On optics, light, etc ..... wow this photography thing is getting deep!

[Vtec44]

You need to know about almost none of this stuff to take pictures. It's great that you're enjoying yourself, but it's no more related to photography than petroleum chemistry is to driving a race car

Hahahaha ok I laughed a little bit because it's true. Ask away but in the end can you produce amazing pictures with all the knowledge? The technical aspect of photography is easy, but the artistic aspect of photography is much harder to master IMHO.

 

[soufiej]

You need to know about almost none of this stuff to take pictures. It's great that you're enjoying yourself, but it's no more related to photography than petroleum chemistry is to driving a race car

I would say your analogy would be better served had you said something like, " ... it's no more related to photography than a knowledge of federal legislative regulations for natural gas fracking is to driving a race car." I don't know a lot of people involved in auto racing nowdays but those I've encountered do understand the chemical make up of the fuel they use and how to manipulate those values to get the best results in any situation. They might not talk like scientists and they don't talk to scientists but they know the lingo and the trade offs well enough to discuss the issue with their crew chief. They are not dummies if they want the best results.

You are, however, correct that anyone can push a shutter release. We now understand a monkey can press a shutter release out of blind curiosity and come up with a decent image. And the greatest advantage digital cameras have over film, IMO, is you can waste 99 of 100 shots and not feel like you've just thrown your money down the crapper. If, though, you don't care to gain some technical knowledge of why those 99 shots were really, really bad, you'll probably go on wasting lots more.

I spent decades in consumer and professional audio and, there too, anyone with the available funds can own an audio component. If that person has no idea how components fit together to make a synergistic whole and how to achieve the best results from any component or speaker, they will be outdone by the buyer with that knowledge and one third the funds. It comes down to how any one person wishes to go about their hobby. In the days of film, many enthusiasts would develop their own shots. Back in the days of tubed audio gear, many enthusiasts owned their own tube tester which they calibrated by hand.

I do have the opinion those days are no longer with us in theory. Modern day electronics designers/manufacturers, whether it be audio or photographic equipment, seem uninterested in declaring "this" is how I believe my design should stand. There is a certain degree of laziness which is in favor now which says the final result can be anything the owner wishes it to be. The number of switchable filters and enhancements available to the end user make fidelity to reality a non-starter. The audio buyer no longer is encouraged to have a real world concept of how live music sounds. The modern photographer is being told there are few absolutes and those which still exist can be altered in post production. This makes many photographers lazy, IMO, knowing the aim is not to capture the best image, just any image that can be reworked in a computer program.

So, yes, once again, you can be considered correct that no one needs to know anything. Hand the camera to the chimp and see what comes out.

 

[photoguy99]

Let me clarify.

You can be an excellent photographer and make outstanding images with only an extremely rudimentary understanding of optics.

This does not mean that knowledge of optics is worthless or dumb. It might even help some people take better pictures. The artistic process is mysterious. But will understanding photons and the speed of light in glass versus air and how that produces refraction effects etc directly help you make excellent images?

Nope.

 

[soufiej]

Let me clarify.

You can be an excellent photographer and make outstanding images with only an extremely rudimentary understanding of optics.

This does not mean that knowledge of optics is worthless or dumb. It might even help some people take better pictures. The artistic process is mysterious. But will understanding photons and the speed of light in glass versus air and how that produces refraction effects etc directly help you make excellent images?

Nope.

Possibly, this discussion will spur an interest in the op's mind which involves a photographic study of refraction. That would be an interesting study for a newbie in this hobby. Why discourage that desire? Why stomp on the op's curiosity? Were you abused as a young photographer?

If you don't feel this is an interesting topic, why are you here? Why did you open this thread if you thought it was a worthless topic? Just to push your personal opinion when it is not the topic of the thread? Right now the op is merely a beginner trying to find what interests them most in a highly diverse subject. A worthwhile endeavor for any student of any topic IMO.


