Um, here's something I've been thinking about for a while...
I showed this photo that I took to some friends -
Somebody asked me "how did you get that sunflare?!"
"Well, it was just there, in the sky," I said, "and all I had to do was point my camera at it!"
Which is kind-of my point, if you see - some photographers are able to make a good shot... They can do clever things, with stuff called "depth-of-field", and "light", and so on... I can't do that - if something looks good already, I can take a picture of it, and it will look good in the picture also... But if a scene is dull or unexciting of itself, there's nothing I can do, with my camera, to make it any more interesting...
I'm not entirely sure why I'm telling everyone this... But which would you say you do? Can you make a decent picture, seemingly out of nothing? Or do you have to wait until something looks good of its own accord, and then snap it?
I think i generally make a photo, its what is the most fun bit of photography for me. I like the create a scene or i have a vision in my head i want to recreate.
@valentinerose
Thanks Katie! :)
Yes, I'm sure you do - all your pictures are lovely! I suppose that is the "best bit" of photography, really - it's just that I can't seem to do it... :/
Pre-visualisation is key with most photogs - you see it in your mind first, so you can work out how you are going to both take and edit the photograph to create what your mind's eye sees.
An easy starting point is with black and white photography - instead of looking at colour, as most of us tend to do everywhere we look, one has to look at the light itself, and local contrasts matter a lot more. Many colour photographs only work well because of the dramatic colours or colour contrasts, but black and white can't make the same use of it. Red and black, for example, often don't contrast well at all in black and white images. So, you have to look at the dark and light in what you're about to shoot, to know if it will jump out, or just look muddy and dull.
That's not to say pre-visualisation is the only, or even the best way, to photograph. But for those who do it, it tends to work. A few (definitely the minority in my experience) thoroughly disregard the whole concept, saying that it limits creativity. And it can, if you can only see one thing in your mind. Flexibility is important and, as always, one needs to be able to evolve so you don't get stuck shooting the same thing day after day.
Kit, you perfectitly wrote my pictures' definition: 'it was there, I point my camera'... and if I really like the subject I take a lot of them from different angles and hope I'll like one of them!
Sometimes the scenery lends itself to a great photo and you can just snap away, but usually you need to have an 'eye' for it. Anybody can climb a hill and take a photo of the scenery and get a fairly nice shot, but you have to ask yourself about your choices. What about foreground interest? how much of the sky do I want? Do I turn 180 degrees and point my camera the other way? And so on. I use this example because I recently went to the Peak District in the UK and I knew the type of shots I wanted before I left the house. I specifically went to a place where the rocks were huge and craggy, and I wanted to use them as foreground interest.
Sometimes though I like to look for the beauty in the mundane. Have a look at things around your house that you take for granted. Look for the small details and use different angles. Set up shots with things you have around the house and do a still life. Can you make it interesting?
Sometimes take, but usually make. :D I love love love playing with depth of field and focus. And I often think about bokeh and different ways of getting it.
I've done both. I've gone out to a location and snapped 200+ photos with no idea as to what the finished photo will be. In that regard, I've maybe come away with a handful that either look good the way they are or trigger an idea in my head as to what I want them to be. There's only been a couple of times I've purposefully set up a shot to "look a certain way." For some reason, I don't find those as fun, however. They just seem too much like work.
Not being at all "artistic" I wouldnt know where to start setting up a shot. But while I am out I take hundreds of pictures, sometimes as many as 10-15 of the same thing but from different angles. I try to vary them in regard to the amount of sky, the amount of foreground, what the final shot will look like etc., and what message I want the picture to give. Sometimes I get a shot that makes me go WOW I took that!
I never do any editing, and many of the photos end up being deleted. Lately I have been looking at some of the ones I'm about to delete, and find someting that is worth cropping and saving, as per the one of the chrysanthemum from last weekend. That was part of an out of focus shot that I decided to crop and see what happened.
