 Ruslan Safin |
afraid of shooting after knowledge Dear Jim! I started seriously interesting in photography more than a year ago. I shot anything at any place - and the pics were interesting and more showing. To deepen the knowledge of photography I had searched and read and dug quite a pile of articles and books, I even attended photocourses for 2,5 months. The result is that I know significantly more about photography, I discriminate quite good in composition, light etc. BUT I became afraid of shooting as I used to do. Is it the problem of growing up and did it happen to you and how did you find the way out? Or is it simply a matter of time?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ken Pang |
I know your feeling, Ruslan! The more I knew about photography, the less I wanted to shoot! Why? Because I was more discriminating and it became harder to get photos that made me happy. I did a few at a friend's wedding the other week. Out of the whole roll, I really only got 4 or 5 that were "good" photos, where as before, I would have been happy with most of them, and stoked that I got 4 or 5 really good photos. I'm doing a friend's formal tonight. I'm feeling pretty apprehensive about it, because I'm expecting a lot out of it and wondering if I can deliver. (Of course it doesn't help that I really want to impress her with the photos - I asked to do them for her, so I don't want to disappoint her) I think the only answer is to go out and shoot, knowing that out of a whole roll, there may be only a handful of good photos, but everyone else will still like your other ones, because they're not as discriminating as those of us who have studied photography a lot.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ruslan Safin |
Thank you, Ken, for the answer which turned out to be quite a support! In fact I know how to make better pictures from aesthetical point of view . I have understood that the matter is that when a boy becomes a man he leaves his freedom of carelessness - I can't shoot as I used to like running around. It's not a boyish joy any more, it's time to, so to say, hold responsibility for the images that you see and the ideas of which you convey to spectators and yourself. (most of the roll will definitely go into bin:))
|
|
|
|
||
|
Judith A. Clark |
It sounds to me like you guys need a new challenge try shooting something new or buy some new equipment to learn and expand your horizons. Ok we all pitch half the roll now, because its just not good enough, go digital you can just delete the images you don't like. Keep learning, and you keep it new and excitining.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Victoria |
Call me old fashioned, but I prefer using film instead of digital. I guess they are ok for test shots, but for some reason, I cant let go of my film. What really sucks is, It seems everyone is manipulating photos in Photoshop. Ive always strived to get the shot right the first time. Now days, anyone can go out and take pictures and turn them into excellent photos using photoshop. I admit, Ive done it myself. But it is this that has made me less interested in shooting more, as well as learning more. I hope this makes sense. Anyone else having trouble adjusting to digital?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Ken Pang |
I use a hybrid of digital and film. I started in photography with one of the world's first megapixel cameras. It set me back over $1500 USD. Now you can pick up a megapixel camera for under $99. But right now, I shoot with a prosumer SLR and scan the photos on to my computer with a 4000dpi scanner. This creates a 24 megapixel image: something no digital can even come close to yet. I like film, because of its higher quality, but I do always bear in mind that if I can't get the shot perfect, I can always edit in Photoshop later. The thing I hate about film, is that to get a good photo, you need to pay a professional lab. I pay about $5 USD to get it processed at K-Mart or even a reputable place like Fletchers, and they produce photos that are blurry, dark and off colour cast. I scan them in and adjust slightly and I can get professional quality shots at a fraction of the price. You should see my latest batch. Most the photos are throw aways, but once I scan them in with a bit of adjustment, they come out perfect.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Judith A. Clark |
OK I didn't mean to start a conversation on digital versus film, but I just started using a Nikon D100, I do try to get the shot right the first time, because I hate the editing part, and I don't understand photo shop, other then getting rid of some noise, I really haven't had to edit. The results are so much better then anything I could do with a scaner. The colors are true, the emages sharp, and the details are amazing. I print with an epson 1280, and I dare anyone to tell the difference between what I print and what comes from the crappy photo studios at walmart and kmart. I also use Gepe inkjet fix spray (even though its not recomended by epson) and I can run my prints under the faucet and dry them with a towel, after two coats. Digital has given me a new challenge, that makes me want to shoot again, saves me time and money proccessing film, and its just plain fun to see the prints instantly. If you don't want to go digital, my point was, just try something new, and keep it exciting.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||