Forum menu
Imagine if someone out there was telling you you had to ride a certain kind of bridleway to get a 'pure' riding experience...
That's not what is being suggested though (to my mind anyway).
It's more like someone suggesting that if you want to [u]really[/u] focus on learning to ride smoothly then it can be an informative and fun learning technique to put down the full-susser for a moment and try it on a rigid.
To me it just has far too much blown highlights, but horses for courses eh - good example of why a photograph isn't just about technical correctness and often capturing memories is at least as important I suppose.
Indeed. My point exactly. But that's what it looked like as we rode along into the September evening sunshine, before the final descent. I know it's probably technically crap but that's what that part of the ride was like, captured in a pic
I happen to have the latest STW mag here with me which I was reading whilst eating my lunch. if you look at pages 18,20,21,66,67,68,69,75,76,96,116&118 you'll see some lovely scenic shots presented in pretty much the same aspect ratio as a camera will give. They might well have been cropped, in fact I'd imagine they all have been, but none of them just have the interest in the middle. 🙂
Oh, and this 'zoom makes you lazy' thing seems a bit harsh to me. If 'lazy' is trying to frame a shot properly, than I can live with that! (I'd struggle like buggery to do landscape shots with my 50mm prime) 🙂
Take the tools you want and go and take pictures. All you have to do is think about what you're doing. Never mind all this stupid 'advice' and 'rules'.
Whoa there! As GrahamS said...
And I said 'dunno if it works for everyone but I think it helps me' - jeesus some people are touchy on here. 😕
I'm not talking about 'you must never use a zoom or you are a bad photographer' - but that it can be useful to have limitations sometimes. Can you think a bit more and force you to be a little more imaginative.
'd struggle like buggery to do landscape shots with my 50mm prime
But making yourself try doing landscapes with a 50mm prime could be a good creative exercise.
because you can't just "lazily" dial in the one you are comfortable with.
In other words, you can't get the shot you want, you just have to snap something else instead.
Sounds great!
🙄
but that it can be useful to have limitations sometimes
Depends on why you are taking photos, and what you want to get out of the experience, doesn't it? Personally I find the whole thing cripplingly limiting sometimes - I often find myself wishing for a video camera that took high quality movies that I could print out on a bit of paper (Red Dwarf style)
In other words, you can't get the shot you want, you just have to snap something else instead.Sounds great!
At the risk of sounding like Elfinsafety - I wonder how the great photographers of the past managed to get any shots at all without zoom and autofocus? Before they were invented all photos were rubbish weren't they.
Ok so I'm dosed up with Morphine for the pain so I'm almost compus mentis. Can I blame Simonfbarnes for my foot injury? I mean I know he didn't cause it, but can I blame him anyway? Is that ok?
I've had a think about Simon's comments about not following the conventions of picture aspect ratio, and I do agree with some of his points. Rules are there to be challenged, certainly. HCB and others were masters at working within the constraints of the medium, and their talent cannot be denied.
As for digital v film etc; I would say that simple equipment forces you to think more about the image you want to produce, but needn't be limiting. Some folk don't like to be encumbered and befuddled with too many options. As for digital giving you the ability to instantly assess the picture; if you aren't blessed with the talent that enables you to take great pictures, then it doesn't matter how many thousands of shots you rattle off. You just end up with a lot more crap ones.
Getting back to the OP; being in an environment where you can share ideas with other passionate people, and receive constructive criticism about your work is going to be far more valuable over time than buying the latest flashy cam the industry wants you to splash your money on.
Simonfbarnes; I've had a look on your bogtrotters website, and there are one or two nice pics, but mostly just snapshots of your friends riding, albeit good quality snapshots. A good visual record of events. And an awful lot of bottoms.
Do you have some other stuff that's maybe a bit more 'arty', or are you a recorder of facts more than you are an artist? Equal validity in both areas of course.
An interesting discussion, although I think we've strayed from the point a bit. Which is that in order to take great pictures, you do need a particular talent. Which can't be bought, but which can be nurtured.
In other words, you can't get the shot you want,
you just have to snap something else instead. Sounds great!
Exactly. And yes it is great, because it forces you to look for the "other" shot that you would have ignored.
I was at Baddesley Clinton (National Trust property) at the weekend and I walked about with the 50mm on just trying different things. Some worked, some didn't.