My dream is to be able to afford an editing package like photoshop or similar so that I can learn how to do the effects seen on some of the beautiful shots here on 365. I have so much to learn but am loving the journey
Personally, I try combining "making" and "taking". Mostly, I take things that are either already gorgeous (like flowers) or something exceedingly ordinary (like a fork) and try to make it something different. I love trying new perspectives and things like that. However, there are some things I simply fail at. For instance, taking pictures of people and animals is something I just can't seem to do. They always turn out extremely unflattering. xD
This photo is very nice, and needs no help. I think some pictures are over-edited thus giving a photo as not really seen. Sure, it can be a great picture, but not a TRUE picture. I uploaded a lightning picture a while back. It was way to bright and the bolt was barley visible so I darkened it with Picasa edit so the bolt was then visible. That is about the extent of what I do other than croping at times to get rid of unwanted items.
I like the editing of a picture more than anything. This includes for the color or bringing out detail. Also, I look for the unusual over the more common pictures. I want to see something different and this may mean doing something in the editing process.
@vikdaddy I think the crux is that it never turns out the way I envision it. I just don't have those photography skills yet--or maybe my brain just has visions of grandeur. (:
I usually take... Some days i just take a bunch of photos and then pick one... I find that the more you look, the more you notice. Beauty is everywhere for the world to see, you just have to open your eyes wide. I love it when I am at the right place at the right moment! But, sometimes, I also make photos... something prompts me and gives me a good idea, so I go along and execute it. Both can be fun, it just depends ;-)
@rrt Richard raises an interesting point, or perhaps debate - at what point does PP (post processing) become too much? It may seem tangential to the main topic, but really it should probably be considered as a large part of it. Taking vs Making.
Is there such a thing as "pure taking" of a photograph, without any making? I don't believe so. How you compose a shot itself is "making" because of what you choose to leave out. Which lens you choose to use, or which focal length in the case of a zoom, "makes" a perspective change. Your aperture controls your depth of field, and therefore "makes" changes to what is actually there by controlling what is clear and what is not. Shutterspeed, likewise, can "make" vast changes in the appearance of the final image. And that's all before you get your photo to a computer.
It's not just digital that lends itself to further "making" either. How many hours did we used to spend in the darkroom "making" our prints, choosing the paper and process, dodging and burning to adjust local contrasts, or even completely changing aspects of what was on the negative? Film is no more "pure photography" than digital is - it is simply that many more people now have access to the tools via a computer.
I apologise in advance if I've complicated matters. Feel free to ignore me entirely if I've caused the onset of a headache. ;)
I do both, sometimes an idea just comes to me and I have to try it. Other times the photo is just there and there is nothing left to do but take the picture! I like both. It is fun to use creativity in making a photo, but the reward can also be just as nice when you are at the right place at the right time.
I do both, though a tend toward the "take the photo" team considering most of my shots are of my children and they are rarely cooperative to what I actually WANT them to do. Though I do take numerous shots and move around to "make" the shot more to my desires, so I suppose even when I'm just taking the photo, I'm also making it.
Sometimes I see a shot that another photographer has done and I am inspired to attempt a similar shot, in which case the shot would be set and "made" instead of just randomly shot.
Yes, there's a reason why darkening and lighting parts of a photo is called 'dodge and burn'... because even in the days of darkrooms photo editing was rife.
@jinximages
I see that you are commenting on this topic from the lofty heights of an SLR shooter - and one with some considerable experience, too, at that! ;)
I see what you're saying about "making" a picture being to do with all aspects of photography, but y'know, I don't do any of that stuff - all the things you mentioned with "composure" and "shutter speeds" and things... I simply point my camera in the right direction, and press the big button on the top... I don't make any conscious decisions to affect the outcome of the photo in any way - just, however the scenery looks when I see it with my eyes, is how it'll look in the photograph!
I "make" a photograph. Take the picture that was posted at the top of the page for example. If I'd taken that image I wouldv'e adjusted and angled myself until I got the scene to look just as I wanted. I do as much in-camera as I can, but lets face it, there are way to many obstacles and distracting objects cluttering up almost every scene these days.
