The three photographic essentials ...

Tom Caldwell · Nov 25, 2014

NCV said:
For me the essentials are:

Your photographs must have something to say, preferably something new . This is the most important.

The photographer must develop a personal style to some extent and must master the compositional aspects of photography. This is vital.

The technical side of things should be under control , not the measurebating stuff like equivalence, which is just fun for gear heads, but the knowledge of why to chose a certain shutter speed or aperture and when to over or under expose etc.

A certain determination and patience to get the photograph you want and not settle for second best when shooting helps. ( waiting for the light to change of waiting for that moment when that monument you want to shoot is free of bystanders).

The photographer must learn to examine and really look at everything in the viewfinder before clicking the shutter.

Photograph for a purpose or project and be very clear what the subject of a photograph or set of photographs is. My best photographs always occur when I know exactly what I am going to photograph.

Luck has little part in creating good photographs.

Photograph to please yourself and avoid playing to the gallery( photo competitions, likes on Flikr). I know it is nice to get all those likes.

Most modern gear is up to the job so this is not very important. One of my own favourite photographs was taken on a 3MP Olympus compact. The content for me transcends any technical limitations od dynamic range and noise. Just look at the great stuff Kertèsz did on quite primitive gear in his early stages. Changing camera will not make you a better photographer I am afraid.

If you want to improve your photography it is better to see by visiting exhibitions or reading monographs to see what other photographers have done or do, rather than reading gear orientated photo magazines or visiting gear sites.

http://nigelvoak.blogspot.it/

All good, I was just trying to reduce it to three basic essentials without complicating side issues as the side issues seem to be quite capable of being sub-sets of the three prime elements. My contention is that all my three postulations are always present in any image capture and they tend to vary on a scale 0-9 (9 being excellent). The hypothesis I make is that any image can be backed by two of these elements strongly and pass even if the third element is weak. However if two of the elements are weak then the image struggles.

From your well reasoned response I would summarise: Good Talent + Good Opportunity = Good chance of a great image and the gear used is less important.

I could also say that the best gear + a great opportunity would give a good chance of a great shot as well but for most instances would be classed as "lucky shot". But this allows the lucky owner of that shot to claim bragging rights which short of a string of great opportunities might be hard to repeat.

Tom Caldwell · Nov 25, 2014

dv312 said:
To talent I'd add practice

Some has innate ability to see, to capture the right image in his/her mind

Some needs a lot of practice and learning from the pros , from the greats, from others

Most of us fall within the latter category and the more we shoot the better we're at our craft

I compare myself to the Nikon Matrix exposure evaluation system : it comprises of a large database of thousands of collected different scenes so it can quickly determine the best exposure

I read a lot of magazines, almost on a weekly basis and have browsed many images on the web; these photos stay ingrained in my sub-conscience and help me evaluate the scene in a shooting session; I can quickly recall what I 've seen and deemed as beautiful and try to re-capture the moment

Cheers,

Agreed, practice helps make talent and therefore is a subset of the class "Photographic Talent" itself.

If we worked at it I think that all the essentials of good image making could be dropped under one of the three main categories.

For instance good gear would cover: camera bodies, lenses, flash, tripod as was necessary - latest and greatest or just pinnacle of its era. But gear alone does not make a good image.

Talent might cover natural nous to see what makes a good image or practice where that might be necessary - practice also includes familiarity with your gear. Knowledge of photographic principles and technique also comes under that heading. Ability to create opportunities might also fall under this heading, also thinking outside the box. There would be others. But many could get by with good gear and good opportunities to use it.

Photographic opportunities are either seized when unexpected or as good as you set out to find/create them. This would include suitable photographic conditions including but not exclusively light. Studio work, or events, or travel, or simply from in the street. Not nearly as forthcoming in your own backyard we have to get out where the action is.

Tom Caldwell · Nov 25, 2014

RoelHendrickx said:
I thought this was an interesting read.

