Become the teacher....

Well, there is something to that. It is really irritating to see some
kid fresh out of art school who hasn't a clue spout off about what big
things he's going to do in photography, without having made any
connections whatsoever with the local or regional market, and while
expressing complete disdain for doing the kind of work for which there
is some real demand. I remember visiting a local camera shop and there
was some twenty-something female talking about equipment, saying she
wanted to be a photojournalist, but dismissing all the reasonable
suggestions that were brought up by the sales staff, such as working
for a suburban paper or doing sports photography. She thought she
could walk onto the staff of National Geo and go to Italy or someplace
like that to do her work...

It was infuriating to listen to this imbecile..

 

That attitude is NOT unique to photography ;-) I think people, in general,
have lost the concept of "having to pay one's dues" before they get to
achieve their goals.

Chris...

 

Everybody wants to start at the top.
There was a guy who bought a competing studio back when I was in
business. He came from photojournalism and did an outstanding job of
black-and-white photography (formerly employed by a large San Francisco
paper). But his portraiture skills were limited.
His studio booked a school dance. And while he was setting up for the
dance, he thought about how he was an artiste and was above such
demeaning work.
But as the evening progressed, he looked over at his wife who was
collecting the money and noticed the box overflowing money. It was then
that he realized this wasn't that bad of work after all.

Imbeciles abound in photography.

 

Yes. even (GASP!) among pros.

 

Right, so it's not sour grapes when someone who has been in the field
for a few decades feels more than a little irritated at someone who
wants to start at the top. If I couldn't do it, and I had plenty of
skill, why do they think they can? And then you DO see them fail...and
it's really funnier than hell. I once worked for a commercial
photographer who split off from a bigger studio...I remember seeing
him a few years later buying sheet film in a camera shop, and he was
not able to buy all the film he needed because he had little
money...his charge account had been closed...I see he's now doing
weddings....and he was a VERY good commercial photographer!

 

Why in the world should that infuriate you? And why call her an
imbecile...naive, yes but imbecile??

I'd suggest you ask your doc to up your Qualude dosage but they aren't
made anymore.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

Well, you should have seen and heard this spoiled little rich kid
talk. Her daddy just put her through school...and she wants to be a
'photojournalist' but she had no idea what a 'photojournalist'
does...but she didn't want to do anything like photograph people for a
newspaper....or sports...what the **** does she think a
'photojournalist' does?

 

I know as soon as you all see this photo, I'll be blasted in someway.
It seems that a lot of the people on this board do like to critize
just about everything I post. My feeling on that is that is better you
blast me than someone else who is just trying to learn something new
here. And I'll continue to mis-spell words on occassion, but save us
all the reading about grammer corrections & limit your comments to
content please.

The photo that this link leads to is of a study I did in light and
shadow. It isn't one of my best, but I do like the outcome of this
photo. Most of the light & shadow studies I did were done in black &
white. It was taken on a Canon SLR with 400 ISO Kodak film. Do you
have any suggestions on content, cropping or conversion to sepia/b&w?

 

Link didn't post in other message... hope it works this time.

http://www.photographyboard.net/com...99999/page,view/catid,1/PageNo,1/key,7/hit,1/

 

I tried it B&W, didn't care for it. Tried sepia which I preferred to
B&W or original.

I also like it better when both gamma and saturation are decreased a
bit.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

: I know as soon as you all see this photo, I'll be blasted in someway.
: It seems that a lot of the people on this board do like to critize
: just about everything I post. My feeling on that is that is better you
: blast me than someone else who is just trying to learn something new
: here. And I'll continue to mis-spell words on occassion, but save us
: all the reading about grammer corrections & limit your comments to
: content please.
:
: The photo that this link leads to is of a study I did in light and
: shadow. It isn't one of my best, but I do like the outcome of this
: photo. Most of the light & shadow studies I did were done in black &
: white. It was taken on a Canon SLR with 400 ISO Kodak film. Do you
: have any suggestions on content, cropping or conversion to sepia/b&w?

Since you ask …

I think it's too tightly cropped, and the cutesy way it's printed lacks
relevance to the subject matter. If the green patches are real, they manage to
appear fake by being too blue. And how did you persuade the sun to cast those
shadows on only one side of the stream?

Also, it may just be my eyes or the low online resolution, but I find the
overall soft focus disorienting. If you're going to defocus both the
foreground and the background, I think the figures should be sharp.

Bob

 

It's not the way I would do it (there's no modelling), and the bright
area is overexposed or underprinted.

 

Interesting. The contrast is so extreme, I think it still works toning
that down considerably. I like it b&w.

 

Don't quit your day job. Learn about posing subjects and lighting them
properly.

 

Which is why I preferred it with decreased gamma and saturation.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

What I meant was that I would not take the photo is a way that left no
modelling of anything. Look at my stuff, and you will almost always
see strong modelling, which gives depth to the two-dimensional image.
The hallmark of the amateur is precisely his choice of flat,
uninteresting light.

http://www.photographyboard.net/index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=7770

 

The fishermen did not know I was there, so photo was taken in candid
form. They were under a bridge on a bright sunny day which cast the
shadow over them alone. So this was from a series I tried in natural
light. The link was to the photo as it was originally taken, no
alterations. It was actually printed in a brochure for the Boat & Fish
Commission of my county. I did adjust color saturation & increased the
contrast (only selected the fishermen to get a crisper edge.) for the
printed piece, but I still felt it wasn't quite up to par. I do like
the overall image for a project I am working on, but wanted to redo
the adjustments to get a more appealing look to it. Thanks for all
your imput. I will try your suggestions to see what will fit the
project best.

It is interesting to hear how different your suggestions are when you
have no outside detail on the image other than camera, film speed,
etc. The things you mentioned would certainly made a better photo had
I had most of them available to me at the time.

This was taken on a day I had just decided to go for a hike & took the
old SLR with me. I liked how the shadow of the bridge was cast over
the fishermen, so I took the shot & hoped it would come out when the
film came back. I was disappointed at the washed out look the summer
sun made in the photo. A friend that works for the boat commission saw
it & loved it. I didn't even want it published but he insisted and the
check was, well, lets say the deciding factor at the time. Guess it
just goes to show people will pay almost anything for something they
like.

 

most newsgroups are that way. I just joined this one tonight for the
first time.

Any chance you can shorten my learning cycle and point out those that
are a waste of time and consumer of tums?

 

Burt:

Most photographers are idiots. Get used to it.

 

Fortunately, that is not true at all. You are a massive exception, and
one of those idiots that appears to get his kicks by trying to destroy
any group he enters.