What to shoot?

lennon33x · Jan 11, 2014

I've actually been thinking of this for a bit, so i wanted to see how other photographers responded.

When I got my digital camera, I took pictures of EVERYTHING. My girls, my dog, trees, the sky, the sunset/sunrise, clouds, squirrels, coffee mugs...the list goes on. I got gear to take pictures of anything I could. I became such a gear head and figured I needed to buy everything under the sun (to which my wife highly disapproved). Finally, about 2 months ago, I was driving to drop my kids off at daycare and saw a sunrise, and said, "Man that looks awesome. That would make such a great photo." And then realized that I had absolutely no desire to stop and shoot it. At that point I realized that I virtually detested shooting nature shots, and I primarily wanted to shoot portraits and composites. Not because I don't love nature...I absolutely love the outdoors. I just realized that it wasn't something I wanted to shoot primarily.

At what point did you guys find out that "Hey, I really only want to shoot (insert subject matter)!"

sashbar · Jan 11, 2014

reavesce said:
I've actually been thinking of this for a bit, so i wanted to see how other photographers responded.

When I got my digital camera, I took pictures of EVERYTHING. My girls, my dog, trees, the sky, the sunset/sunrise, clouds, squirrels, coffee mugs...the list goes on. I got gear to take pictures of anything I could. I became such a gear head and figured I needed to buy everything under the sun (to which my wife highly disapproved). Finally, about 2 months ago, I was driving to drop my kids off at daycare and saw a sunrise, and said, "Man that looks awesome. That would make such a great photo." And then realized that I had absolutely no desire to stop and shoot it. At that point I realized that I virtually detested shooting nature shots, and I primarily wanted to shoot portraits and composites. Not because I don't love nature...I absolutely love the outdoors. I just realized that it wasn't something I wanted to shoot primarily.

At what point did you guys find out that "Hey, I really only want to shoot (insert subject matter)!"

I was shooting pictures in my head long before I decided to use a camera

So what to shoot was never a question. After I bought a camera, my choice has narrowed somehow, but it is still the same aesthetically and content wise. I know what I want to see in my pictures and I also know how far away I am from that pictures. I have learned my lessons with my previous hobby with hi-fi when I got into a vicious circle of perpetual outrageously expensive hi-end upgrades in search of a perfect sound that took over the music.
So this time with photography I have adopted a simple, clear philosophy: creative side first, technical second and gear remote third. I only buy gear when I absolutely need it. Otherwise it is just collecting boxes. Ugly black boxes with buttons and handles. Actually I can sell my current loudspeakers and buy a pair of cheaper ones, and spend the rest on some full frame body and a couple of pro zooms. I sometimes entertains this idea, but the fact is - I do not need this FF gear.
I too have no desire whatsoever to shoot landscapes and sunsets. I just see no point. Probably also because I am not good enough to take a sunset picture that would stand out. (Actually I doubt anyone could take a sunset pic these days that would stand out) But then again I do not like outdoors, if it is not a big city. And I have no desire to shoot squirrels, my kids, coffee mugs and, god forbid,clouds.
I also have another theory which I call Aesthetic Threshold Theory. Problem that many of us sooner or later encounter is that one can shoot kids and squirrels and sunsets and definitely coffee mugs, and keep asking himself "Why am I doing it?". "What is the point?". Until you answer this question, your only escape is more boxes, newer, "better" cameras and some gearhead's "photo knowledge" that has very little to do with actual photography. That's where a lot of guys end up and that's where I apply my AT Theory :eyebrows:

. The theory says that there are pictures and pictures. That's actually the whole theory. The point is it is very easy to tell pictures from pictures, because they are separated by an aesthetic threshold. Once you have crossed that threshold, made a picture that has an independent aesthetic and artistic value, you have found your answer. You will have realised that you have created something valuable and unique that never existed before and you will get a tremendous kick out of it. And when you look at it, the last thing on you mind is what gear did I use, was it FF or P&S.. Probably you will be more proud to take this shot with something cheap mad simple.
But that is how I see things. A lot of guys collect cameras and lenses, get a kick out of having "the bestest", never produce anything worth even hanging on the wall and they are perfectly happy with their hobby. And I can see nothing wrong with that either. Hobbies should not be taken literally. Some buy a camera to shoot a sunrise even though they hate to wake up early, others buy a camera to have an excuse to do exactly that and spend the day outside. Some want to meet new people and have something to talk about. Some even buy a camera to take the same shot for the next 40 years and make a living out of that. No problemo.

lennon33x · Jan 11, 2014

Initially mine was learning exposure and the "how to" in taking pictures. I got interesting shots of squirrels. But then it became very blasé. I got bored very quickly. Not that squirrels aren't cute. But that I lost control of the composition. Because I'm like you in that I began to think about the composition before I took the shot, losing control of my surroundings isn't appealing.

