Do you Take pictures -or- Make pictures

It's become more apparent to me that there are two different approaches by photographers to their photography.

One group Takes a picture, whether it be a landscape, a bride and groom, a sport activity, their kids, birds, street scene, etc.

The other group starts with a vision somewhere in their head and builds that image in their studio or out on location whether it be a dream, or a fantasy or an editorial comment or a fashion spread, product or commercial shoot, etc.

I am mostly a picture taker. But I admire the picture makers. So what are you?

EDIT - I'm sure someone will post the comment "Does it matter?" The answer is no. But it interesting as to how one approaches that little rectangle that is their photography.

chkproductions said:

It's become more apparent to me that there are two different approaches by photographers to their photography.

One group Takes a picture, whether it be a landscape, a bride and groom, a sport activity, their kids, birds, street scene, etc.

The other group starts with a vision somewhere in their head and builds that image in their studio or out on location whether it be a dream, or a fantasy or an editorial comment or a fashion spread, product or commercial shoot, etc.

I am mostly a picture taker. But I admire the picture makers. So what are you?

EDIT - I'm sure someone will post the comment "Does it matter?" The answer is no. But it interesting as to how one approaches that little rectangle that is their photography.

--
http://chkphotography.zenfolio.com/

Click to expand...

Realistically I think the best route is to do a bit of both, having a well developed "gut" instinct for good pictures is very important but also being able to analyse what drew you to a scene is helpful for getting the best out of it.

Whether they're photographs is someone else's call. They're usually not quite 'reality' (or nothing near reality). Reality is over rated IMO, and is what I attempt to to escape from for a time when picking up a camera.

--

...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

In my little home studio I am making pictures. But everywhere else I take pictures.

Kelly Cook

I make pictures out of the things I see around me in the world-- not just objects, but colors, shapes, actions, edges, ideas and juxtapositions. I can't have a plan ahead of time, since I can't know what I am going to see.

Just to confuse the issue, it's when I go out with the camera and a preconceived idea of what I want to do that I am most likely to just take pictures.

Same as you. A picture taker who admires and sometimes envies the pictures makers.

That's not to say my photos are snapshots or that they're not very deliberate. But they're not built or constructed or previsualized (in the sense that you might see potential in a scene and revisit it in three years when there's that freak snowstorm in April that you've been waiting for, or a location in a city that will be just right in the rain when someone walks by with a red umbrella). I don't hire models, don't ask people to stand somewhere or walk somewhere or turn on or off the lights outside their house or anything like that.

But as much as I admire that, I'm not sure I'd want to do that even if I had the creativity. It's just not what attracted me to photography. I shoot to record things that interest me and that I hope will interest others. And the more I shoot, the more I learn to see interesting things.

• Dennis
  --
  Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

I think that there is an important difference here. Taking a photo, IMO, is a passive act. You point the camera at the subject and press the shutter button. Making a photo is an active process. You choose an aperture for the DOF that you want. You choose a shutter speed to stop or show movement. Maybe you use a polarizer or ND filter to remove a reflection or darken the sky. You move a little to the side you avoid a distracting background. These are examples of things we do to make a picture.

I think photos are ultimately taken, not made. This applies even to Newton, Leibovitz, Karsh or Sherman.

It is the nature of the art.

I find my way into photos based on circumstances and found subjects, rather than constructing them in my mind and assembling the elements I want. Like you, I envy those who can build the vision and fulfill it. They would include the commercial, food, fashion, portrait and still life experts. Too ponderous for me. I really like a more photojournalistic and documentary approach.

A studio portrait is not something you just take. It takes at least an hour to set up my studio and another one to take it down. The best ones start with a vision of how this person is best presented. If all goes well the final picture will have some of that vision left in it, but one should never be so fixed on the vision that a chance for something even more illustrious is surpassed.

And sometimes the portrait just ends up being the same old standard job. That is when "as long as the subject is happy..." is the keyword. Not everybody inspires art, and not everybody wants an arty portrait.

Klaus dk said:

A studio portrait is not something you just take. It takes at least an hour to set up my studio and another one to take it down. The best ones start with a vision of how this person is best presented. If all goes well the final picture will have some of that vision left in it, but one should never be so fixed on the vision that a chance for something even more illustrious is surpassed.

And sometimes the portrait just ends up being the same old standard job. That is when "as long as the subject is happy..." is the keyword. Not everybody inspires art, and not everybody wants an arty portrait.

Click to expand...

Your description how you arrange your setup and so on: agreed.

But then comes the final step: you press the button - the picture is taken. With all your lighting and posing guidance and arranging: click, the camera takes a moment in time. :-D

[No message]

RobertSigmund said:

Klaus dk said:

A studio portrait is not something you just take. It takes at least an hour to set up my studio and another one to take it down. The best ones start with a vision of how this person is best presented. If all goes well the final picture will have some of that vision left in it, but one should never be so fixed on the vision that a chance for something even more illustrious is surpassed.