When I deal with audio I have a saying, "I am not responsible for what someone else cannot perceive." I've found that people with strongly held beliefs cannot be dissuaded from their views. Try and they will simply double down on their pre-conceived concepts. If someone feels they can take compelling photos by relying solely on some mysterious process without a grounding in the science of light and lens, so be it. However, I see no reason to offer that opinion in this thread. The op is posting in the beginner's section of the forum. The op is searching for what interests them at the moment. Possibly, they are the type of personality which enjoys a comprehensive grasp of a subject. IMO, there are numerous issues for any newbie to study. Different courses for different horses. It is up to the individual to decide which direction they wish to head and how far they wish to go in their pursuit of any topic. Has no one ever mentioned to you, there are no stupid questions? Outright disparagement of youthful curiosity would seem at this point to be unwise, unwelcome and downright rude. You have your opinion, the op has yet to gather sufficient information to form their own. That's what this forum and this thread are about.

Given the number of directions any one photographer might decide is best for them, it is likely best to allow everyone the freedom to make that decision on their own. You are not them and they are not you. I don't remember anyone asking for any opinion regarding the mysterious process which is the artistic value of an image. If the op wishes to ask a question regarding the technology of photography, why butt in? Why discourage a beginner? Why show your least admirable side?

You go your way and have the decency to allow others the same privilege. Eh? You've made your point.

 

[Vtec44]

You go your way and have the decency to allow others the same privilege. Eh? You've made your point.

He actually gave a really good advice. Sure, technical aspect of photography is great to know like exposure triangle, inverse square, diffraction, and so on. In the end, photography is about your vision compare to someone else. You can ask Internet experts about this and that or go out there and find the answer yourself by actually doing it. You can remember all the technical and composition rules of photography and still produce a technically correct but bland picture with no "feel". It's a good reminder that there's more to photography than aperture, ISO, shutter speed. So, don't get all too caught up...

 

[photoguy99]

The point is that the OP sounds very confused and interested. I merely wanted to note - to the OP - that this thread was unlikely to go anywhere the would really help with the OP's photography as such.

And now I find myself attacked, and forced to defend myself, for some minor and obviously true remark.

Please take your self righteousness and place it... Elsewhere.

 

[soufiej]

You go your way and have the decency to allow others the same privilege. Eh? You've made your point.

He actually gave a really good advice. Sure, technical aspect of photography is great to know like exposure triangle, inverse square, diffraction, and so on. In the end, photography is about your vision compare to someone else. You can ask Internet experts about this and that or go out there and find the answer yourself by actually doing it. You can remember all the technical and composition rules of photography and still produce a technically correct but bland picture with no "feel". It's a good reminder that there's more to photography than aperture, ISO, shutter speed. So, don't get all too caught up...

IMO, encourage every student to get as "caught up" as they wish at this point in their studies. Why not? This is the time to explore. It is not the time to be told your questions are worthless and a waste of time. If "this" interests you now, explore it. Is there such a thing as too much knowledge? I don't think so. So don't discourage enthusiasm by discouraging curiosity. Whether the point made was good or bad doesn't matter here. This isn't a thread about the mysterious processes of creative spirit. There will be plenty of time for that - in another thread.

Let's say you were a educator working with young students in a ... oh, let's say, a philosophy class. A very young student comes to you as the instructor and asks about a topic which they find interesting based upon a class you taught last week. They would like to know more about Aristotle and Plato and the relationship between the two men. Would you tell that student they would be wasting their time doing such research? Or, would you suggest the student follow a suggested direction in their study of the two and they could get some extra credit in class? Possibly make a report to the class on what they find? Would you essentially shut down the student's inquisitive nature? Or would you encourage it?

The op is asking/trying to gain a higher understanding of light. Read the title to the thread. They are trying to comprehend how a lens works. Light? Lens? does that sound like something which might benefit a student of photography?

I don't disagree with the idea that technology should not supplant creativity. Yet, I can see a clear link between a better understanding of a lens and creating better, more emotionally connecting images through that lens.

Just because you have an opinion is no reason to express that opinion, just because. No?

 

[soufiej]

The point is that the OP sounds very confused and interested. I merely wanted to note - to the OP - that this thread was unlikely to go anywhere the would really help with the OP's photography as such.

And now I find myself attacked, and forced to defend myself, for some minor and obviously true remark.

Please take your self righteousness and place it... Elsewhere.

I'm a new forum member and, looking at your profile, you are an established contributor. None the less, you are being exceptionally rude, First to the op and now to me. Your comments were and are out of line.

Self righteous? Out and out rude for no good reason? I can deal with the former and I assume the op can too. It is the latter which is misplaced here.

