Does this make me a terrible nature photographer

[jimbo_chrimbus]

<p>In the spirit of wanting to push my nature photography even further I have been deeply meditating and thinking about what to do next.<br>

So I have been reading a lot of things about what makes a "true" or "great" artistic nature photographer (or even a photographer) that say I should be visualizing in my minds eye what a photo should be before taking a shot and then trying to make that a reality in my photography. Problem is I don't seem to be good at visualizing anything. I normally go to a location find a beautiful subject and look for beautiful artistic surroundings to photograph it in. I usually apply some kind of depth of field trick or some technical camera trick to make the photo excel.<br>

Here is the thing I have been photographing seriously since 2007 and earlier with film but I would call that more like a week interest and not really in depth enough.<br>

I have always been interested in drawing and nature so have been kind of an artistic fellow for most of my life.<br>

<br />I have been told by a professional and others that my work is so good that I should do workshops, etc however I just don't believe that my work is that good. I think because I don't apply the a fore mentioned technique I will always be a mediocre photographer. :/<br>

<br />What do you think?</p>

[User_6502147]

<p>We have no idea how great or terrible of an image maker you are. Why not show few of your images or a link to your website....and we might tell you what we think.</p>

<p>Les</p>

[johne37179]

<p>The issue for you is when do you form that image. I usually have a shooting plan before I go to a location. But like all plans, they tend to fall apart the minute you stop making them. As long as you have that image in mind before you trip the shutter, you are still visualizing the shot. Back in 1968 I had the pleasure of spending a good deal of time with Ansel Adams -- who truly visualized every shot. During the month or so that I got to work with Ansel then, he exposed one sheet of film, even though we went out every day. He would go out, tell his assistant where to set up the tripod and camera. We would wait until he thought the light or whatever it was he had in mind appeared - it rarely did. So we'd pack up and go home and have a drink. Those were great days and very fond memories. Ansel and I stayed in touch and he visited me several times more before his death. I found out about a year ago that he kept several of my prints in his personal collection which is available online.</p>

[jimbo_chrimbus]

<p><strong><em>"<a href="/photodb/user?user_id=6502147">Leszek Vogt</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jun 27, 2014; 02:57 p.m.</em></strong></p>

 

<p><strong><em>We have no idea how great or terrible of an image maker you are. Why not show few of your images or a link to your website....and we might tell you what we think.</em></strong><br>

<strong><em>Les"</em></strong><br>

<br />That is not what I am asking for. I am not asking for you to judge my photography. I am asking if how I execute my photos is what keeps me from growing:<br>

<br />Jimbo Wrote:<br>

So I have been reading a lot of things about what makes a "true" or "great" artistic nature photographer (or even a photographer) that say I should be visualizing in my minds eye what a photo should be before taking a shot and then trying to make that a reality in my photography. Problem is I don't seem to be good at visualizing anything. I normally go to a location find a beautiful subject and look for beautiful artistic surroundings to photograph it in. I usually apply some kind of depth of field trick or some technical camera trick to make the photo excel.</p>

 

[jimbo_chrimbus]

<p><strong><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=1110391">E. J.</a>, Jun 27, 2014; 02:58 p.m.</strong></p>

 

<p><strong>The issue for you is when do you form that image. I usually have a shooting plan before I go to a location. But like all plans, they tend to fall apart the minute you stop making them. As long as you have that image in mind before you trip the shutter, you are still visualizing the shot.</strong></p>

<p>I have a plan on what I want to shoot and roughly how Id like the subject to be photographed (ie clean background, specific perch sometimes). However mostly I find a subject and I look for a beautiful pattern or background to photo it on, while I am at the location. Most of what I photo is insects, mixed with fungi, plants, patterns.</p>

 

[noreen]

<p>If you even suspect that your current photographic process is holding you back, why not simply try something different to see what results you get?</p>

<p>I am a nature photographer, but not often of landscapes. I don't always (or even often) "visualize in my mind's eye what a photo should be before taking a shot." I tend to photograph scenes that I encounter, typically with wild animals. That isn't to say I can't see a particular action coming and plan for it--I do!--but if that's all I did, I would have many fewer photographs--and many fewer good ones--than I do. And some do consider me an "artistic nature photographer."</p>

<p>I am wondering if you are misinterpreting advice or else taking certain advice as all-or-nothing. It sounds more like a technique to use when circumstances (or inclination) warrant. Otherwise, do what gives you the results you like.</p>

<p>And if you find yourself dissatisfied with your results, try something different. If you really feel your visualization skills need improvement, look carefully at a lot of good photography and also paintings, drawings, etc. Examine them for composition, lighting, etc. and then try to apply what you have seen in them to what you see in the world.</p>

<p>It sounds to me as though you think that the process of taking a great nature photograph is <strong>necessarily</strong> much more formalized than it sometimes actually is.</p>

<p>(Edited to add: Cross-posted with Jimbo's last post.)</p>

[noreen]

<blockquote>

<p>I have a plan on what I want to shoot and roughly how Id like the subject to be photographed (ie clean background, specific perch sometimes). However mostly I find a subject and I look for a beautiful pattern or background to photo it on, while I am at the location. Most of what I photo is insects, mixed with fungi, plants, patterns.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There is nothing wrong with this. It can lead to very fine photographs indeed.</p>

[John Seaman]

<p>Jimbo you cannot possibly expect to get any kind of informed help or advice without showing us some examples of your work. If you are doing photography for fun, try and enjoy what you are doing instead of beating yourself up about your approach. Anyway that's how I see it, from what you have said.</p>

[jimbo_chrimbus]

<p><em><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=541403">John Seaman</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jun 27, 2014; 04:49 p.m.</em></p>

 