Occasionally you get lucky and you only have to take the picture because you find the scene already as you want it, like the picture above. I would then "take" the picture, but would extend it's beauty in post. I find that all images need at least a bit of editing even if it's just a simple curves adjustment. I find that images SOOC are flat without the slightest bit of contrast no matter how beautiful the scene in the image may be.
When I go out on a shoot. I know what my finished product is going to look like after a press the shutter. I know automatically what I need to do to that image to get it to look the way I want.
I am very big on editing. I know some people think that a picture is only good SOOC, and that's fine...that's their vision of the world, not mine. All photographers edit, even back in the film & darkroom days (as Vikdaddy said). We still use darkrooms to edit our images, only now we call them digital darkrooms. there is a huge difference between a snapshot and a photograph... A photograph is art and contains artistic elements, a snapshot is simply a visual record of whatever is in front of the lens.
Ansel Adams, one of the worlds gems as a photographer said it best....You don't take a photograph, you make it.
For me, I would say take. Even if the whole thing is staged. I think of pictures as a moment in time. It exists only in that moment. I'm not making the moment. It just exists. And if I capture it, then I'm taking (or copying it). So the photo that gets taken freezes that moment in time. Which in theory cannot ever happen again. Even if it were to be staged. The camera is a tool for capturing those moments. Regardless of what I do with it.
I think of it this way - I'm "taking something away from that moment" - in this case the photo.
As for what happens after the moment is captured....that to me is different.
I do love reading peoples takes on this. Thanks all for sharing.
I take a scene and capture it. Sure, I might move around it to find the best angle, perspective, etc., but I usually don't try to change the setting. Even in my stranger pictures, I don't tell them what to do or where to look. They decide.
When I load it, sometimes I may crop a picture or do a simple change - saturation, brightness or contrast, but mainly I am doing it to look normal, like how I pictured the scene to be. I don't want to "make" the picture something it wasn't.
Sometimes I may have something particular in mind and then I look for what I want, but since I mostly photograph animals - and action shots, as much as possible - it's often very hard to plan exactly how you want your photo! So in many cases, I would also fall into the "Capture the moment" group :)
I can do both and I do both. But I never mess with nature. Nature shots are nature shots. I can create a photo,I can edit a photo,I can upload it and be in love with it. I have a little compact camera...Most the time its just me and how I capture things.
Everyday is an opportunity for something different and hopefully something magical. If Im not feeling that and Im not happy with my shots then I take something I can work with to piknic and get some help in creating that magic. Today I came back with 60 unplanned photos and I was totally disappointed with a batch of them that were magical to take at the time. This was because I didnt know how to turn the flash off so I was unable to capture the moment with the light and shadow playing through some trees. If I was flashless I can imagine the photos to have been 'taken'. Piknic came through for me instead and I thoroughly enjoyed editing a photo that had a different type of magic that could only be 'created' or as you put it made. So for me either works just fine :)
I "take" photos. I'm using 365 as more of a visual diary and many times don't try to take a great photo, just document my day. As someone mentioned above, sometimes I see something that screams to be photographed from many angles, etc. I've been know to spend an afternoon with my camera and find I have almost 400 shots - most of them really appeal to me. That, however, sums up my digital camera experience.
My trusty SLR has been with me since 1975 and never takes a bad photo. With that camera I do concentrate on the process of taking photos. I play with all the manual settings - but still always come back to the basics of framing, angle, and content.
though i do admire those that can set up the perfect shot! that takes so much talent and creativity to do. i cannot do that as when i try to "make" a shot, it never turns out like i envisioned and i end up frustrated. that being said, i think that it takes a different kind of talent to take a shot/find the perfect angle/focus/etc and make it stunning.
I take, and I'm jealous of those who can "make"...I try to take notes and learn a little from everyone here, and some day I hope to really master the editing part. It made me laugh when you said, "Well, it was just there, in the sky, and all I had to do was point my camera at it."
I definitely take photos rather than make - I love to photograph the wonderful world around me and it encourages me to get out and about more.