Unfortunately nowadays, it takes more than talent, gear AND opportunity to "hit the big money". As a whole, photography has devaluated vastly : there are still people who recognize and value great photography, but for many, MANY purposes in the fast-moving age, most people find it more important that the shot is online soon, than that it is really good. That is why the photographer who wants to have some kind of success in any field that is dependent on time, must learn to prioritize in his processing and get images out there before interest wanes.

Look here on the aspect of "creating your own opportunities":

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54799206

Tom Caldwell · Nov 25, 2014

phazelag said:
phazelag said:

Luck has little part in creating good photographs.

Click to expand...

Yes

Don't agree, some photographs just come because the opportunity simply falls into place (luck), but maybe they are not created I would agree with that.

RoelHendrickx · Nov 25, 2014

Tom Caldwell said:
RoelHendrickx said:

I thought this was an interesting read.

Unfortunately nowadays, it takes more than talent, gear AND opportunity to "hit the big money". As a whole, photography has devaluated vastly : there are still people who recognize and value great photography, but for many, MANY purposes in the fast-moving age, most people find it more important that the shot is online soon, than that it is really good. That is why the photographer who wants to have some kind of success in any field that is dependent on time, must learn to prioritize in his processing and get images out there before interest wanes.

Look here on the aspect of "creating your own opportunities":

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54799206

Click to expand...

ulfie · Nov 25, 2014

[No message]

ulfie · Nov 25, 2014

To paraphrase Emily Dickinson (at bottom) one also needs "revery."

To make a photo it takes some gear and a photographer,--

Some gear, and a photographer.

And revery.

The revery alone will do

If photographers are few.

_________________________________________________________

To make a prairie it takes a clover and one bee,--

One clover, and a bee.

And revery.

The revery alone will do

If bees are few.

Abrak · Nov 25, 2014

Tom Caldwell said:
The three things are:

Good gear

Photographic Talent

Photographic opportunities

Generally you can manage with a shortage on one of these attributes but not when two are absent.

Talent is sometimes natural but usually talent comes from working at it, learning the "trade", practicing, understanding your equipment and having some fundamental nous.

Obviously if you have all three then you are made and are about to hit the big money (if your talent includes self-promotion)

Obviously if you are short in one department you have to work harder in another. I suppose that is why there is an endless demand for ever better new gear

A good photographer will of course tend to go make his own opportunities, so we might say the boundaries are flexible. If you are good enough then the image taken with more primitive equipment will pass, but not if the opportunity is lacking.

But if you have no talent then the opportunities and good gear are not quite good enough.

We all have our own make up within these rough boundaries and in the end if we have enough of a combination luck helps keep us going.

In the end I think that luck is the photographers friend being in the right place with the right equipment and enough talent to get the shot is all we need. Of course some guys make their own luck and therefore get luckier.

TN Args · Nov 25, 2014

markintosh13 said:
Tom Caldwell said:

The three things are:

Good gear

Photographic Talent

Photographic opportunities

Click to expand...

Hmm. That last one is an arguably large bucket.

Personally I would replace "Good gear" with "Good light" or perhaps "Interesting light."

Totally agree, though I think that good light counts as 'Photographic opportunities'. ;-)

--
call me Arg

TN Args · Nov 25, 2014

ulfie said:
To paraphrase Emily Dickinson (at bottom) one also needs "revery."

To make a photo it takes some gear and a photographer,--

Some gear, and a photographer.

And revery.

The revery alone will do

If photographers are few.

_________________________________________________________

To make a prairie it takes a clover and one bee,--

One clover, and a bee.

And revery.

The revery alone will do

If bees are few.

I think she meant 'aviary'.

Bhima78 · Nov 25, 2014

This is where skill comes in really. I'm no pro by any means, but I know there are moments I've taken a shot and realized later that I could have moved the subject x-feet or inches that way to take advantage of better light.

cameron2 · Nov 25, 2014

Paulmorgan said:
Light, light and more light, you can`t do much without it

You forgot full frame equivalence.

