Defining photographers...my take on it.

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by sk66

Let me pose a question...

You own a Crop DSLR, a standard zoom f3.5-4, and you are struggling with a situation of not having enough light.....what do you choose?
Lighting, Faster lens, FF body, or whatever is better and recommended most, or nothing?

If you don't know which is the best choice for you it's because you don't understand what kind of photographer you are, your style, or haven't defined your goals.

That's a very expensive/confusing way to go.

Most would say "get a faster lens", "get a fast prime"...that won't hurt, but it may not be the best choice for you in the long run.

I own expensive lenses that get very little/no use...I also own more lighting gear than I need and it never all gets used... I "can" use it all, it just doesn't suit me, my interests, goals, or style.

That's why there are 4 sale signs BTW, concerning the battery pack, have you heard anything yet? Money was taken out of my paypal account so far, but that's it.

[sk66]

Haven't even thought about it.....
Just checked..it says "shipped"....free shipping airmail from China is typically about 3 weeks.

[nickbedford]

Originally Posted by sk66

I own expensive lenses that get very little/no use...I also own more lighting gear than I need and it never all gets used... I "can" use it all, it just doesn't suit me, my interests, goals, or style.

Interesting point. I can back this up. I'm a portrait photographer, but I try my hand in other genres such as live music and maybe the odd landscape and such, but I only own two lenses; the EF-S 17-55mm F/2.8 which is my "workhorse" on my 60D, and a nifty fifty 1.8.

And I often think, oh, wouldn't a 70-200mm be handy right now! But in the end, all I need is my 17-55mm lens because my passion is portraits, and the majority of portraits don't need much beyond those focal lengths (remembering the crop factor).

So the money I save on not buying lenses I'll use probably 15% of the time I'm spending on lighting gear and modifiers and other accessories that helps me out in portraits.

Mind you, it's not easy to resist

[zona5101]

Originally Posted by autofocus

Years ago, in a sales training course I was required to take, they (whoever the hell they are) concluded that there are four basic types:

1) conscious competent - those that know what they want, and know how to get there, and maybe willing to break the rules to get there
2) unconscious competent - those that didn't know how to get there, but still managed to do so, (possibly by luck or chance) usually plays by the rules
3) conscious incompetent - Knows why they've not been able to get there, but can't quite figure out what it will take to get there, usually doesn't fully understand the rules
4) unconscious incompetent - doesn't even know that they've failed to get there, let alone have the knowhow to a fix the issues

To some degree, I think you can apply some of these categories to Steve's original premise

The science of selling?
Crossing the will buy line?
Tuning in to WII-FM?

ohhh yeah.
And I agree that these can help refine the segments Steve created in the first post.
I know that this topic is one I internalize quite a bit. I *think* I know a bit about the technical aspects of the equipment and taking the shot...but I lack a deep understanding of the artistic side. In my opinion, that's the thing that will keep me back from every being any "good" at this. Understanding where I am and where I want to go should help me define the steps I need to reach the next level. Without this evaluation, I can't draw the path forward.

[philaw123]

Originally Posted by andyw

Only two basic definitions.

Good photographers
Bad photographers

Or if you like
Skilled and unskilled.

I think I fall somewhere in between. I have some of the technical skill but a bit lacking on the creative side. Or does that put me in the "Bad" category?

[NathanFranke]

Originally Posted by philaw123

I think I fall somewhere in between. I have some of the technical skill but a bit lacking on the creative side. Or does that put me in the "Bad" category?

So much of it is in the eye of the beholder. Look at some images by Eugene Atget. Technically, they could use work. He did a lot of stuff that would get someone laughed out of Critique Day in class. Exposure tended to be off, varying from blown-out highlights, to clipped shadows. He tended to leave his reflection in architectural shots.

And yet, I love his photographs. Is it artistic? Opinions vary. Is it technical. Opinions vary. Label it however you want, and it'll be an accurate label. For this kind of labeling, your own opinion is the only one that matters.