The "How Did You Do That?" Question

[my stuff]

<p>The "How Did You Do That?" Question<br /> <br /> I am often asked the question How Did You Do That? I could very simply answer the question which I often do and the results that person gets isn't what he/she was expecting. If I talk about post production, yes the actions on the image will be as I recommended, but when asked about the results of a shoot, I more often than not get a disappointing, "it doesn't look like yours...!"<br /> <br /> Now, I will not go in to a lengthly diatribe about what is required to put a shoot together, as I have covered that topic ad-infinitum in several of my articles. What I am trying to explain here will be quite difficult, but I will attempt to do so here.<br /> <br /> Imagine a huge globe and that globe is the culmination of all of the information you have accumulated over the many years of experience you have acquired in your craft. You might wish to call it a brain, but for my purposes, let's call it a huge floating globe. All of the information is stored in that globe and inter connected and accessible at any moment in time. The speed at which the information is accessed is astounding. So much so, that you are often not aware of the process for how you collected all of the elements to get to the final output or finished product.<br /> <br /> The more elements within the globe the more complex the output possibilities become. Let us call these elements in the globe "epiphany events". Epiphany Events are those events that occurred during a learning process that had a paradigm shifting effect on how you viewed your reality. These types of events will create a completely new subset of elements to draw from for future products creations, photos, music, dance, sports etc...<br /> <br /> You are probably wondering where am I going with all of this. Well just hang in there for a while and I may just get to the point. <br /> <br /> The more elements in your globe the more possible permutations and the more permutations the more potential elements that can be placed in to your globe for future use.<br /> <br /> Now, what happens during the act of creation when some element that has not yet been added to your globe is presented to you? You get what most of us would call disorientation. The time it takes to integrate this element could be from a nano second to the complete rejection of that element, or worse yet the ignoring of it all together. It is often under those circumstances that some of the greatest creations occur and the epiphany happens. I like to call them, creative accidents.<br /> <br /> When I am on a creative roll, I cannot recall all of the elements that are in action during the process until I take a break and stop to think about it for a moment. I don't know if any of you have ever thought about what is going on in your head during a photo shoot. The more elements in your globe the more complex the computations. You can never really be missing elements in your globe. You may have less or more, but there is no such thing as missing elements. Just less elements to choose from and what ever you create will be a direct reflection of the elements you had available to create what you did.<br /> <br /> What I have retrospectively recalled in thinking about my own process, is that I am dealing with literally thousands of considerations during the act of creating an image that come to light so quickly that if I were to stop during the process and think about it, I would stall to a HALT.<br /> <br /> It is never just the technique and it is never just the creation during the process. It is everything from thinking about the last time you cleaned your ears to is there enough fill light to I must try to be so self deprecating to I need to increase the speed of the Fan to get the hair moving a bit more. <br /> <br /> Your random thoughts will effect which elements you access as well and those thoughts are often what trigger the brilliant idea. The reason so many of you out there are not getting what you want has a lot less to do with technique than allowing yourself to be open to the possibilities of allowing elements in to your globe that may give you the freedom to fly. I know that sound corny. But being creative is SO much more than the camera you use or all of that other stuff. I could show you what I did technically for a shoot and more often than not the results will not be satisfactory to you. Why? Because the elements I had to draw from are not as yet art of your Global Repository. Just to prove my point here. The other day a posted an image of a man on a park bench. Now, rather than presenting it horizontally, I presented in vertically, as it gave the impression of him being crucified. I would say that over 80% of the viewers could not handle looking at the image without crooking their heads to see it in a horizontal position. Now those that rejected it did not allow the "Element" to enter their globe. They will never see in another perspective until they let disorienting elements in to their globe. Those that did have added a new element and thus a new perspective for how to view "Reality". <br /> <br /> The old "How did you do that?" question never really suffices. It can introduce new elements in to your globe, but they will NEVER be exactly like the formula of another persons Global Experience.<br /> <br /> <br /> Now..."How did I do that?"</p>

[my stuff]

<p>I made an error it should read "stop being so self deprecating"</p>

[anthea50]

