Overated primes II

I respectfully, completely disagree.

Tiger Woods does not stand at the tee and think about keeping his head down, slowing his backswing, keeping his left arm stiff and making sure he follows through with his club. No. He only thinks about where to place the ball on the fairway or the green.
Well, maybe.

Actually I don't know what Tiger thinks about.

Well, on second thought I think I do!




Nor, in my opinion, does any really great photographer think of all the things that you are suggesting that he should think about when framing a shot. He mearly sees the shot, frames it and takes it.
Well, if you say so.

The only really great photographer I personally know is LinconB.

And he would never admit to knowing me!

(Well, there is that guy down the hall from me who shoots Seahawk's games-I guess he counts).
And he doesn't need to shoot it several times, as he knows he got it when he squeezes the shutter button.
Well if you say so.

BTW, which "really great" photograhpers do you know personally?

You seem to know so much about how they think.

You must know a whole bunch of 'em!
It's done. It's over.... and it's as simple and instinctual as breathing.
Uh huh.
At least it is for me.
Wow, you must be a "really great" photographer-not having to think or plan or anything!

I wish I was just like you!
Bob, from Ohio
Basically, he was saying that there's more to good composition than framing. Think about two approaches to composing a particular shot. First you set your zoom to 14mm and frame so that the subject's face comprises about a third of the width of the frame. Take the shot. Then set your zoom to 45mm and walk backwards until again, the subject's face comprises about a third of the width of the frame. These won't be equivalent compositions! In the first the subject will appear larger relative to the environment, this can give the observer a feeling of relative insignificance. In the second shot, much less of the environment is visible in the frame. It can give more of a sense of intimacy... that the observer is occupying the same space as the subject. I'm a novice and certainly not an artist and there are certainly other ways to use angle of view and perspective in composing a shot. The point is that there is more to an artful composition than simple framing, and a skillful photographer, whether using a zoom or a prime lens, will choose a focal length with an understanding of the resultant angle of view and how it effects the composition, and not just to achieve a particular frame or field of view.

Carl

The Chaste Student
TEdolph
 
No, most people zoom in and out quite a bit before they make their shot! This, even if they end up at one end or the other.
I'm saying I can see the shot and put the right camera to my eye faster than I can get the correct zoom while I'm trying to frame the shot. Alternatively, I suppose I could accomplish the same thing by getting to know very well the two extremes of a zoom, so I could quickly, without having to look, zoom to the widest and to the longest ends while I'm bringing my camera to my eye to capture the shot.
most people actually do.

Take a look at your EXIF data for any zoom lens you use.

Most shots will be at the widest end, the second most will be at at the longest end.

In reality, most people use there zoom like a Leica Varifocal lens, just two focal lenghts.

Which of course shows that Jere's entire contention is non-sense.

TEdolplh
 
Actually, you probably are in agreement.

No, Tiger doesn't give deliberate thought to how he's going to get that ball to drop where he wants it, but he certainly used to when he was learning the sport. Now, he just makes it happen, since he has completely internalized the process. This is exactly what I described about how a musician develops their skills.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=40334985

Carl just described how a photographer may process a scene. It may be a deliberate process full of decision points, or a completely internalized process that's second nature. That depends on the individual, but the process is probably still taking place on some level.
Tiger Woods does not stand at the tee and think about keeping his head down, slowing his backswing, keeping his left arm stiff and making sure he follows through with his club. No. He only thinks about where to place the ball on the fairway or the green.

Nor, in my opinion, does any really great photographer think of all the things that you are suggesting that he should think about when framing a shot. He mearly sees the shot, frames it and takes it.

And he doesn't need to shoot it several times, as he knows he got it when he squeezes the shutter button.

It's done. It's over.... and it's as simple and instinctual as breathing.

At least it is for me.

Bob, from Ohio
Basically, he was saying that there's more to good composition than framing. Think about two approaches to composing a particular shot. First you set your zoom to 14mm and frame so that the subject's face comprises about a third of the width of the frame. Take the shot. Then set your zoom to 45mm and walk backwards until again, the subject's face comprises about a third of the width of the frame. These won't be equivalent compositions! In the first the subject will appear larger relative to the environment, this can give the observer a feeling of relative insignificance. In the second shot, much less of the environment is visible in the frame. It can give more of a sense of intimacy... that the observer is occupying the same space as the subject. I'm a novice and certainly not an artist and there are certainly other ways to use angle of view and perspective in composing a shot. The point is that there is more to an artful composition than simple framing, and a skillful photographer, whether using a zoom or a prime lens, will choose a focal length with an understanding of the resultant angle of view and how it effects the composition, and not just to achieve a particular frame or field of view.

Carl

The Chaste Student
--
http://453c.smugmug.com/
 
Took me many years of shooting handheld to realize that I get better photos when I shoot everything with a tripod and a prime! I ain't loonie!

Not telling you how to shoot.