For me 365 is about recording my year in photos and improving my photography not about how clever I can be in creating scenes to capture although I do get a lot out of seeing everyone else's photos no matter how created or spontaneous.
Most of my photos are also almost straight out of camera with minor processing to crop etc. I sometimes take many many shots and other days take just one or two, I love photography and want to keep it as pure as I can for me.
Currently using superzoom p & s and trying to use the manual settings a bit more but so want a DSLR soon :)
I'm of the take and then try to make crowd as well. I'm not sure I've ever taken a picture I was happy with straight from the camera and rarely am happy with them even after editing.
@simonarmstrong
That's the approach I take, as well, Simon... I'm trying to learn more about how to be a "proper photographer" - but I always have tracks to learn, and other work things getting in the way, so it's quite a gradual process! haha
I know I'm new at this, but in my opinion, I just like to imagine a scene, a moment, a feeling, then, during the day I keep what I imagined until something appears, that's when I take the picture.
There are also, those moments that come all of the sudden, that just happen and I have the luck to photograph (Day 4). Right now I haven't had the chance to photograph other things than the own I have in my house, but as soon as I can go out, I'll go back to the way I usually take photos like.
well, being able to find that "perfect shot" and snapping it is kinda "making it" you know? I guess maybe you just have to open up your mind as to what it a "good" shot already. I can pretty much "make" or "take" a picture out of anything. I think some ppl in this thread are confused and think you mean editing and photoshop when you say "make" but the way I thought you meant was being able to find and "make" something that doesn't SEEM like a perfect picture into a good shot in how and what you photograph. yes?
You knowing where to put your camera to get that sunflare was kinda "making" it you see?
If it's something you want to work on, I just did a challenge the other day and stayed in the parking lot of my downtown apartment complex... not a lot of good pics I thought would come out of it... but I "made" them anyway, using only what was there... I was actually quite pleased with what I got
i would say a do a bit of both, but more of the 'take a photo' because most of the time, i'm right there with you. "this looks like it would be a pretty picture" and so i take it, and ta-da. of course, sometimes i'm not able to translate what i see in person as well into the digital format, but i try.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Thanks Katie! :)
Yes, I'm sure you do - all your pictures are lovely! I suppose that is the "best bit" of photography, really - it's just that I can't seem to do it... :/
An easy starting point is with black and white photography - instead of looking at colour, as most of us tend to do everywhere we look, one has to look at the light itself, and local contrasts matter a lot more. Many colour photographs only work well because of the dramatic colours or colour contrasts, but black and white can't make the same use of it. Red and black, for example, often don't contrast well at all in black and white images. So, you have to look at the dark and light in what you're about to shoot, to know if it will jump out, or just look muddy and dull.
That's not to say pre-visualisation is the only, or even the best way, to photograph. But for those who do it, it tends to work. A few (definitely the minority in my experience) thoroughly disregard the whole concept, saying that it limits creativity. And it can, if you can only see one thing in your mind. Flexibility is important and, as always, one needs to be able to evolve so you don't get stuck shooting the same thing day after day.
Sometimes though I like to look for the beauty in the mundane. Have a look at things around your house that you take for granted. Look for the small details and use different angles. Set up shots with things you have around the house and do a still life. Can you make it interesting?
I never do any editing, and many of the photos end up being deleted. Lately I have been looking at some of the ones I'm about to delete, and find someting that is worth cropping and saving, as per the one of the chrysanthemum from last weekend. That was part of an out of focus shot that I decided to crop and see what happened.
My dream is to be able to afford an editing package like photoshop or similar so that I can learn how to do the effects seen on some of the beautiful shots here on 365. I have so much to learn but am loving the journey
eventually I'll get better at it.
Is there such a thing as "pure taking" of a photograph, without any making? I don't believe so. How you compose a shot itself is "making" because of what you choose to leave out. Which lens you choose to use, or which focal length in the case of a zoom, "makes" a perspective change. Your aperture controls your depth of field, and therefore "makes" changes to what is actually there by controlling what is clear and what is not. Shutterspeed, likewise, can "make" vast changes in the appearance of the final image. And that's all before you get your photo to a computer.