<p>Amen Ben!<br />As a newcomer to this site (a member since June 09) I am often struck by the amount of threads asking this type of question. Ok, I am by no means new to photography, just to Digital, so maybe it's not my place to comment on what could be a misplaced thirst for knowledge by someone new to photography but still...</p>

<p><em>"What I have retrospectively recalled in thinking about my own process, is that I am dealing with literally thousands of considerations during the act of creating an image that come to light so quickly that if I were to stop during the process and think about it, I would stall to a HALT</em>."</p>

<p>Absolutely agree with this comment, how can you document the stream of conscienceness that led to the final product? Lightening in a bottle, perhaps. (Or in a globe)<br />Personally, I much prefer to look at other photographer's images and be inspired by the possiblities, not limited by 'but how did they do that?'.<br />Inspiration not duplication is what I seek. Raise the bar please, don't tell me what height, what colour, what camera, what what what......<br />Think I'd best stop there ;)</p>

[william l. palminteri]

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1132194"><em>Benjamin Kanarek</em></a><em> </em><a href="../member-status-icons"><em><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub5.gif" alt="" /></em></a><em>, Sep 03, 2009; 05:40 a.m.</em><br>

<em>The "How Did You Do That?" Question</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ben, what a fascinating article !<br>

I shoot primarily unretouched photos, so my answer to the question is....<br>

"It's unretouched".<br>

You'd think that would explain things, but the general public seems to think that every photo these days is a miracle of post production wizardry. Sad, but true.<br>

When I DO manipulate, I use some non-standard techniques and that makes it very hard to explain to people.<br>

You make some good points about trying to duplicate a result by pushing the same buttons as you did. It's just not that simple.<br>

That holds true in the unretouched world also. The Autumn sun gives very different results than the Spring sun. Try explaining THAT one to the casual observer ! </p>

<p>Bill P.</p>

[steve_swinehart]

<p>Suggest moving this to "Casual Conversations" - as it is not a Philosophy of Photography topic. This is knowing, having, or developing the personal tools required to create the image envisioned - and is not limited to PS work or darkroom work; but the entire photographic creative process starting with seeing the image - either in your mind or in the field and knowing how to travel the path to the finished photograph. </p><p><b>Moderator: Agreed, moved to CC Forum.</b></p>

[bmm]

<p>Fabulous article... very interesting and very thought provoking.</p>

<p>A follow on question - do you think the same dynamic applies to the '<strong>why</strong>' question? I suspect the answer is broadly 'yes'.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Would be interested in reading/knowing about the exchanges you had with those that asked "How you did that" and your instruction on how to proceed. From the look of your gallery images it appears you used very good lighting and subject arrangement with a Canon 10D and 20D. The subject arrangement within each scene seems pretty obvious to pull off by just copying, but not so for the lighting and reflectors used which aren't known.</p>

<p>You have some very compelling (with regards to subject and composition) and well rendered images and I have to wonder if the compelling part is what most folks are missing from your instructions or is it the rendered look they are after. You mention "actions" you offered to these folks so I'm assuming they were after Photoshop post processing tips to get the same look as yours which tells me they were more interested in the rendering of your images. I'ld have to say though from the look of your gallery that lighiting seems to be the predominant force here rather than Photoshop "actions". Did you tell them that or did you just offer them the "actions"?</p>

<p>Digital cameras aren't that linear though their internal electronics and processing software seem to expect that from the sensor. One slight change in color temp and contrast levels throws everything off. Someone not knowing this and not nailing the lighting as you did may not realize this which makes the "actions" pretty much useless. They may think if they use the same exposure they'll get the same rendering to start out with using the "actions" as you did and mistakenly assume they'll get the same results. Were they aware of that and also aware that more processing work would be required?</p>

<p>From my illustration background anytime you re-envision a image to make it completely different from the default rendering coming straight out of the camera you're getting into photo illustration unless everything was done in front of the camera. Most folks don't have that kind of sensitivity and intuition required to pull that off or even be aware of the concept. Are you instructing other seasoned professional photographers on how you do your shoots and render your images or are these amateur hobbyists? </p>

[mrstubbs]

<p>Each time we learn something..it changes our view. Each time we change our view..we learn something new.</p>

