Seeing Great Photos

[smcilree]

A short time ago there was a thread entitled "Auto. Bad rap??" going on this forum. I spent several days writing and rewriting a response to it, and never got around to posting anything. That thread seems to have now died a well deserved death, so I am going to start a new thread because I believe a different perspective underlying the oft-debated Auto vs Manual discussion needs to be explored.

Why have I now found the words to express that which escaped me before? They arrived with the postman yesterday, in a new book I had ordered. The book is The Practice of Contemplative Photography, by Andy Karr and Micheal Wood. I found the essence of what I wished to say in the preface to that book.

Quoting Mr. Karr: "...little is written about how to work with eye, mind, and heart to produce fine works of art or how photography can be used to expand your vision and your appreciation of the world. Henri Cartier-Bresson expressed this well when he wrote, 'Technique is important only insofar as you must master it in order to communicate what you see...In any case, people think far too much about techniques and not enough about seeing.'

"It is fairly easy to master the technical skills of photography. In fact, the sophistication of modern digital cameras makes many of these skills superfluous. It is much harder to develop your ability to see and learn to work with the subtle dynamics of your own mind, yet this is where the potential for real artistry and joy is to be found" (emphasis added). Thanks to the author and I do hope some of you will be encouraged to take a look at his book.

So this, very succinctly says what I was searching for in response to the earlier thread. IMHO, if one has the talent to "see" a great picture they can capture it with any camera with good glass. I find it really offensive when some self-styled "pro" suggests that great pictures cannot be made except in full manual mode. That said, I would hate to see this thread evolve into yet another Auto vs Manual rehash. Rather, I would like to hear from others what they think about the importance of developing the ability to "see" great pictures.

[Jim Bryant]

You can only develop the eye to see or recognize great pictures is by taking pictures. Practice, practice, practice, that's the only way to train your eye.

Still, by putting your camera on full auto is letting your camera pick the f-stops and shutter speeds. Not wise! Either use AV or TV to select the desired f-stop or shutter speed, otherwise, it might be the difference of capturing a "great" photo or a so-so photo.

[scootermcq]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

You can only develop the eye to see or recognize great pictures is by taking pictures. Practice, practice, practice, that's the only way to train your eye.

Still, by putting your camera on full auto is letting your camera pick the f-stops and shutter speeds. Not wise! Either use AV or TV to select the desired f-stop or shutter speed, otherwise, it might be the difference of capturing a "great" photo or a so-so photo.

+1 on that. If my great eye sees a blurry background, and my camera decides on f8, then we are not singing off the same choir sheet

[candidrachel]

I find the technical side of photography really, really hard to get to grips with. Its not an easy thing to master for me. I read, read and read some more and the next day I have forgotten what I read. Also, I read so much that alot of books have conflicting info. I can't give any examples off the top of my head because I can't remember what book said what

I think I spent a whole year trying to get to grips with aperture and getting it to register to the grey matter that f22 is a SMALL aperture not big one

I am not a stupid person its just anythig remotely "technical" I can't get my head round. Even learning to drive was painful. I dreaded it every time I had a driving lesson and when it came to the test I read every book I could get my hands on and had over 80 lessson. I did pass first time so it did pay off in the end.

[Jim Bryant]

Originally Posted by candidrachel

I find the technical side of photography really, really hard to get to grips with. Its not an easy thing to master for me. I read, read and read some more and the next day I have forgotten what I read. Also, I read so much that alot of books have conflicting info. I can't give any examples off the top of my head because I can't remember what book said what

I think I spent a whole year trying to get to grips with aperture and getting it to register to the grey matter that f22 is a SMALL aperture not big one

I am not a stupid person its just anythig remotely "technical" I can't get my head round. Even learning to drive was painful. I dreaded it every time I had a driving lesson and when it came to the test I read every book I could get my hands on and had over 80 lessson. I did pass first time so it did pay off in the end.

Practice, practice, practice to a point where it all becomes second nature to you.

[docxnoel]

talent is just a talent wihout practicing, working on your talent with technical aspect makes a difference.

[veritasimagery]

I agree with the whole practice thing. But I think a great point is that someone who has great technical skill, but lacks the "eye" will never be able to create "art". It's the same with music. I have heard people that "technically" were very adept, they practiced tons, but there is still something missing. On the flip side, I have heard musicians that may not have the schooling, or the "technical" skill, but they create amazing music.

Here's a great example. Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull, taught himself how to play the flute because there were too many guitars in the band. He found out decades later, when his daughter asked him to help her with a piece of music she was learning on the flute, that he was actually playing the instrument "wrong" all that time. His talent and his music showed through his lack of "technical ability".

So here's my take. If a person can take great photos consistently using "auto" or "P" then who really cares how they do it. In reality, do the clients care what mode you're using?

Kevin

[smcilree]

Originally Posted by candidrachel

I find the technical side of photography really, really hard to get to grips with. Its not an easy thing to master for me. I read, read and read some more and the next day I have forgotten what I read.

So what is important? Have you let the "pros" intimidate you into trying do all your work in a manual or semi-manual mode, or are you ready to ignore them and simply enjoy taking pictures?

[smcilree]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

Either use AV or TV to select the desired f-stop or shutter speed, otherwise, it might be the difference of capturing a "great" photo or a so-so photo.

I am in complete agreement with you some of the time. First, I want to state that the one leg of the exposure equation I never allow the camera to choose is ISO, which is why my usual setting is Program mode. That probably stems from 30 years of shooting film before getting my first digital camera in '96.

Certainly, if my vision of the picture demands I control the depth of field I will use Aperture priority. And if the picture demands control of motion I will use Shutter priority. And on that rare occasion that the picture demands control of both DOF and motion, I will not hesitate to switch to full manual. However, for the vast majority of shots, I find that my latest cameras come up with the same selections I would make (although I reserve the right to tweak the EV),

[FlyingKiwiGirl]

Originally Posted by smcilree

I am in complete agreement with you some of the time. First, I want to state that the one leg of the exposure equation I never allow the camera to choose is ISO, which is why my usual setting is Program mode. That probably stems from 30 years of shooting film before getting my first digital camera in '96.

Certainly, if my vision of the picture demands I control the depth of field I will use Aperture priority. And if the picture demands control of motion I will use Shutter priority. And on that rare occasion that the picture demands control of both DOF and motion, I will not hesitate to switch to full manual. However, for the vast majority of shots, I find that my latest cameras come up with the same selections I would make (although I reserve the right to tweak the EV),

Amen to that ......I think I'm far from being anything close to an expert on photography and I'm loving learning and reading anything and everything I can get my hands on at the moment but at some stage I know I'm going to have to say enough learning get practicing plus I won't have the huge amount of time available that I do at the moment to "surf" and read. I feel as long as I mostly understand how and why things are done I can then use the various modes to suit the situation. I don't want my enjoyable hobby to become a chore.