TN Args · Nov 25, 2014

cameron2 said:
Paulmorgan said:

Light, light and more light, you can`t do much without it

Click to expand...

You forgot full frame equivalence.

:-D:-D

Tom Caldwell · Nov 25, 2014

RoelHendrickx said:
Tom Caldwell said:

RoelHendrickx said:

I thought this was an interesting read.

Unfortunately nowadays, it takes more than talent, gear AND opportunity to "hit the big money". As a whole, photography has devaluated vastly : there are still people who recognize and value great photography, but for many, MANY purposes in the fast-moving age, most people find it more important that the shot is online soon, than that it is really good. That is why the photographer who wants to have some kind of success in any field that is dependent on time, must learn to prioritize in his processing and get images out there before interest wanes.

Look here on the aspect of "creating your own opportunities":

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54799206

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Tom Caldwell · Nov 25, 2014

Abrak said:
Tom Caldwell said:

The three things are:

Good gear

Photographic Talent

Photographic opportunities

Generally you can manage with a shortage on one of these attributes but not when two are absent.

Talent is sometimes natural but usually talent comes from working at it, learning the "trade", practicing, understanding your equipment and having some fundamental nous.

Obviously if you have all three then you are made and are about to hit the big money (if your talent includes self-promotion)

Obviously if you are short in one department you have to work harder in another. I suppose that is why there is an endless demand for ever better new gear

A good photographer will of course tend to go make his own opportunities, so we might say the boundaries are flexible. If you are good enough then the image taken with more primitive equipment will pass, but not if the opportunity is lacking.

But if you have no talent then the opportunities and good gear are not quite good enough.

We all have our own make up within these rough boundaries and in the end if we have enough of a combination luck helps keep us going.

In the end I think that luck is the photographers friend being in the right place with the right equipment and enough talent to get the shot is all we need. Of course some guys make their own luck and therefore get luckier.

Click to expand...

RoelHendrickx · Nov 25, 2014

Bhima78 said:
Good light opportunities are almost always there...
This is where skill comes in really. I'm no pro by any means, but I know there are moments I've taken a shot and realized later that I could have moved the subject x-feet or inches that way to take advantage of better light.

I agree.

In fact, I believe that BAD light opportunities are the ones where a photographer's skill can really shine and make the difference. (Even without use of flash, which is a skill in its own right.)

RoelHendrickx · Nov 25, 2014

ulfie said:
To paraphrase Emily Dickinson (at bottom) one also needs "revery."

To make a photo it takes some gear and a photographer,--

Some gear, and a photographer.

And revery.

The revery alone will do

If photographers are few.

_________________________________________________________

To make a prairie it takes a clover and one bee,--

One clover, and a bee.

And revery.

The revery alone will do

If bees are few.

zenfr2009 · Nov 25, 2014

>The three things are:

Good gear

Photographic Talent

Photographic opportunities

_____

Perhaps money is the 4th things ?

Money can help a lot improving those three things.

- Get a better gear

- Go here and there to meet talented people and see a lot of good results. This is one way to become more talented.

- Travelling and searching for more opportunities.

My 2 cents !

letsgofishing · Nov 25, 2014

Tom Caldwell said:
The three things are:

Good gear

Photographic Talent

Photographic opportunities

Generally you can manage with a shortage on one of these attributes but not when two are absent.

Talent is sometimes natural but usually talent comes from working at it, learning the "trade", practicing, understanding your equipment and having some fundamental nous.

Obviously if you have all three then you are made and are about to hit the big money (if your talent includes self-promotion)

Obviously if you are short in one department you have to work harder in another. I suppose that is why there is an endless demand for ever better new gear

A good photographer will of course tend to go make his own opportunities, so we might say the boundaries are flexible. If you are good enough then the image taken with more primitive equipment will pass, but not if the opportunity is lacking.

But if you have no talent then the opportunities and good gear are not quite good enough.

We all have our own make up within these rough boundaries and in the end if we have enough of a combination luck helps keep us going.

