A little reading about the "Work" of taking a good photo

[Mira]

I've been saving, over months and months, weekly newsletters by this guy in a file, and never read one.
Saving it for a rainy day.
Today it "rained".

I liked what he had to say, and will read more.
(that does not mean I'll post it, but I'm posting his name if you want to find him)


MoreSatisfyingPhotos.com weekly newsletter

Serious photographers can be a bit obsessive. I know I am. A more casual photographer might go to a place once to take pictures and then never return. After all, why keep on photographing the "same thing" over and over? Many serious and professional photographers may visit the same place many, many times.

I also see some people photographing commando style. They will hit a target and then quickly move on to the next target. Whereas I've been known to spend 30 minutes photographing just one flower. Maybe I'm waiting for the light to be just right. Or for the wind to die down. Or a bee to show up. Or one to finish his business and move on. Maybe I'm trying different settings and comparing the end results.

Outside of my workshops I typically only show my one very best result so most people would have no sense of the amount of time and effort that was put into it. They compare their 3 second snapshot against my 30 minute bit of obsession and assume it must be because I "have a better camera" or possess some magical skill.

Some people come to my workshops looking for me to reveal some amazing secret they've never heard before that will instantly transform every picture they take into a work of art.

Here is the secret: WORK. A good photo is usually much harder work than people realize. Even if I (or anyone else) can point and snap off a great work of art in three seconds, what is reflected in that end result is years of study and work.

Notice that I still haven't had much to say about equipment. That's because equipment really doesn't matter all that much. A modest camera in the hands of a great photographer will
usually produce better results than a great camera in the hands of a hack.

That really is one of the key differences between amateurish results and more professional results.

At risk of seeming like I'm drifting off on a tangent, let's talk about grocery store shelves. Most of us know by now that grocers place their most profitable items at eye level. These may not necessarily be the most expensive but they are certainly the most profitable on the whole. Next most profitable items go above eye level. (Really and truly getting off on a tangent, $0.05 each on 100 pacakges of Oreos beats $0.13 each on 4 packages of Archway cookies. So "most profitable" is relative.)

People don't like reaching up -- or even looking up -- but they are more willing to do that than go to all the effort of stooping down. Thus, least profitable items go on lower shelves near the floor.

Statistically speaking, the fewest number of people will stoop down to reach those items. Especially not to save a mere few cents. Easier to spend the extra dime and just grab what's at eye level.

So how does all this tie back in to photography? I can't tell you how many times I've seen photographers -- even ones who've invested in rather expensive equipment -- only take photos
while standing up. Every photo they take is from the same vantage.

To illustrate the point, I often will sit or lay down on the floor during some of my workshops. I can see looks of shock cross people's faces. As though I'm doing something scandalous.

There's nothing wrong with taking photos from different vantage points. In fact, there's everything right with it. Give it a try. Your pictures just may thank you for it!

Happy shooting!
Jeff Kontur

[Solly Mack]

1. Thank you!

[ohheckyeah]

2. That's a geat article

that makes a very important point: work.

I had some sunrise shots from the Blue Ridge Parkway and a person who saw them commented that they were lucky shots! Not hardly. I got up at 4:00 a.m., drove to the sight, set up and waited for the sun to rise. It was cold and miserable out but I wanted the shots. They didn't turn out as good as I would have liked but I learned a lot from the experience.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

3. a book I am reading now, well two

books by Michael Freeman

The Photographer's Eye and The Photographer's Mind

I can't recommend them enough. Even though I did take classes for this stuff, some of it was either not covered well, or brushed aside.

[bluedigger]

4. The grocery store analogy was kind of a stretch, but good points.

Guilty of all of the above, both good and bad. Thanks for sharing!

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

5. Changing our eye angle

is very effective at producing a different picture.
Thanks! :bounce:

[Stevenmarc]

6. I think the 1st and 5th paragraph

were great jumping off points, where he landed was a bit underwhelming. Honestly, he could of Tweeted this one in with something like, Spice up your shots by shooting at unusual angles.

Don't get me wrong, I think shooting at different levels is a great idea, for example, I shot a Pug event by holding a monopod upside down so that the camera was getting a pugs eye view the entire day.

However he really had the start of a better article if he had stuck with the reasons why one might want to go back to the same place over and over, hell Ansel Adams made a career of it. When Sothebys held their Polaroid Collection auction last year they had a huge amount Ansel Adams work on the block what I found most interesting wasn't the final product pieces but the numerous studies he did to get to that final product, you got to see the artists process and it was pretty evident that his most famous shots weren't the result of a happy accident there was a tremendous amount of work poured into them.

Personally I have a go to location that I use especially when I purchase a new piece of equipment so that I can find the qualities and limitations of that piece of equipment, it allows me to understand how to play on it's strengths because I'm already familiar with the subject, it's a great baseline, it's part of the "work" that the author mentions, it's also why a good photographer can take a great photograph with a crap camera they know their equipment and can exploit it's limitations, well that and a great eye also helps.

[Mira]

7. What I got out of it mostly,

was his description that no amount of fine equipment will trump a good eye and diligence in using it. If there isn't anything in your photographs that spells "you" then you have not worked the subject enough. Or something like that.

I think none of us have to be told to get down or into the line of action when taking a picture, and I think he overdid the grocery store analogy. It's the only way to do kids, am i right, Alfredo?

I'm really responding to your comments to make a plug for the wonderful documentary : "An American Experience", about Ansel Adams. It shows what you are saying.
I saw it at an AAdams exhibition in Sarasota, where I got to see the movie surrounded by his photographs.
Unforgettable.

[Stevenmarc]

9. I saw that doc

One of the sadder aspects of the auction was knowing that all those studies would be split up and one would never have the experience of seeing all the process in the same place ever again, I really wish it had been sold as a collection.

Speaking of Ansel Adams and work, one of his greatest contributions to photography was the Zone System and digital photography has made it easier than ever to implement it, more than a few photographers don't put in the work to understand the Histogram feature of their camera and that's unfortunate.

Another aspect of work I wish more photographers would spend time on doesn't involve a camera at all. A good basic understanding of art history goes a long way in developing an eye, and not just a study of photographers although knowing what actually makes a good photograph does go a long way. I belong to a photography group that meets every couple of months and the assignments usually revolve around an art movement like Bauhaus or Surrealism generally linked to a current museum exhibit, they're always an interesting exercise.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

8. You see why most photographers

don't write, and writers should not photograph now?

Yeah, he needs an editor. He has like 3 articles jammed into one.

[alfredo]

10. Try to look through the eyes of a 9 yr old.

They are closer to the ground. They aren't afraid of getting dirty elbows and knees. They are energetic, and curious.

[Elfin Yeti]

11. Thanks Mira!

This piece reminded me of a book (I recommend highly) titled "Outliers", by Malcolm Gladwell. He posits, among other things, that achievement requires 10,000 of practice or study, etc. I've spoken with world class show jumping riders who admit they weren't particularly talented or gifted, but rather, they put in the time to perfect their skills.

[Bonhomme Richard]

12. Thanks. I need all the help I can get. n/t