And sometimes the portrait just ends up being the same old standard job. That is when "as long as the subject is happy..." is the keyword. Not everybody inspires art, and not everybody wants an arty portrait.

Click to expand...

Your description how you arrange your setup and so on: agreed.

But then comes the final step: you press the button - the picture is taken. With all your lighting and posing guidance and arranging: click, the camera takes a moment in time. :-D

Click to expand...

I make the moment, I decide to press the button. We'll just have to agree to disagree then, won't we?

Klaus dk said:

RobertSigmund said:

Klaus dk said:

A studio portrait is not something you just take. It takes at least an hour to set up my studio and another one to take it down. The best ones start with a vision of how this person is best presented. If all goes well the final picture will have some of that vision left in it, but one should never be so fixed on the vision that a chance for something even more illustrious is surpassed.

And sometimes the portrait just ends up being the same old standard job. That is when "as long as the subject is happy..." is the keyword. Not everybody inspires art, and not everybody wants an arty portrait.

Click to expand...

Your description how you arrange your setup and so on: agreed.

But then comes the final step: you press the button - the picture is taken. With all your lighting and posing guidance and arranging: click, the camera takes a moment in time. :-D

Click to expand...

I make the moment, I decide to press the button. We'll just have to agree to disagree then, won't we?

Click to expand...

We may not even disagree a lot. Just: without the moment it clicks it would remain an arrangement.

Take Karsh's most famous portrait of Churchill, the lion. Of course he arranged his lights carefully. Then Churchill came, with his cigar, Karsh, who was a young man at this time, took away Churchill's cigar, Churchill looked furious, this was the moment Karsh pressed his cable release! :-D

That's photography, that's what sets it apart from other arts!

W. Henry Fox Talbot, one of the inventors of photography, describes his experience in attempting to do drawings of picturesque scenery.

He uses the word ‘take’ when he describes himself as ‘taking sketches’. Not that it means much, but the usage of the word is quite old.

Most of the time my studio ideas are already in the works before the first light is powered. Mostly based on my concepts and clients needs. I will however continuously rethink as the sessions progress. Based on subjects reactions and demeanor.

Anyone who does portrait work will tell you that each session is definitely fluid and that the end results are many times different than the vision you started with.

When I do landscapes I usually seek out an area that matches the vision or idea that I wanted that day. Many times, though, I spend walking around trying to develop that concept and this little voice will tell me to look this way or that. (Don't have too much fun with the voices thing).

Anyway, when I listen to the voice there has many times been, THE SHOT.

I will enter contests and when I arrive at the location to start shooting there will be that voice and more times than I cared to admit, THAT SHOT, was the one picked in the contest.

Maybe the practically creative side of me arguing with the truly creative side, or a higher power, whatever you want to believe. But, being there at the golden hour, searching for the right shadows falling, right blend of color and contrast, etc. Well ,that is not chance or impromptu.

I shoot at a lot of things with my camera. Every now and then I get a picture.

chkproductions said:

... One group Takes a picture, whether it be a landscape, a bride and groom, a sport activity, their kids, birds, street scene, etc.

The other group starts with a vision somewhere in their head and builds that image in their studio or out on location whether it be a dream, or a fantasy or an editorial comment or a fashion spread, product or commercial shoot, etc...

Click to expand...

The same difference between a doodler and an artist.

I shoot raw. When I shoot, I have it in mind what I want the image to look like. So, when I "take" the image, I am only interested getting the best data I can for the scene and framing I desire. That means I maximize exposure, typically at base ISO, but possibly up to ISO 800 (with my E-M5) if maximum exposure is necessarily less than ETTR.

I also take a White Balance reference shot.

This "take" is simply to get the best "information" from the desired scene and otherwise has nothing to do with the ultimate image I desire.

Then I "make" the image I want during processing, often just in RPP or ACR, but a times also with added touches in PS. It is here that I transform my "take" into the image I had in mind at shutter down.

So, yes, I take and make my pictures.

--
gollywop

I'm pretty opportunistic when it comes to photography in the sense that I try to find things in the world to take photos of. BUT. . . I might wait to do PP on a photo for years until I figure out what to do with it, or I might keep 'worrying' at a photo many times before I'm happy with it. I recently just finished a photo taken in 2004 that I think I'll stay happy with for a bit.

I'm not a high volume shooter either though. I'm kind of slow and deliberative in deciding what to shoot. When I was younger, my whole life was experienced through a viewfinder. Not any more though, sometimes the viewfinder is a way to filter out life, not experience it. I think as I age, the experience has more value than the imagery. That doesn't mean the imagery isn't important, just that the experience is MORE important.

--

I still like soup. . .