For instance, my sister in law wanted to announce her pregnancy and wanted me to shoot it. The shot I thought about in my head was 50mm, 1.8, looking up at the sonogram picture from about 30 inches off the ground (from the view of a child) with only the sonogram in focus. In black and white. Went to her house and with one shot nailed what I had in my head. The problem was that there were two sonogram pictures in the original image, this making it appear like there were twins (a learning lesson for me). Went to reshoot it and couldn't get the same feel. Maybe it was because I already took it and it seemed less intriguing. I guess it's similar to the way the brain works with desire. Example: man I want some vanilla ice cream. So you order a large ice cream cone. After about 3 bites, the desire goes away, but the psychological drive to keep eating for a variety of reasons takes over and the desire for the initial bite goes away.

The brain is an interesting thing

480sparky · Jan 11, 2014

Sometimes, the best thing to do is simply not shoot anything for a while. Put the camera down.

lennon33x · Jan 11, 2014

480sparky said:
Sometimes, the best thing to do is simply not shoot anything for a while. Put the camera down.

^this

snowbear · Jan 11, 2014

In my case, the opposite happened. My original intent, when I got serious, was strictly landscapes & nature. But exposure (sorry) to other things has given me a fondness for abstracts (in all visual art forms) and an interest in portraiture/fashion. Previously I never looked twice at abstract art and avoided photographing people.

Peoples interests change and sometimes broaden.

Derrel · Jan 11, 2014

Shoot whatever you like or want to shoot. I think your description of the early days of your digital photography experience sounds pretty common, pretty normal. I'm not very interested in a good number of the sub-genres, like say insect or floral macro shooting, but I do think "nature" photography is interesting. Whatever you shoot, you need to be true to yourself. One of the best ways to do that is to stay away from the aggregator sites, where the same old chit pops up on pretty much a daily basis; same locations, photographed from the same tripod positions, same basic shot of a "proven high-scorer", done ad nauseum.

Rick58 · Jan 11, 2014

Derrel said:
Shoot whatever you like or want to shoot. I think your description of the early days of your digital photography experience sounds pretty common, pretty normal. I'm not very interested in a good number of the sub-genres, like say insect or floral macro shooting, but I do think "nature" photography is interesting. Whatever you shoot, you need to be true to yourself. One of the best ways to do that is to stay away from the aggregator sites, where the same old chit pops up on pretty much a daily basis; same locations, photographed from the same tripod positions, same basic shot of a "proven high-scorer", done ad nauseum.

Well said

lennon33x · Jan 11, 2014

Derrel said:
Shoot whatever you like or want to shoot. I think your description of the early days of your digital photography experience sounds pretty common, pretty normal. I'm not very interested in a good number of the sub-genres, like say insect or floral macro shooting, but I do think "nature" photography is interesting. Whatever you shoot, you need to be true to yourself. One of the best ways to do that is to stay away from the aggregator sites, where the same old chit pops up on pretty much a daily basis; same locations, photographed from the same tripod positions, same basic shot of a "proven high-scorer", done ad nauseum.

I know what you're saying. This past spring, several sunflower fields (with the big 6-8 inch sunflowers) started popping up. I thought, "Wow, this would be a great time to maybe do some portraits." Sure as sh*t, people from EVERYWHERE starting taking pictures in and around the sunflowers, to the point of trampling the sunflower fields. Needless to say, the land owners were pissed and the cops got involved. Nevertheless, it took away from the uniqueness of the photo opportunity. I'm glad I didn't do it. Our local photo group website was slathered with those pictures, and none were unique enough for me ever to get excited about. That's why I try to do different things, in and around my house...like this...