It's not just digital that lends itself to further "making" either. How many hours did we used to spend in the darkroom "making" our prints, choosing the paper and process, dodging and burning to adjust local contrasts, or even completely changing aspects of what was on the negative? Film is no more "pure photography" than digital is - it is simply that many more people now have access to the tools via a computer.
I apologise in advance if I've complicated matters. Feel free to ignore me entirely if I've caused the onset of a headache. ;)
Sometimes I see a shot that another photographer has done and I am inspired to attempt a similar shot, in which case the shot would be set and "made" instead of just randomly shot.
@jinximages
I see that you are commenting on this topic from the lofty heights of an SLR shooter - and one with some considerable experience, too, at that! ;)
I see what you're saying about "making" a picture being to do with all aspects of photography, but y'know, I don't do any of that stuff - all the things you mentioned with "composure" and "shutter speeds" and things... I simply point my camera in the right direction, and press the big button on the top... I don't make any conscious decisions to affect the outcome of the photo in any way - just, however the scenery looks when I see it with my eyes, is how it'll look in the photograph!
Occasionally you get lucky and you only have to take the picture because you find the scene already as you want it, like the picture above. I would then "take" the picture, but would extend it's beauty in post. I find that all images need at least a bit of editing even if it's just a simple curves adjustment. I find that images SOOC are flat without the slightest bit of contrast no matter how beautiful the scene in the image may be.
When I go out on a shoot. I know what my finished product is going to look like after a press the shutter. I know automatically what I need to do to that image to get it to look the way I want.
I am very big on editing. I know some people think that a picture is only good SOOC, and that's fine...that's their vision of the world, not mine. All photographers edit, even back in the film & darkroom days (as Vikdaddy said). We still use darkrooms to edit our images, only now we call them digital darkrooms. there is a huge difference between a snapshot and a photograph... A photograph is art and contains artistic elements, a snapshot is simply a visual record of whatever is in front of the lens.
Ansel Adams, one of the worlds gems as a photographer said it best....You don't take a photograph, you make it.
I think of it this way - I'm "taking something away from that moment" - in this case the photo.
As for what happens after the moment is captured....that to me is different.
I do love reading peoples takes on this. Thanks all for sharing.
When I load it, sometimes I may crop a picture or do a simple change - saturation, brightness or contrast, but mainly I am doing it to look normal, like how I pictured the scene to be. I don't want to "make" the picture something it wasn't.
My trusty SLR has been with me since 1975 and never takes a bad photo. With that camera I do concentrate on the process of taking photos. I play with all the manual settings - but still always come back to the basics of framing, angle, and content.
For me 365 is about recording my year in photos and improving my photography not about how clever I can be in creating scenes to capture although I do get a lot out of seeing everyone else's photos no matter how created or spontaneous.
Most of my photos are also almost straight out of camera with minor processing to crop etc. I sometimes take many many shots and other days take just one or two, I love photography and want to keep it as pure as I can for me.
Currently using superzoom p & s and trying to use the manual settings a bit more but so want a DSLR soon :)
I just point and shoot, but hopefully learning the tech over time.
That's the approach I take, as well, Simon... I'm trying to learn more about how to be a "proper photographer" - but I always have tracks to learn, and other work things getting in the way, so it's quite a gradual process! haha
What's a "proper photographer"?
(*psssssssssssssst* Rhetorical question .....)
There are also, those moments that come all of the sudden, that just happen and I have the luck to photograph (Day 4). Right now I haven't had the chance to photograph other things than the own I have in my house, but as soon as I can go out, I'll go back to the way I usually take photos like.
You knowing where to put your camera to get that sunflare was kinda "making" it you see?
If it's something you want to work on, I just did a challenge the other day and stayed in the parking lot of my downtown apartment complex... not a lot of good pics I thought would come out of it... but I "made" them anyway, using only what was there... I was actually quite pleased with what I got