:)
I simply do not believe that primes force some sort of desirable technique on you. It is exactly the same as the loonies who think we should use tripods for every shot, however bright.
What!? Don't you realize it's simply NOT POSSIBLE to shoot sharp pictures hand-held? You're wasting all the luscious prime lens sharpness by not using a 30 pound tripod and head for EVERY picture. How do you expect to EVER by the next Ansel Adams without a tripod?

/sarcasm ;)
 
If that's the case - and I doubt it's a provable point - then using a prime would save time by cutting the irrelevant zooming out of the process, right?
No, most people zoom in and out quite a bit before they make their shot! This, even if they end up at one end or the other.
I'm saying I can see the shot and put the right camera to my eye faster than I can get the correct zoom while I'm trying to frame the shot. Alternatively, I suppose I could accomplish the same thing by getting to know very well the two extremes of a zoom, so I could quickly, without having to look, zoom to the widest and to the longest ends while I'm bringing my camera to my eye to capture the shot.
most people actually do.

Take a look at your EXIF data for any zoom lens you use.

Most shots will be at the widest end, the second most will be at at the longest end.

In reality, most people use there zoom like a Leica Varifocal lens, just two focal lenghts.

Which of course shows that Jere's entire contention is non-sense.

TEdolplh
--
http://453c.smugmug.com/
 
No matter what you use, there are always limitations. Working within your limitations effectively makes your photography better.

If you can use a super-super-zoom, walk up to a scene and pick out the very best FL, framing and perspective out of the infinite possibilities you are a significantly better photographer than me (and most others), but the majority of really great photographs are shot by superb photographers using prime lenses. Most serious weekend warriors think they need all FL's covered to get their shots.

Whatever gets you your best photographs is what you should be using. I've gone both routes, pro level zooms and primes. I get better photographs from primes.
............ If I mounted a zoom I would never have quite seen this area and captured it quite this way..................
No, the idea is to look at the scene with your eyes and visualise the image that you want, then zoom or choose the appropriate prime (and maybe walk a bit or crop later) to accommodate your visualisation.

Regards.......... Guy
 
I can see your advice as one way to go, though it's opposite to my own experience. I used primes for street shooting because I could previsualize something that was only going to last a few seconds and grab the shot before it disappeared. So it was a way of more quickly capturing the scene, not the slow and fumbling method you describe. And I have never had much use for tripods. Yes, I've used one occasionally, but learning how to hold a camera steady without one has suited my carry-a-camera-everywhere style of shooting more. Ditto flash. I have a couple from my film days that never got much use and I doubt I'll be getting one for my m4/3 cameras any time soon, as I prefer shooting with available light to setting up the scene. If I ever have time to devote to a more deliberate shooting style, tripod and flash(es) will be additions, but they are toward the end of my buy list.

I think most people getting into "serious" photography should probably either:
  • start with a superzoom, so they can get a taste of just about every focal length out there, then add a larger-sensor camera and the equipment that most matches what they most like to shoot -- and what they want to shoot, but can't, with the superzoom
or
  • start with a larger-sensor body, a kit zoom, and one prime (for low light and to get the sense of shooting with one focal length) and then add equipment as their needs and curiosity dictate.
The primes approach suits slower and contemplative effort (and for partners, much time wasting). Zooms get the job done quickly and allow you to move on and take more shots before the sun goes down.

[snip]

First purchase should be body and zooms, second most important is a good tripod, thirdly start looking at primes. And a decent flash is in there somewhere, depends on needs. It's a system camera for heck's sake, and if you die before you've bought everything in the catalogue, then you have failed miserably.

Regards......... Guy
 
Wow, you must be a "really great" photographer ... I wish I was just like you!
Why thank you. Very kind of you to say.
 
So you don't even think about what f-stop or shutter speed you want to use? Does your thumb automatically make the right pick, or do you leave the camera in Program mode?
 
I can see your advice as one way to go, though it's opposite to my own experience. I used primes for street shooting because I could previsualize something that was only going to last a few seconds and grab the shot before it disappeared. So it was a way of more quickly capturing the scene, not the slow and fumbling method you describe. And I have never had much use for tripods. Yes, I've used one occasionally, but learning how to hold a camera steady without one has suited my carry-a-camera-everywhere style of shooting more. Ditto flash. I have a couple from my film days that never got much use and I doubt I'll be getting one for my m4/3 cameras any time soon, as I prefer shooting with available light to setting up the scene. If I ever have time to devote to a more deliberate shooting style, tripod and flash(es) will be additions, but they are toward the end of my buy list.

I think most people getting into "serious" photography should probably either:
  • start with a superzoom, so they can get a taste of just about every focal length out there, then add a larger-sensor camera and the equipment that most matches what they most like to shoot -- and what they want to shoot, but can't, with the superzoom
or
  • start with a larger-sensor body, a kit zoom, and one prime (for low light and to get the sense of shooting with one focal length) and then add equipment as their needs and curiosity dictate.
are completley irreconsilable!

How can you say one or the other?

Most educational modalities (my partner's wife is a school administrator) start with the simplest environment and then build from there.

I would start with a good art course on composition, maybe some perspective drawing, and then shooting in B&W with just one focal lenght, building from there.

Add a second focal lenght, then color, etc.

Sensor size wouldn't matter as long as you could control DOF.

TEdoolph
 
So you don't even think about what f-stop or shutter speed you want to use? Does your thumb automatically make the right pick, or do you leave the camera in Program mode?
a "realy great" photograher is like Tiger Woods going after a hot ba....I mean teeing up the ball.

It is all automatic.

You don't even have to push the shutter release, it is all done through thought transferance.

If you were a "really great" photographer you would know that.

I wonder what other kinds of stuff "really great" photograhers can do?

Maybe Bob in Ohio will tell us?

TEdolph
 
So you don't even think about what f-stop or shutter speed you want to use? Does your thumb automatically make the right pick, or do you leave the camera in Program mode?
Do you know what really pissses old time pros off about me? Well, lots of things actually.

1) I pick up a camera once ever couple of years. Shoot for 30 minutes and then put it back down again for another couple of years.

2) I shoot with simple, cheap "point and shoot" cameras.

3) Yes, I often (not always) leave my camera on "auto" (man, that really pissses them off)

4) I have never studied a darn thing about photography.

5) All things considered,... my work is pretty darn good.

























































 
So you don't even think about what f-stop or shutter speed you want to use? Does your thumb automatically make the right pick, or do you leave the camera in Program mode?
Do you know what really pissses old time pros off about me? Well, lots of things actually.
is that so?
1) I pick up a camera once ever couple of years. Shoot for 30 minutes and then put it back down again for another couple of years.
Hmmm..........the numbers assigned to you photo's fom your previous Sony camera and the date ranges suggest otherwise.
2) I shoot with simple, cheap "point and shoot" cameras.
It appears that you are currently shooting with a Nikon D700.

I wouldn't calll that a "cheap point n shoot camera".
3) Yes, I often (not always) leave my camera on "auto" (man, that really pissses them off)
Huh, so you leave the D700 on "auto"?
4) I have never studied a darn thing about photography.
Well if you say so.
5) All things considered,... my work is pretty darn good.
Again, if you say so.

You know what really makes people unhappy on this forum Bob?

When people come in here and the first thing they do is to try to deceive us.

And do you know what the first clue is?

They are usually pompus.

[snip]

TEdolph
 
1) I have not taken a single shot in over two years. Go back and check the dates again.

2) ALL of these were taken with "point and shoot" cameras.

3) I do not own a D700 any longer, I only owned it a short time and found that it was way too confusing for me.

Now say "Goodnight" and go to bed before your wife spanks you.

Bob, from Ohio
 
1) I have not taken a single shot in over two years. Go back and check the dates again.
Really?

What about the photo of the yellow tabby cat you took on March 19, 2011 with your D700?

Was that two years ago?

What about the number seqeuenses on the photo's Bob?

Sill maintain that you ony pick up a camera once every two years, and that you dont take at least hundreds of photo's each year?

Funny how your Sony assigend sequential numbes suggesting that.
2) ALL of these were taken with "point and shoot" cameras.
Except for other shots you took with a D700.
3) I do not own a D700 any longer, I only owned it a short time and found that it was way too confusing for me.
How long Bob?

Think before you answer-you have a large Internet foot print with a lot of data.

Glad you manned up about owning a D700 anyway.
Now say "Goodnight" and go to bed before your wife spanks you.
Hey, hey-it is my wife who likes the spankings!
Bob, from Ohio
TEdolph,

Formerly from Ohio so don't make up anything about that either.
 
I respectfully, completely disagree.

Tiger Woods does not stand at the tee and think about keeping his head down, slowing his backswing, keeping his left arm stiff and making sure he follows through with his club. No. He only thinks about where to place the ball on the fairway or the green.

Nor, in my opinion, does any really great photographer think of all the things that you are suggesting that he should think about when framing a shot. He mearly sees the shot, frames it and takes it.

And he doesn't need to shoot it several times, as he knows he got it when he squeezes the shutter button.

It's done. It's over.... and it's as simple and instinctual as breathing.

At least it is for me.

Bob, from Ohio
So obviously, tiger has never practiced golf a day in his life. No truly great photographer ever studied the craft, and the Cleveland Browns have never had to work hard at sucking at football. These are all things that come as naturally as breathing.
 
I never lie about anything.

Yes, I shot the cat with a D700. But I sold that camera with just a few hundred clicks on the shutter.

It was more than two years since I had shot a camera when I shot the D700 (which yes I played with for a few months) and I have not shot since, which is close to a year.

My point is.. If all you want to do is to take "good" pictures (and I don't think my work is "great" by any stretch of the imagination), you don't need all kinds of study or expensive equipment. "Good" photography should be mostly instinctual, like mine is.

A few of those duck photos were taken within the first few minutes that I ever held a camera in my hands. In fact, here are two of them.

I knew NOTHING when I took these. I had just put the batteries in the camera, set the camera on "auto" and drove to a duck pond. I HAD NEVER SHOT A CAMERA BEFORE IN MY LIFE, and these were the first few clicks... of a $350 point and shoot.

Now, I am no great photographer, but this stuff isn't rocket science.



 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top