In the end I think that luck is the photographers friend being in the right place with the right equipment and enough talent to get the shot is all we need. Of course some guys make their own luck and therefore get luckier.

NCV · Nov 25, 2014

phazelag said:
NCV said:

For me the essentials are:

Your photographs must have something to say, preferably something new . This is the most important.

Click to expand...

Agreed, but sometimes my photos say I am practicing with my new gear! LOL But I agree

phazelag said:

The photographer must develop a personal style to some extent and must master the compositional aspects of photography. This is vital.

Click to expand...

I feel like I am developing my style now, but I would say I didnt really feal I had a style until about 5 years in of trying lots of things and understanding how to make different looks and really having a choice about how to make a photo look how I want. So for learners, I think they just need to practice and copy alot.

I read somewhere recently that copying other photographers work is a good way of learning and whilst you are copying you will inevitably add something of your own.

When I was selected to take part in a group exhibition some years ago, the critic that wrote about my photography used a nice phrase: “ his photography shows a sedimentary collection influences and styles from which he has made his own style”.

phazelag said:
phazelag said:

The technical side of things should be under control , not the measurebating stuff like equivalence, which is just fun for gear heads, but the knowledge of why to chose a certain shutter speed or aperture and when to over or under expose etc.

A certain determination and patience to get the photograph you want and not settle for second best when shooting helps. ( waiting for the light to change of waiting for that moment when that monument you want to shoot is free of bystanders).

The photographer must learn to examine and really look at everything in the viewfinder before clicking the shutter.

Click to expand...

I think this came for me because I was sick of trying fix stuff in post I knew I should have gotten correct in camera. So yes after several years I think my photos through, through the viewfinder! This is tough for a newbie.

Yes, really looking at what is in the viewfinder is perhaps the most difficult skill to master.

phazelag said:
phazelag said:

Photograph for a purpose or project and be very clear what the subject of a photograph or set of photographs is. My best photographs always occur when I know exactly what I am going to photograph.

Click to expand...

Yes.

phazelag said:

Luck has little part in creating good photographs.

Click to expand...

Yes

phazelag said:

Photograph to please yourself and avoid playing to the gallery( photo competitions, likes on Flikr). I know it is nice to get all those likes.

Click to expand...

True, but those competitions inspire me to try different things, and I am fine with losing because I learn and I truly admire those who do better.

phazelag said:

Most modern gear is up to the job so this is not very important. One of my own favourite photographs was taken on a 3MP Olympus compact. The content for me transcends any technical limitations od dynamic range and noise. Just look at the great stuff Kertèsz did on quite primitive gear in his early stages. Changing camera will not make you a better photographer I am afraid.

Click to expand...

Yes

phazelag said:

If you want to improve your photography it is better to see by visiting exhibitions or reading monographs to see what other photographers have done or do, rather than reading gear orientated photo magazines or visiting gear sites.

Click to expand...

I think alot can be learned quicker about what makes a good photo from sites like 500px.com and even Pixoto. Many times access to high quality exhibits is limited, and I dont have to see them in person to appreciate the work. Dont get me wrong I love exhibits and try to get to all I can, but I would never discount learning online just because its "online".

My 13 year old built an amazing gaming computer part by part from scratch and it worked the first time. I asked him how he learned and he just said "I googled it, its not that hard"

I expressed myself badly here perhaps. I am of the analogue generation and I learn from buying and looking at photographic monographs of photographers I like or when I can by seeing exhibitions.

The web is just as if not more valid to discover new things. I have discovered and liked lots of photographers work by surfing the net. For me the photo magazine is dead, the online ones are much more valid. From here in Italy I have a global choice in what to read and see.

phazelag said:
phazelag said:

http://nigelvoak.blogspot.it/

Click to expand...

--
http://www.scottzinda.com
http://instagram.com/phazelag

The three photographic essentials ...

Community Leader

Community Leader

Community Leader

Community Leader

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Community Leader

Community Leader

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

NCV

Guest

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts