Taking photography to the 'next level'…..

Only if that's how you frame it….

Last one appears to have a post or something in the bottom right that you should have cropped out really. 😉

chasing the SLR with 25 bizzilion pixels is like insisting on spending £5k on a 7" travel 25lb trail bike.

why not do the true STW thing, and go single speed?

seriously.

get yo'self a little dark room setup in the bathroom (its easy peasy) and do it yourself?
My old man was a photography lecturer for most of his working life.

year one of the course involved getting the students to make a wooden box, with a 1" window in the front, and a mount for a sheet of photographic paper in the back.
a piece of beer can went in the 1" window, with a hole nailed in it

PROPER camera :p

Heathen: But, ignoring the wait factor, when you do get your print can you really remember what your exposure settings and conditions were?

You're absolutely right – there's very few people who will take the time to log every shot. I never took one note when I was using a SLR but still got the hang of it – wish I could remember *how* lol. But all the lessons I learnt from using it still hold true now. The 35mm Photographer's Handbook certainly helped along the way. For a penny, it can't be bad.

there's very few people who will take the time to log every shot

I'm not sure what use it would be anyway. The eyes are so non linear that you cannot accurately assess the light level, or the speed of a moving object or the depth of a scene

why not do the true STW thing, and go single speed?

seriously

Cos it's stupid 🙂

Well a light meter would give you accurate light levels, and if you are going old school with fully manual on 35mm film then you may well be using for one for exactly that reason.

My point was more that shooting digitally can aid learning because you get instant feedback on whether your exposure is half-decent or not, and later when reviewing your images in more detail on a monitor, you have a perfect record of all the various camera settings.

Conversely I agree that the cost of film and limited number of exposures probably makes people more rigorous and disciplined, but it also means they are less likely to just experiment and try things that might not work.

So on the whole I'm not convinced by the whole "you must learn on film" argument.

Last one appears to have a post or something in the bottom right that you should have cropped out really.

🙂
I think that's probably my handebar. Schoolboy error!

Molgrips, are you saying a landscape shot can't have anything in the foreground? I'd post some more but the oudated browser on my work PC here won't work with Flickr any more and I can't get the links.

Sure, some landscape shots look better cropped wide, but if they mostly look like that then they'll all look the same. I do like some foreground to give depth to landscapes.
That top one of mine there was shot very, very quickly on an old compact as Kirsty came past me, literally without even looking at the viewfinder, from the hip if you like. That was a lovely day's riding, we were all alone seemingly in the middle of nowhere and it's the shot that describes the day best. Couldn't have wished for a better pic TBH. I might print it and frame it at some point. 🙂

So on the whole I'm not convinced by the
whole "you must learn on film" argument.

Having said that, I learnt on digital and my images are distinctly average, so maybe I shouldn't spout off like I am some kind of authority! 😳

but if they mostly look like that then they'll all look the same.

unless you look at the actual scene portrayed ? You might just as well say there are only 7 bike shots: going left, going right, going away, coming towards, mid air, upside down and underwater 🙂 I suppose some people might judge a picture "too square" or "not square enough" as if that mattered…

One thing that I have seen recommended quite a lot, which I feel helped me learn, is that to start with I only had one fixed focal length lens. I still quite often go out with just one prime lens attached and see what I can do with it.

They say zoom makes you lazy, and having just a fixed focal length makes you think about your composition a bit more, and gets you moving around more. Dunno if it's true for everyone but I think it helps me.

Couldn't have wished for a better pic TBH.

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.

They say zoom makes you lazy

rubbish 🙂 It's handy if you ARE lazy, but otherwise it just allows you to shoot things around you which may be near or far, big or little or just innaccessible – it's not "lazy" not to swim a river or jump a canyon, and also, by the time you get to the ideal spot the moment may be gone 🙂 I often find myself walking *away* from the subject to flatten the perspective, which a fixed focal length would not allow…

Molgrips, are you saying a landscape shot can't have anything in the foreground?

Clearly not! However, many don't. And if you want to capture a wide open vista, then cropping is useful – or a panorama tool.

God forbid I might use anything so high-tech and automated as that tho!

But going out with just a prime lens on does force you to think about the shots you can take, and it pushes you to experiment with different framing and think more about composition because you can't just "lazily" dial in the one you are comfortable with.

(i.e. I think grum means mentally "lazy", rather than physically, simon)

They say zoom makes you lazy

"They" spout a hell of a lot of bollocks.

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'.

Photography is more about doing your own thing than just about anything else, now that cameras are so good at automating the tech side of it.

Imagine if someone out there was telling you you had to ride a certain kind of bridleway to get a 'pure' riding experience, or that there's a formula for the correct amount of singletrack vs fire-road and number of jumps in a ride to get it properly satisfying. Total bolx.

(i.e. I think grum means mentally "lazy", rather than physically, simon)

as evidenced by his remark :o)

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 really 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 decrease 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?[/quote]

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).