then I as a photographer have failed in my mandate of portraying the subject in a desireable manner... or illiciting an emotion that the person who is paying me to take that shot wants to attain. Well no because you may just have to documet aspects of the machines functionality. So here's the silicon before and here's the silicon after... oh do you feel horny now? Now I just want to see what the mofo looks like!

A cab driver and a nascar driver are both drivers, but I dont think either of them would do a great job if they switched jobs. Well you don't think that but I think a monkey with a lesser sense of self preservation might do better than both.

Same thing with photograpers, even though equipment and basic techniques are the same, the circumstances and requirements are very different from one type of photography to another. Ok and photographers are sooo stupid that they can't figure that out and adapt? Like I can't sit there and wait for the clouds to brake I also can't want for that glance from the bride to the groom as the ring is slipped on? because I'm a robot that takes pictures of construction equipment I'm obviously inadequate.

Im not saying the cab driver could never become a good nascar driver and vice versa, but anything that you want to do with excellence requires specific skills and practice. I'm glad you're not saying that coz any lead foot can push a pig and every photographer is always looking for the next shot outside his/her comfor zone so what's the problem? Now if you said a nascar driver wouldn't be great at taking pictures then I'd think about it but if he can't drive a cab then I say shoot the monkey.

A good photographer should be able to produce decent images under most circumstances, that's what I said right? but to be able to do any type of photography great, you need skills and practice in that particular area. So if I get a "Wedding Photographer" for MY wedding I'm guaranteed to have good shots? Don't make me sick. I'd rather have Abraxas [sorry for singling one out but referred to with every sincere respect as an ACE landscape photographer] as a photographer to do my wedding photos than someone thinking the way you do - one limiting oneself to isolated scenarios.

" hI nice to meet you. What do you do? I'm a photographer. Oh great I'd like you to take a picture of my son. Oh I can't because I'm a _______ photographer and don't do "son" photos."


right well this is the point of my unhappy face You boys and girls talk like every shot you make matters to the universe but in the end show a complete unawareness of what you do in it's basic form - fill a frame. Not meaning to over simplifiy the game but in the bare basics we gotta get people interested in our output right? Cranes, cars, cancer patients, we have to "portray" what we're shooting. (sorry for the over simplified angle - here they come with the 'Oh how magnificent we are arguments')

The two of you in my opinion are talking utter muck and have a long way to go. I wouldn't be able to take to you because you talk in such negative terms making excuses for why you don't try. Which seems to be the consensus of the thread.

Jerry- Artistic my arse - It's a frickin picture, you have limited control over it unless you're He-Man - Master of the Universe. If you're not lucky enough to catch a bolt of lightening hitting the tree then it's probably just another picture of a tree no matter who trips the shutter. Within the realms of realistic everyday situations you as a photographer should be able to get a decent shot. Not a noble prize winner but a shot that the client is satisfied with. If you can't do that then don't play in the field because the reality is that a man and his woman just want a pic of the ring sliding on to the finger. ( and a couple more )It's not about getting into Time magazine or National Geo so get over the concieted ideas and take the photos. Apply all your knowledge and knowhow to giving the punter the best you can supply.


Can I ask "what are you specifically good at?"? so if it's a picture of Nascar drivers is that much different of mountains? Don't you have X amount of canvas to fill with interesting content? Are you more focused (mentally) on the subject or the frame - because as far as I can tell everyone so far is obsessed with the subject. What will you do when the fat freckly kid comes into your studio? Will you say that you don't do fat freckly kids? Fat freckly kids are not my job!

Your job is to capture images, now quit the bitchin and get on with it! Anything on the far end of the glass is fair game, now shut mouth and provide.

I'm utterly disappointed with the tone, snobbery and conceitedness of this thread.

Pictures are for the poor, the grieving of the dead, the fanatics, the rich, the knobs, the sportsters, the curious and everyone else.

Get technical and pick the bones out of my words if you like but an argument to the contrary will be better recieved.

I can imagine the builder coming to my house and saying well I build walls but I don't do kitchen walls.
:thumbdown::thumbdown:

 

[JerryPH]

I can imagine the builder coming to my house and saying well I build walls but I don't do kitchen walls. Twats!

Lol... a little anger showing, but I think that stems more from your sense of how strong you feel about it, rather than wish to be condescending or insulting to any member here... at least that is how I would wish to interpret your post.

But since any photographer can now shoot anything well, we can take that concept to also extend to mean that any Ford technician can now work on a Detriot diesel since both are all mechanics or all guitarists can suddenly play accordions, since both are musicians.

I've yet to see any harvard mechanical engineer come close to being able to shoe a horse, and that blacksmith should be able to build thousand foot span bridge well... since both work in metal.

No my friend, I stand by what I say... no one can do everything "well". The day that you take someone out of their area of expertise, the only way to get satisfactory results is to lower one's level of quality.

 

[Bevel Heaven]

interesting views here......... :er:

I voted NO

Simple answer.......

compare a studio where you can set up and control everything [assuming your model is not 5 months old] to shooting motorcycle racers at the track where you have almost NO control over anything [changing light, bikes are 100mph taking different lines through the corner].......

I rest my case