 

[my stuff]

<p>As I made several orthographic errors and when attempting to edit could not, here is the essay again:</p>

<p>The "How Did You Do That?" Question<br /> <br /> I am often asked the question, "How Did You Do That?" I could very simply answer the question which I often do and the results that person gets isn't what he/she was expecting. If I talk about post production, yes the actions on the image will be as I recommended, but when asked about the results of a shoot, I more often than not get a disappointing, "it doesn't look like yours...!"<br /> <br /> Now, I will not go in to a lengthly diatribe about what is required to put a shoot together, as I have covered that topic ad-infinitum in several of my articles. What I am trying to explain here will be quite difficult, but I will attempt to do so here.<br /> <br /> Imagine a huge globe and that globe is the culmination of all of the information you have accumulated over the many years of experience you have acquired in your craft. You might wish to call it a brain, but for my purposes, let's call it a huge floating globe. All of the information is stored in that globe and inter connected and accessible at any moment in time. The speed at which the information is accessed is astounding. So much so, that you are often not aware of the process for how you collected all of the elements to get to the final output or finished product.<br /> <br /> The more elements within the globe the more complex the output possibilities become. Let us call these elements in the globe "epiphany events". Epiphany Events are those events that occurred during a learning process that had a paradigm shifting effect on how you viewed your reality. These types of events will create a completely new subset of elements to draw from for future products creations, photos, music, dance, sports etc...<br /> <br /> You are probably wondering where am I going with all of this. Well just hang in there for a while and I may just get to the point. <br /> <br /> The more elements in your globe the more possible permutations and the more permutations the more potential elements that can be placed in to your globe for future use.<br /> <br /> Now, what happens during the act of creation when some element that has not yet been added to your globe is presented to you? You get what most of us would call disorientation. The time it takes to integrate this element could be from a nano second to the complete rejection of that element, or worse yet the ignoring of it all together. It is often under those circumstances that some of the greatest creations occur and the epiphany happens. I like to call them, creative accidents.<br /> <br /> When I am on a creative roll, I cannot recall all of the elements that are in action during the process until I take a break and stop to think about it for a moment. I don't know if any of you have ever thought about what is going on in your head during a photo shoot. The more elements in your globe the more complex the computations. You can never really be missing elements in your globe. You may have less or more, but there is no such thing as missing elements. Just less elements to choose from and what ever you create will be a direct reflection of the elements you had available to create what you did.<br /> <br /> What I have retrospectively recalled in thinking about my own process, is that I am dealing with literally thousands of considerations during the act of creating an image that come to light so quickly that if I were to stop during the process and think about it, I would stall to a HALT.<br /> <br /> It is never just the technique and it is never just the creation during the process. It is everything from thinking about the last time you cleaned your ears to is there enough fill light to I must try to stop being so self deprecating to I need to increase the speed of the Fan to get the hair moving a bit more. <br /> <br /> Your random thoughts will effect which elements you access as well and those thoughts are often what trigger the brilliant idea. The reason so many of you out there are not getting what you want has a lot less to do with technique than allowing yourself to be open to the possibilities of allowing elements in to your globe that may give you the freedom to fly. I know that sounds corny. But being creative is SO much more than the camera you use or all of that other stuff. I could show you what I did technically for a shoot and more often than not the results will not be satisfactory to you. Why? Because the elements I had to draw from are not as yet part of your Global Repository. Just to prove my point here. The other day I posted an image of a man on a park bench. Now, rather than presenting it horizontally, I presented it vertically, as it gave the impression of him being crucified. I would say that over 80% of the viewers could not handle looking at the image without crooking their heads to see it in a horizontal position. Now those that rejected it did not allow the "Element" to enter their globe. They will never see in another perspective until they let disorienting elements in to their globe. Those that did have added a new element and thus a new perspective for how to view "Reality". <br /> <br /> The old "How did you do that?" question never really suffices. It can introduce new elements in to your globe, but they will NEVER be exactly like the formula of another persons Global Experience.<br /> <br /> I would sum it up putting it this way. The greater the vocabulary the richer the experience…<br /> <br /> Now..."How did I do that?"</p>