Technical over Art? :: Discuss

[Forkie]

So what say you? Do you think that too much technical concern can put a damper on your creativity?

YES. The end goal should be the photo, not the neatness of your EXIF data.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

If a second shooter or other "somebody" with JUST a 50mm prime and a shoe-mounted SB 600 is out-shooting you with a 24-70 and better lighting, then you need to ask yourself "why?"

I guess this is what I get for not reviewing my thread before posting, then going to bed too early and not seeing the responses.

When I say 'out-shooting', I don't mean that she was producing work that is superior to mine. My work holds its own, and will make a very nice album, and I'm not discounting my work. What I mean is that she is producing the same quality work with less equipment than I am.

The question you should be asking yourself as business professional is whether or not all that focus on equipment brings a return on investment.

I think it does. Having the OCF gear, and the different selection of lenses nearly guarantees us the ability to shoot in any situation, (notice I said nearly, not always.)

 

[skieur]

there she was with her single SB600, and her 50mm, and shooting INCREDIBLE stuff. Sure I could look at her photos and say that a particular angle distorted the brides dress a bit, or that she cut off a limb, or that this shadow or that shadow was a little harsh - but while I was worried about all that stuff in my pictures, she was capturing incredible moments and photos that showed emotion, and mood, and style.

Ooooooooooooooo... How interesting...

What you described to me is the act of snapshooting.... a term so many here hate but I am still a firm believer that at the heart, it is all still photography (good or bad, still... )

Have you studied or examined some street or journalistic photog's work? Its a differemt mindset that focuses on telling a story rather than obtaining the technical perfection to the nth degree many obsesses over.

The question you should be asking yourself as business professional is whether or not all that focus on equipment brings a return on investment. Certainly a war photographer dodging bullets loaded down withtons of equipment would see a very bad return in their investment. Some of the most powerful examples many herewould scoff at because if the photo's technical weakness.

My opinion, a wedding set isnt complete with a little of both.... technically strong photos coupled with those that focus on capturing the moment and story.

Snap shots are ones where the shutter has been pressed with no regard for either technique or composition which usually end up in file 13 (garbage) for most serious photographers. There is also a "journalistic" style which is technically and compositionally strong and effective, largely because the photographer has anticipated what action will take place, in what location, and where the best camera angle is. This style may "seem" like snapshooting but the talent, planning and skill show up in the results.

skieur

 

[usayit]

agree to disagree...

Even those snapshots have even the most basic users Framing a subject. When the response ends with something along the lines of a resulting bad photo, then the term snapshot is usually to describe the final result not the act which in of itself not definitive.

i ,make no excuses, I know the common stance here in the TPF is that snapshots are a bad thing. The OP did say that one frame cut off a persons arm but still captured a great moment. Again, a failure in tech composition BUT still a successful snapshot er.. photo

 

[PASM]

It's originally a hunting expression. A shot taken, without careful aim, at a moving target. These days, in this context, it means a casually taken photo.

 

[AmazingGrace0385]

I think the "art" is what comes naturally to most awesome photogs... but I know my artistic eye has been put on the back burner when my brain is busy figuring out the technical side, because I am still learning. I agree with what a PP said about one can be learned the other can't... but it's hard for me to focus on the creative aspect as much, while trying to figure out a proper exposure and lighting technique. And as ANOTHER PP said, once you can put the two together and shoot without thinking, that's when you really know what you are doing and know you are "ready."

I know I'm not there yet! But this post has been very insightful.

 

[skieur]

agree to disagree...

Even those snapshots have even the most basic users Framing a subject. When the response ends with something along the lines of a resulting bad photo, then the term snapshot is usually to describe the final result not the act which in of itself not definitive.

i ,make no excuses, I know the common stance here in the TPF is that snapshots are a bad thing. The OP did say that one frame cut off a persons arm but still captured a great moment. Again, a failure in tech composition BUT still a successful snapshot er.. photo

You are really mixed up. Composition is the artistic side. There is no such thing as "tech composition" Whether you agree or disagree is irrelevant, the definitions are there and they have been in the field for more than half a century.

There is also no such thing as a successful photo with a major weakness. If there is a major weakness, then it is LESS than successful. :lmao: Pretty funny! Like saying I cut off his head in the portrait by accident but it was still successful, because I exposed it property.

skieur

 

[usayit]

typical...

 

[Josh66]

Pretty funny! Like saying I cut off his head in the portrait by accident but it was still successful, because I exposed it property.

I think you missed the point that pretty much everyone was trying to make...

 

[usayit]

Like saying I cut off his head in the portrait by accident but it was still successful, because I exposed it property.

nope.. what I said was that an arm was cut off but the photo still captured a special moment (not exposure)

Magnum's Burt Glinn, 82

agree to disagree... we had this same discussion a few years ago...


typical....

 

[skieur]

I think the "art" is what comes naturally to most awesome photogs... but I know my artistic eye has been put on the back burner when my brain is busy figuring out the technical side, because I am still learning. I agree with what a PP said about one can be learned the other can't... but it's hard for me to focus on the creative aspect as much, while trying to figure out a proper exposure and lighting technique. And as ANOTHER PP said, once you can put the two together and shoot without thinking, that's when you really know what you are doing and know you are "ready."

I know I'm not there yet! But this post has been very insightful.

Both technique(the technical side) and composition(the artistic side) can be learned but needless to say, if you have some "artistic" talent, then you already have a head start.

skieur

 

[skieur]

Like saying I cut off his head in the portrait by accident but it was still successful, because I exposed it property.

nope.. what I said was that an arm was cut off but the photo still captured a special moment (not exposure)

Magnum's Burt Glinn, 82

agree to disagree... we had this same discussion a few years ago...


typical....

Arm..head..same idea. Whether a special moment was captured or not is a personal rather than a compositional interpretation and therefore not really relevant to the critique of a photo or whether it is effective. Successful is a term that is not used either in photo critique. (Just so you know.)

skieur

 

[usayit]

agree to disagree.... link has an example btw.

 

[skieur]

I was not at all impressed by the example photo in your link. You should know, that there is a premise in compostion/artistic photography that is part of critique. Basically, it should NEVER be necessary to explain the moment when the photo was taken. No explanation should be necessary.....It should be obvious from the photo alone.

This photo is just the back of a bald, older gentleman looking at the statue of Lincoln. It means NOTHING MORE to the average viewer and that IS its WEAKNESS and why it is NOT a great photo.

skieur

 

[skieur]

Whether you agree or not, the fundamentals of composition remain the same and so does the basis of critique. Of course, perhaps as an amateur, you don't really care and are not really interested in improving your work, which I have not seen here by the way.

skieur