Yes it was frustrating at points when I couldn't fit in what I wanted, but it made me look for other shots. Which is the point.
I wonder how the great photographers of the past managed to get any shots at all without zoom and autofocus?
Crap logic. Why not ask yourself how many great shots went begging because they didn't have the kit? We will never know 🙂 Plus, I bet they cropped and resized plenty of images! Do you think if zoom digital cameras had been invented they, that they would all have shunned them? And then gone on to take worse images?
Of course not!
It's like bikes - it's certainly possible to do lots of rad/amazing/inspiring things on a £500 hardtail and have great rides, but it's defintely better to do some things on an expensive specialist machine. Which is why you don't see many pros on £500 hardtails through choice.
because it forces you to look for the "other" shot that you would have ignored
But it might not be as good a shot..?
I don't take pictures based on what my kit does - I look at what I see, find a great picture then try and get it on camera.
but that it can be useful to have limitations sometimes. Can you think a bit more and force you to be a little more imaginative.
here's a handy test of discipline/imagination: stick with your zoom lens but leave it at the focal length of the lens you would otherwise have selected. If you like, use some tape to stop the zoom ring turning as a reminder. How long would it be before you rip off the tape in disgust at its arbitrary restrictions ? Think of it as a thought experiment. For me, the tape would never be applied :o)
Might one not apply a similar philosophy in other circumstances? Try tying your legs together and imagine creative new ways of getting around, or invent new sign languages after stuffing your mouth with marbles etc etc
But it might not be as good a shot..?
If you are unwilling to take risks and challenge yourself how are you going to improve as a photographer? Or are you not bothered about that?
If you are unwilling to take risks and challenge yourself how are you going to improve as a photographer?
good point, but why not do it through real imagination and insight instead of trying to trick yourself into it with a handicap ?
it's certainly possible to do lots of rad/amazing/inspiring things on a £500 hardtail and have great rides
amusingly, I find myself in the other camp on this one, as in the end I decided I prefered the hairier riding on a hardtail to the excess ability of full suss 🙂
why not do it through real imagination and insight
Is that what you are doing when you use your superzoom to get close ups of muddy girls arses? 🙂
But it might not be as good a shot..?
True... so?
I'm not convinced that continually repeating different versions of the safe shot that I know will work, will make me any better photographer.
By enforcing a restriction on myself I'm trying to instill a little creative thought and force myself to look again.
If you are unwilling to take risks and challenge yourself how are you going to improve as a photographer?
I agree with Barnes. Setting arbitrary restritctions for no reason is not a productive way to challenge myself, I feel. That's why I don't singlespeed 🙂
I don't challenge myself when taking pictures. I just look, snap and learn. The more I look, the more I see, and the further down the path I find myself travelling.
I don't wake up one morning and say 'right today is 50mm day'.
By enforcing a restriction on myself I'm trying to instill a little creative thought and force myself to look again
I do this anyway without the restrictions. Restrictions are so.. restrictive 🙂
I don't wake up one morning and say 'right today is 50mm day'.
Why not try it?
Why not try it?
Cos I don't see the point! The idea does not appeal to me...
Is that what you are doing when you use your superzoom to get close ups of muddy girls arses?
I'm relying on basic instinct :o) But I don't claim to have either imagination or creativity, you can get good photos by passively waiting for them to appear in front of you and allowing the machine to do its function 🙂
For day to day shooting, and certainly while on holiday I'd stick to a superzoom for the freedom and flexibility it gives you, but every now and then going out with just a 50mm can be fun - being limited by the technology definitely does force you to search out different photos - which might open your eyes to new ways of looking at things. Assuming we're talking about a 50mm f1.8 lens, the increased depth of field also opens up other possibilities.
Still, it's not (IMO) the best way to learn, to my mind criticising and being criticised is a far better method - I'd also include reading other people's critiques as a particuarly interesting insight (albeit one that may well be wrong...).
Assuming we're talking about a 50mm f1.8 lens, the increased depth of field also opens up other possibilities.
Surely f1.8 would be a [i]decrease[/i] in DoF? 8)
which might open your eyes to new ways of looking at things
OTOH, I'm fine with looking at things and just want a thingy that captures what I've found, not a pair of blinkers to modify my looking.
