The more you know (about great photography) the less pictures you take?

Started Feb 12, 2014 | Discussions thread
DenWil Veteran Member • Posts: 3,479
The more I accomplish, the higher my expectations.

trale wrote:

Over the last couple months, I've been watching "The Grid" series of videos put out by photoshop guru Scott Kelby and his pals.

I've learned a great deal from these videos, particularly from the critiques that they do, like this one . I've learned many of the ingredients of great (not just good) photo, elements like:

  • Good lighting
  • Good time of day
  • Interesting location
  • Interesting subject
  • Good composition
  • The right moment
  • Interesting perspective
  • Eliminating distractions
  • Good post processing

All the top photos on sites like 500px invariably demonstrate many (if not all) such elements. No doubt this will improve the output of my own photography in the future. But there seems to be a few drawbacks. For one, now when I revisit some of the photos I've taken in the past - photos that I was once very proud of, they now look mundane. I can pick them apart and describe all the things "wrong" with them. This is a humbling feeling.

That is simply education.

The other drawback is that I feel less inclined to take photos over-all.

And that's a bad thing? I go for weeks sometimes between shoots. It's not an issue.

If you watch enough of The Grid, you get the sense that if you don't happen to be at an interesting locale, with an interesting subject, at just the right time of day (near sunrise / unset), you might as well not bother taking out your camera.

I have never watched.

Unless I'm willing to go to such lengths to do the necessary legwork to purposely situate myself in the right location at the right time, many of the shots I take on a normal basis is classified (as they call it) "snap-shots", even if I do have some of the other elements.

One thing they do emphasis over and over is that your gear (price of your camera) is NOT one of the crucial elements of a great photo. I suppose this is to encourage those with entry-level DSLRs and the like. That's fine, but when they suggest "you gotta go to the right spots" which invariably means travel costs, the cost of gear seems to pale in comparison.

Your thoughts on this?

I always go to those lengths.  It is simply the process. I have driven hundreds of miles in a pick up truck with furniture  and  and a model to be on a dry lake bed in the middle of nowhere at 5 in the afternoon. Other times I am simply in my own back yard. My gear is relatively  low priced at this point - that's is simply timing- but the gear is crucial ,very crucial to the quality of my images. An entry level DSLR will not produce comparable product.

-- hide signature --


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow