Why do we want to learn?

[motcon]

motcon;

Fascinating post. That's the second time I've went off on an exploration after reading your comments.

motcon;

Just thought I let you know that was a cool 'review/critique.'

very kind words, thank you.

art has been a part of my life since i was a wee little one. my relationship with art has grown to the point that it's no longer 'me' and 'art'; we are integral parts of each other. i love to, each day, view this world through eyes of artistic filters rather than seeing this world, then trying to find art in it.

i attempt to do critiques as often as i can for the crowd that desires such a critique. to do one means to do it correctly and that takes a great deal of time. there's no way to mechanize the process as the number of elements in art are great, so each photograph needs to be seen as unique, then a mental distillation process to put it in to words.

once again, thank you.

 

[fightheheathens]

hmmm, interesting

im gonna give my view on subject matter and why i choose NOTE
with a little help from Ansel Adams


Mr. Adams was a fine musician and once made this analogy.
A photo is like music where the negative is the score (written music) and the print is the performance. (akin to post processing) You cant have one with out the other.

As i see it, you cant have a good piece of music with a bad score no matter how good the performer just as you cant have a amazing performace with a bad musician.
As i see it, with out a good score you have nothing and can never have anything, however, there are scores that still are good despite a bad musician. Beethovens 9th is still awinspiring even in the hands of a highschool orchstra where as "hit me baby one more time" in the hands of The london Philharmonic would still suck.

what i am getting at is that i think that the actual negative is more important in the end then the post processing work. when i ask for a critique i want to know what i could have done to make a better picture and usually it has to do with composition, lighting, and exposure (ultimitaly the most important part of the photo) all of which are mostly done in camera. you can change all to some extent in PP but getting it right in camera will put your energy into finishing it rather then saving it.
what i have found is that if people cannot edit your photo they tend to concentrat on those things which you do in camera (ie lighting exposure etc) where as if they can edit it, they focus less on that.
OFten when i ask for a critique its in the comp, lighting and exposure
Im fairly confident in my darkroom skills. therefore to me it is more benificial to focus on the creation of the image at stage one rather then the PP work.
If i have a question about PP in photoshop i would allow people to edit my image, and soon i will be getting a digital camera and photoshop and im sure i will ask for PP help in photoshop, but i still need to concentrate on getting that initial image down before i worry about the finishing touches



hmmm....that was rambling...hope you can follow it

 

[hovis]

hmmm....that was rambling...hope you can follow it

Makes perfect sense to me. Couldn't have put it better myself, and I totally agree.

In answer to the OP, I want to learn.... new techniques, different ways of looking at things. Basically I want more tools in my box and know how to use them to good effect. Editing one of my shots may, with the right supporting info, acheive those aims, but can never show me how much better a scene would have looked when taken from three feet to the left, for example.
It's a big subject this hobby / profession, when I stop learning, I reckon it'll be about a day or two later when the coffin nails go in...

 

[mysteryscribe]

I must have misread my photo history. I had no idea ansel and edward had NOKtE on their forum posts.

Oh yeah now I remember it was a different time when the were learning to be immortals. They didn't have that oportunity. And an edit here isn't changing your negative, its just like drawning crop lines or saying lighten this or darken that. ITS JUST EASIER...

If they had transparent crop L software would that ease you mind. And little stamps that said lighten this darken this needs more detail. all of which could be stamped onto a copy of your image rather than change it. If so then we just need to find a way to do that.


Actually that can be done in a couple of paint programs. Then the image will so so screwed up that no one would possibly mistake it for the original only as a learning tool.

Sort of like one of the other critiques here. Actually that might be a good idea. Don't change it just show what needs to be changed in the critiquers opinion. It would certainly stop all this frivilous editing.

 

[elsaspet]

Let me state again that for desired, deliberate offers to have photos edited in order to get new ideas for possible PS editions on THAT very photo, we have the Photoshop Challenges, and I have had photos in the Challenges, too. No qualms on my side there.

But as a general rule, I a) don't know any teacher (other than my daughter's art teacher in Grade 5, who riled EVERYONE!) who actually rewrites sentences, only would they put "sentence structure" on the side and - if you ask them later "What's that?" - discuss it with you, and b) I still think that it is the words that bring about more.

But I am always happy to agree to disagree.
There is an OPTION on TPF, we have a CHOICE, and I chose NOTE and need not be in the defensive over my choice, at all.

And my question was "Why do we want to learn?", here, anyway.

Ah. Just a story from when I was 9.
We had to paint "A King" in arts class, with water colours.
I painted a big orange head, dots as eyes, smiley mouth, two round red dots as "healthy cheeks", lots of beads around my "king's" neck, a crown on his head, all that. And I was very happy with my painting in the end.

My mother said: "But he looks like a Red Indian (polically incorrect wording, I know, but that is what she said back then) in full war paint! Here, I show you how to paint red cheeks". And she took out a new sheet of paper and showed me. In her own painting, one that she created all by herself. I was duly impressed with how she made the face pink, not orange, by mixing red with white, and put some more red into the still wet pink to make it flow apart and not look too added.

So I set out and painted a queen. In the new technique. Which was then MY painting, from the beginning to the end. All mine. Much better than the king, truer to life. And I had learned something new.

I brought all three pics back into class. And the arts teacher loved my mom's king. I kept saying: THAT ONE is NOT mine! My mom did it to show me how to paint red cheeks, but it is NOT mine!

I could not help it: my MOM's pic went into the showcase in the hallway!
I was FURIOUS.
Not because it was none of my pics in there, but because the teacher apparently never listened. I did not insist on having my orange-red-dot-cheek king in there. By then I knew it looked kind of ... funny.

But for them to take an adult's pic and put it among all the other 9-year-old paintings ... my!

Well, but my mother did not change MY king.
I still have all three: the orange-red-dot-cheek king, my mother's king, and my own queen. I could photograph them for you and show you.

That is how I learned.
And we can learn about all sorts of photography, even that which would normally be "outside our box" on here. By reading other members' posts, by looking at their photos, by sharpening our own awareness on what speaks to us and what does not, which also helps learning for one's self, one's own opinions, and then we can decide in what manner we want to step out of our own box and try out new paths.

If pictures only get edited, or any work does, to me it means someone else is trying to get me into their box...

LaFoto, that is the sweetest story I ever heard. I'd love to see the drawings! (Yours only)

 

[The_Traveler]

Let me slide in another story of my own.

In college I was taking a life sculture class with Peter Grippe, a sculptor with a very definite style http://my.brandeis.edu/news/item?news_item_id=8760&show_release_date=1, as opposed to my own self who had no talent, let alone style. He came over to look at my effort and he told me that 'the line was wrong.' When I looked puzzled, he began adding clay to my effort and, guess what, he was right and now I could see it.

My point being is that some situations lend themselves more to actually being shown how to do things better. If I were 9, I'd think I'd be hurt if my teacher drew over my stuff and effectively destroyed it, but I'm older than that now and I can recognize that, for me, being shown is sometimes better.

If an OP is sensitive about their image and doesn't want it touched, I'm cool - but it is my own prerogative to not get involved in their critique.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone can comment on my stuff to the level that they allow on their own. I just won't allow them to come to my house and change the originals.

 

[mysteryscribe]

well put..