<p><em>Jimbo you cannot possibly expect to get any kind of informed help or advice without showing us some examples of your work. If you are doing photography for fun, try and enjoy what you are doing instead of beating yourself up about your approach. Anyway that's how I see it, from what you have said.</em><br>

<em><br /></em>I appreciate your sentiment but others have chimed in. I prefer to remain anonymous. I understand your position though and if you feel you cant answer this question without seeing my photos I will understand:<br>

"So I have been reading a lot of things about what makes a "true" or "great" artistic nature photographer (or even a photographer) that say I should be visualizing in my minds eye what a photo should be before taking a shot and then trying to make that a reality in my photography. Problem is I don't seem to be good at visualizing anything. I normally go to a location find a beautiful subject and look for beautiful artistic surroundings to photograph it in. I usually apply some kind of depth of field trick or some technical camera trick to make the photo stand out or excel."</p>

 

 

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I'm not sure that visualizing a prospective photograph - in the sense of pre-determination - is essential, beneficial or even particularly desirable. Sure, some photographers prefer working that way, perhaps because it suits their personalities and preferences for structure and organization.</p>

<p>But I don't see anything wrong with working more spontaneously. If you're comfortable with the hunter/gatherer style of photography - or what comedians call found humor - then keep doing that. Perhaps your method leaves you more open and receptive to seeing possibilities that others may overlook because they're more concerned about fitting the scene to their pre-determined visualization, rather than responding to whatever the world offers.</p>

 

[jimbo_chrimbus]

<p>Noreen and Lex,</p>

<p>Thanks for your insightful comments!</p>

[Andrew Gosden]

<p>It sounds a bit like the subjects you choose to photograph don't lend themselves to tremendous amounts of previsualization. Insects move and their appearance in a certain place when the light is just right is not guaranteed. Fungi don't always last long, if you don't make the best photo you can when you see it, it might be not be there the next day.</p>

[hank_morris1]

<p>Don't feed the troll.</p>

[kts]

<p>sock puppet</p>

[jimbo_chrimbus]

thom polimeros , Jun 28, 2014; 10:24 a.m.

sock puppet

 

Cyber bully.

[AlanKlein]

<p>Last Thursday, I was suppose to go fishing. I was planning on it for days before. I was picturing all the fish I would catch. Then a storm blew in and I had to cancel the trip.</p>

<p>My photo planning stops at pretty much where I want to go. Lighting is paramount so getting good results is at the mercy of nature in many respects. I can check the weather, and cancel or proceed accordingly, but too much planning the final capture is a headache. If the picture when you're there doesn't work,. move on. </p>

<p>Visualization for me is done at the time I'm ready to snap the picture. It's then that I see something worth shooting. It's then that I position the camera, lens, etc. to make it work if I can. </p>

[kerry_grim]

The pros who write books and articles just LOVE to use the words "visualization" and "pre-visulation". This

in itself has as much meaning as "feeling the energy" which is basically bull crap, meaningless words.

[colin carron]

<blockquote>

<p>what makes a "true" or "great" artistic nature photographer</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would certainly not include myself among that group but the characteristics which seems to me to single out the consistently successful nature photographer are, first, obsessive dedication to getting the image they want, then a deep feeling for nature and finally a substantial technical skill. But, as i say, I am not in that group on at least two out of those three.</p>

[sgust]

<p>I'll lend my vote in agreement of what's already been said. If you subjects and their environment are on the unpredictable side, then visualizing your shot ahead of time is at best a preparation for a best case scenario. Knowing how to get the results you want with the gear you have under varying conditions is far more important. I will often go on a photo hike with a specific image in mind that I want to get, but often the best image from the hike is the one that I couldn't have expected to find. The spontaneous shot can be just as good as the one you spent days preparing for.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Don't sweat the previsualizing business. Previsualizing means that when you see something you think may make a good shot, you should try to visualize what the resulting 2-D image will look like and the best framing that makes for a worthwhile composition. It also means putting yourself in the shoes of an observer of the resulting photo - will it actually be interesting/beautiful etc to him or her? It doesn't mean you visualize an image before you get there and actually view the scene - although it can. It also means previsualizing how post processing can make the scene work as a photograph, which is particularly important in black and white.</p>

[tholte]

<p>"I have been told by a professional and others that my work is so good that I should do workshops." I would sign up in a second!</p>

[tudor_apmadoc]

I tend to be on the way more spontaneous side. The only real planning that I will do will be to check the weather the night

before, and if I'm going to take sunrise/sunset shots, depending on the location, I will use "the photographers Ephemeris"

application to check lines

 

To create really good photos, isn't a matter of pre planning, it's about capturing the scene as you see it, on the day you

shoot it, with the conditions you have at the time you take the pic.

 

If you plan too much, you will only end up disappointed and that will affect how you shoot. I do a lot of URBEX work in

Detroit, temps range from -10 to 90, bright sun, clouds, rain. I love it all, the same location, same shot can provide

wildly different textures, moods, etc.

 

Two of the huge benefits of digital over film..... 1. Taking extra shots, experimenting, trying new things doesn't cost a

dime. When we shot film, the cost of the film, developing, prints, was always whispering in your ear. 2. Instant

feedback. Look at the shot, love it, hate it, take another shot, repeat

 

My advice, go out and shoot, ALOT, you will find your style, your viewpoint, your message

[tom_yin]

<blockquote>

<p>I would certainly not include myself among that group but the characteristics which seems to me to single out the consistently successful nature photographer are, first, obsessive dedication to getting the image they want, then a deep feeling for nature and finally a substantial technical skill. But, as i say, I am not in that group on at least two out of those three.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I would add <strong>patience</strong> as an essential trait for a successful nature photographer. Animals spend an awful lot of their day doing not much of anything at all, at least as far as I can tell</p>