I don't think there's any need to take this further. You've made your point. What's your intent now?

Drop this?

 

[photoguy99]

OK, so you're not paying the slightest attention to what I actually said, but prefer to argue lengthily against some imagined remarks.

Good to know.

 

[Vtec44]

It's the Internet and unfortunately you're going to hear opinions that you may not like when posting something. No one is stopping the OP from asking these questions. Some people simply reminded the OP not to get all caught up on the technical data. There's a whole other side of photography. Most new photographers have made this mistake, including myself when I first started. I have several apprentices under my wing now and I tell them the same thing.

You go your way and have the decency to allow others the same privilege. Eh? You've made your point.

He actually gave a really good advice. Sure, technical aspect of photography is great to know like exposure triangle, inverse square, diffraction, and so on. In the end, photography is about your vision compare to someone else. You can ask Internet experts about this and that or go out there and find the answer yourself by actually doing it. You can remember all the technical and composition rules of photography and still produce a technically correct but bland picture with no "feel". It's a good reminder that there's more to photography than aperture, ISO, shutter speed. So, don't get all too caught up...

IMO, encourage every student to get as "caught up" as they wish at this point in their studies. Why not? This is the time to explore. It is not the time to be told your questions are worthless and a waste of time. If "this" interests you now, explore it. Is there such a thing as too much knowledge? I don't think so. So don't discourage enthusiasm by discouraging curiosity. Whether the point made was good or bad doesn't matter here. This isn't a thread about the mysterious processes of creative spirit. There will be plenty of time for that - in another thread.

Let's say you were a educator working with young students in a ... oh, let's say, a philosophy class. A very young student comes to you as the instructor and asks about a topic which they find interesting based upon a class you taught last week. They would like to know more about Aristotle and Plato and the relationship between the two men. Would you tell that student they would be wasting their time doing such research? Or, would you suggest the student follow a suggested direction in their study of the two and they could get some extra credit in class? Possibly make a report to the class on what they find? Would you essentially shut down the student's inquisitive nature? Or would you encourage it?

The op is asking/trying to gain a higher understanding of light. Read the title to the thread. They are trying to comprehend how a lens works. Light? Lens? does that sound like something which might benefit a student of photography?

I don't disagree with the idea that technology should not supplant creativity. Yet, I can see a clear link between a better understanding of a lens and creating better, more emotionally connecting images through that lens.

Just because you have an opinion is no reason to express that opinion, just because. No?

 

[photoguy99]

I defy you to show where I was rude to the OP. Go on, find where I was rude and quote it for us. We'll wait.

While we're waiting let me remark, as someone who has actually taught at the university level, that keeping students on track is a very big part of the job. 'That topic, while interesting, is outside the scope of this course' is a common refrain.

 

[soufiej]

What's the deal, photoguy? You try an argument from authority as if you teaching automatically makes you a good choice for an instructor. I assume from your post you would have told the philosophy student to drop the idea and get to work on next week's lesson.

I would disagree with that decision too.



So, why are you so upset? Your ego bruised? I asked that you drop the issue and you decide instead you should come at me? Why the continuing posts asking a question which you shouldn't be asking. You've been told you were rude by more than myself alone. Take a hint, guy.

Now you truly want to derail this thread by going at me?

You've made your point, you've repeated your point - more than once! and you've complained how unfair life has treated you on a public forum. What more do you want?

To burn the forum down? Or, just show your silverback side? Sorry, not interested.


Responses have been given. The op doesn't appear to be around. The thread has now been taken far off track. Maybe it's time for this thread to be closed by a moderator?

 

[photoguy99]

Actually a quick perusal of the thread will show that you came at me first.

Any progress on where I was rude to the OP? You know, actually pointing out the rudeness? Designer is also welcome to play.

 

[soufiej]

Actually a quick perusal of the thread will show that you came at me first.

Any progress on where I was rude to the OP?

OK, I'm new here and I may not quite understand the rules which we all agreed to when we joined. Or how the forum is moderated. But I'm finding this personal BS waaaay out of line.

 

[photoguy99]

Well then maybe you should stop being so obnoxious (eg post #19 paragraphs 1 and 2) when people try to give a little friendly advice you happen to disagree with.

You might find that you get along in society a bit better.