Surely f1.8 would be a decrease in DoF?
he means increased fuzziness 🙂
I'd also include reading other people's critiques
but they're always going on about my shots of girls' arses 🙁
Still, it's not (IMO) the best way to learn, to my mind criticising and being criticised is a far better method
Probably. So where do you go for that though?
I thought about joining the local photography club, but my father-in-law is in one near him and the photos I've seen from it are distinctly uninspiring.
Still, it's not (IMO) the best way to learn, to my mind criticising and being criticised is a far better method
Probably. So where do you go for that though?
You could join Flickr and look for a suitable group (though most seem to be aimed at increasing comments and views rather than proper criticism).
I would have thought a class with a teacher and some passionate, enthused young people would be a healthy learning environment. 'Camera Club', to me at least, brings to mind an image of a group of grubby middle-aged men sitting round showing off slides and sometimes getting some poor student lass who needs to pay her rent in to take her clothes off so that they can point their zoom lenses at her. Dirty bastards.
Is Amateur Photographer the STW of the photographic world?
Assuming we're talking about a 50mm f1.8 lens, the increased depth of field also opens up other possibilities.
Surely f1.8 would be a decrease in DoF?
Of course I meant that, just checking you were paying attention 😳
Photo.net has a forum for critiques, I'm not sure how much traffic it gets, and a lot of the photos seem to be fairly high standard - fishing for compliments rather than a genuine urge to learn... At least one of the UK mags also has them, I think it's the weekly one (can't remember the name).
I thought about joining the local photography club
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeek!!! 🙁 Beardy, balding, loaded down with kit (sorry Kit!). Run away!! [warning: sterotype content]
Yeah flickr seems like a bit of a love in with no real criticism.
And you're right some of the others just seem to be fishing for complements.
A class does appeal, but I'm definitely not "young and enthused" and I'm not sure I have the time to be honest.
Camera Club sounds better than I thought tho...
you never get any real critique on flickr - and you have to work quite hard to get any comments at all really (submitting to loads of groups etc)
www.talkphotography.com is the place I post photos for critique. You still sometimes just get the 'nice shot' thing like on flickr, but there are some people who give decent critique, and some of them are working pros etc
Heh heh! Dirty old bugger!
Assuming we're talking about a 50mm f1.8 lens
Well that's a different issue. Having f1.8 at your disposal does indeed open a lot of doors for doing cool stuff in low light. However if I could I'd have f1.8 in a 14-600mm zoom lens 🙂
You'd never use it cos you'd need a donkey to carry it for you! 🙂
Yes. It should also be light weight and cost 10p, without compromising image quality.
And fit in your pocket?
I'll take two!
You'd never use it cos you'd need a donkey to carry it for you!
update: he [b]IS[/b] a donkey :o)
Heh heh! Dirty old bugger!
Oi! Don't talk about [b]GrahamS[/b] that way, the elderly are excused personal hygeine!
I'm a Software Engineer: personal hygiene means nothing to me anyway 😀
However if I could I'd have f1.8 in a 14-600mm zoom lens
It would be flippin' useless becasue you can't hold the damned steady beyond about 200-250mm! 🙂
And 14mm isn't wide enough either......
Of course I meant that, just checking you were paying attention
Oh yes I am indeed. 🙂
FYI an f/1.8 at 600mm is at least 333mm in diameter! So you'd need a crane...
LOL @ SFB. 😀
You wouldn't need a crane. You could have it swivel mounted on the back of a Landrover or something.
Have a look at [url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/joolzed/sets/72157624695003622/ ]Joolze's selection of portraits using just a 50mm lens[/url]. Some lovely, natural portraits. A perfect example of using the simplest of kit, very well.
No arguments there. 50mm is an ideal portrait lens.
No-one said you couldn't take good pics with one.
note that's ^^^ only a 500mm lens, the 600 would be 20% wider 🙁 ie nearly half as heavy again even if it were the same length! Also that bloke's arms are twice as thick as mine.
And it is a f2.8 not a f1.8 which would be much larger again!!
Love these pics of Joolze' (Hope you don't mind Joolze):
So natural, beautiful lighting:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joolzed/4879252418/in/set-72157624695003622/
Really happy face:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joolzed/4879251418/in/set-72157624695003622/
Funny, happy, perfect use of depth of field, great composition:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joolzed/4879251272/in/set-72157624695003622/
Cracking.