The god skills in photography, are they worth practicing?

[c.cloudwalker]

...and in some situations you would have missed the shot, lol.

So yes, it can be useful to be a walking light meter in some (but few) situations. However, if I have time I would much rather check the light meter in my hand.

Sniper hands? No idea what that is.

God skills is not what I would call those things however. Each profession has a certain set of skills and that includes photography. Some of the skills are very useful and some are more like parlor tricks but all of them can be learned through a bit of practice. When I taught photography I used to amaze students when I mentioned shooting blind, the art of framing and focusing a shot without bringing the camera to the eye which can be quite useful to PJs and street shooters. Students who really were interested in the skill learned it very quickly...

I usually only have planned shoots but I could see how that could make you miss a shot. I guess knowing automatically what I want to be shooting at will come with time

If you need that particular skill you will develop it. But, as I said, it would only be useful in a few situations. Like when you don't have a meter

 

[PatrickCheung]

Both the skills you mention are well within the capabilities of almost anybody who can tie his or her shoelaces.

And pretty much anybody who could tie his or her shoe back then knew how to meter with their eyes and shoot steady! It's really not that hard to let go of the meter, I think that it's just difficult to get over the idea of possibly missing a shot or being wrong with your metering. If you shoot RAW, you have quite a bit of wiggle room with your metering... you could always learn the Sunny 16 rule (I remember I was taught to that on this forum when I first started), shoot in RAW, analyse your photos and see where you went wrong... that's pretty much how I did it. Eventually you'll get a good sense of what settings to use in different light.

At first I thought metering without the meter was stupid... why bother thinking about what exposure you want and possibly miss shot when you can get a near-accurate reading off your camera? But after being forced to meter with my eyes (shot with meterless cameras for the past year) it felt stupid to rely on a meter. These were basic skills back in the day!

 

[Dao]

Practice makes perfect.

- I do not have a flash that can ttl with my Camera. (Actually I do, but my wife use it all the time with her G11). When I first shoot family or friend's indoor birthday party type events, I need to do a lot of trial and error shots. But now, the I can get the right exposure with bounce flash in couple shots. Or sometimes I got it on the first try.

 

[Derrel]

Accurate Exposure with Your Meter


Ultimate Exposure Computer


Day & Night Photography Exposure Guide -- by FotoSharp


http://home.earthlink.net/~snapshooter/exposureguide.pdf


The dilemma, challenge and paradox of exposure

The above articles deal with exposure. There are several articles with charts, listing "the right exposure" for various types of situations frequently encountered all across the world.

 

[tirediron]

Much less necessary with todays in camera meters. Shoot, check, adjust, shoot again. Or shoot in aperture/shutter priority. Or bracket. Knowing the exact exposure would sure be nice, but not really that necessary in my opinion. My camera's light meter can tell me the same exact thing.

Or just fix it in post? :lmao: I'll assume you were absent for the "How light meters work" class?

 

[nickzou]

So I basically any backwards on the whole meeting thing. I got my DSLR and started shooting, learned about the exposure triangle and just went at it. Then I started looking into other topics and new bodies and it seemed that the meeting system was a big deal. What's more you have all of these very expensive light meters so I figured that meeting was very important to learn so I stopped shooting by eye and started relying on my camera's meter.

As for the steady hand, I must not have it since I haven't managed to take a steady shot with my telephoto at 1/60 ever. Always had to use a tripod. And then I got a VR lens and it all seemed less important.

 

[KmH]

As for the steady hand, I must not have it since I haven't managed to take a steady shot with my telephoto at 1/60 ever. Always had to use a tripod. And then I got a VR lens and it all seemed less important.

It's still important.

Review your camera holding technique and make sure you're using every advantage.

Did you ever learn how to shoot a gun? The same principals/techniques are used for shooting both a gun and a camera

 

[DiskoJoe]

My old photography teacher was a walking light meter. She had been shooting for 30 years and could just tell us what correct exposure was for almost any situation. The other skill, sniper hands. Are these things that photographers should actively try to pursue or are they just god given gifts to lucky individuals?

These are essential skills. Hints why your teacher could make a living tell others how to do this. Knowing how to use your light IS photography and you must have a steady hand.

 

[nickzou]

Did you ever learn how to shoot a gun? The same principals/techniques are used for shooting both a gun and a camera

No, I live in Canada. It's not as a big a part of our culture.

And after talking to some older pros, whose dexterity they say is not what it used to be. They don't feel as though they have become less skillful because they cannot hold a heavy lens as steady as in their youth. Which also lead me to the conclusion that you can still be a good photographer without an iron grip.

 

[KmH]

It doesn't take an iron grip, just a steady grip.

I'm 59 and guaging from photographs I take now, I can hand hold now better than I did when I was young.

Hunting isn't a big part of Canadian culture?

 

[unpopular]

I do think there are people who just intuitively think photographically, but I don't think this mindset translates to good photos, or even good exposures without practice.

I for one feel like I understand a lot more than my photography shows. The skill is in application, which I know I lack.

 

[Gainsboro]

Of course! The more you understand light and the technical side of photography; the better you will get!!

 

[table1349]

The difference between a guy with a camera and an accomplished photographer is the skills they possess and refine. A guy with a camera shoots, checks, changes, shoots checks changes and eventually lucks into what they want in a photograph. An accomplished photographer knows what needs to be done to accomplish their vision and does it. When the accomplished photographer makes changes it is not in their photograph but in their vision of what that photograph should be.

No body ever died from to much knowledge. Whole cultures have perished for lack of knowledge. What do you think you need?

 

[Rekd]

A lot of replies here are bagging on you about your use of the term "god skills". Whether you meant "good" or "God" I have no idea, but the bottom line is that those skills are easily learned if you just try.

For a new photog, when you realize just what goes into getting a good shot then see someone do it flawlessly and fluently you may percieve that to be "God-like" skill. I get that.

In my early days as a machinist I had the same impression of my mentor. Now when I see someone doing that I simply recognize that they've got a few years in the business and have applied themselves. They're no better than anyone else.

The bottom line to your question is yes, it is worth practicing to get good shots the first time.

Good luck in your future with photography.

 

[Forkie]

I think it's also a case of knowing your own camera and its limitations, i.e., not buying a new one every year!