Developing a photographic eye

[victor wood]

I am by no means a "good" photographer, but I keep trying. What I found useful was having a small pocket digital, which I always had charged and ready to go whenever I went anywhere. Whenever I saw anything interesting I took its picture, often several. Most turn out not so well, but some were surprisingly good. Each failure helps to learn and produce a better next shot. <br>

Having a cheap digital is an advantage because of the lack of processing time and costs and I left it in automatic mode to concentrate on composition. I didn't bother with the technical aspect when training my eye.

<br> I feel my composition has improved a lot over the last year or so using this method, and I now try things that I wouldn't have tried before.

<br>Practise makes perfect, and I still need a lot of practise!

[jay dougherty]

It's like anything else you wish to be good at: be consumed by it. It helps to be an intellectual, too, wanting and loving to study. It also helps to have natural talent. If you don't, move on to something else.

[sknowles]

Wow, lots of great advice to read and reread.

 

I can only add from my experience as a part-time photographer, and only in the last 7-8 years of 34 years with a camera have I begun to practice my own advice. First, learn your strengths and weaknesses. How you see is important as what you see. Learn what you didn't see in others' photographs as your own. Second, learn your equipment and film, and how you can use it for the results you want. Third, focus on just a few themes and ideas. Since I don't have a lot of time for photography I borrowed advise from a Sam Abell essay and focus on 3 themes. And last, practice (shoot more than enough film) and understand mistakes are the norm (meaning lots of "ordinary" photos are ok, if you're shooting 35mm anyway).

 

I not so enamored with getting lots criticism (suggestions ok), or posting photographs, only one so far, but I make photocards for friends and family. I photograph for personal interests and if folks like them, fine, and if folks can help improve them, fine, but I'm in it for the enjoyment of doing my best to capture the moment. After all it's what you enjoy that matters and expressing what's important to you.

 

Good luck.

[bakari]

I haven't read through the entire thread, only the firt 8 pages or so. But if it hasn't been said before, I'll say now: get a digital camera and just shoot! Find a good book on photographic composition and other techniques and get out and shoot what you like: people, nature, boats, animals, landscapes, whatever. But a digital camera will allow you to take risks without going into dept. I've had a digital camera for over a year and it has done wonders for my photographic skills. I have lots to learn, but also lots of confidence to keep learning because of my digital camera.

 

<a href="http://amani.blog-city.com">My photoblog</a>

[davewittemann]

Well, i'd like this chance to counter the digital comments on this thread. It is important to go back to your own photograhic past and review. You will never be able to do this with digital. You will deleete any and all shots you don't instantly like. I cannot tell you how many times i've gone back and printed from negs 2 3 5 years old. I photography is your passion, your source, learn the craft. There is always time to go digital. You have to crawl before you can walk. Photoshop and such programs are based off of a basic knowlege of film. Technology is not always what it is cracked up to be. Just recently I went to a 4x5 rail camera...essentially a leap back in photographic time to the begininngs of our craft. Amazing how much can be learned when you strip away all the tecno-glitz and return to the fundementals. Don't short change yourself! Keep the digital for holliday pics and snaps of the kids!

[robfu]

For six months I have been looking for the answer to this question. And now I have found it. I went to goolge and typed in "training a photographic eye", thats how desperate I was. My google results lead me here, right where I started a couple of months ago.

The only conclusion I have come to is that I am not alone in my search and it seams an elusive concept. I beleive I am a left brainer as I work with computers, buy things based on technical merit and read technical junk. But then I am also a sceptic and don't beleive all that medicine and science tell us about left brain/right brain margaine or butter or what ever. So based on all the good comments, I will "press-on" (was Calvin Coolidge thinking of photography when he said that)knowing that photography is for anyone who wants to have a go and yes even good photographers burn lots of film.

[jerry_freeman1]

I am blessed with a life long intuitive ability to see. The ability has served me well in a

career in architecture, as an easel artist, art instructor, and now�photographer. I am

cursed by seeing many things I would prefer not :)

 

My method is somewhat slow and studied rifle approach, practiced enough to

shoot fast if necessary. I attempt to visualize those elements necessary for a

successful print before lifting the camera. If those elements 'speak' to me, I carefully

carve a 'full' frame around them, if not I walk on. I immerse myself into the scene

looking for shapes, contrast, and line�the 'thing' is not important to me. Even on

grab shots I anticipate where the action may occur and position myself for the best

effect. Allowing for occasionally bracketing of difficult lighting, and always some

experimentation, my success rate for keeper frames is above 50%, I am not snap

happy�a roll will last me a session, if not a week. :) You may prefer a shotgun

approach, it only takes one great frame.

 

Over the years I have learned and practiced all of the fundamentals until they are no

longer 'thought' about. I prefer the notion of fundamentals rather than rules�I always

break the rules. :) The golden mean�closer to 5/8ths than 1/3�is effective�but

static�lacking the dynamic of the subject being pulled back into the frame by it's

contrasting elements.

 

Slow down, look for the nuances of the light and the line�look for contrast. Shoot the

elements rather than the things. Bend, kneel, lay down, climb, eliminate, move closer

�use your sneakers. Be playful, have some fun! Walk to any single spot and find that

frame�right there�waiting to be captured. They don't all have to be cover shots, but

they all have that potential! ...jf

[david enzel]

Jerry

 

Just read your post with interest. Would love to see some of your work and hope you

will post some images on photo.net.

[jerry_freeman1]

ok David...jf

[40mm]

Years ago I read an interview with Jay Maisel in which he was asked (I'm paraphrasing from memory) "How do you learn to be a good photographer?", his reply was something like, "Most photographers don't take enough photographs".

[mike_scarpitti]

Norm:

 

I've seen that sort of approach advocated before, but I have reservations. There are people who churn out hundreds of photographs and who never seem to improve. I believe competing and getting paid is the best reinforcement and test of your work. Competition does wonders.

[chris_waller]

As Jeff (Spirer) said, first there has to be the desire to take photographs. That is the sine qua non. Then as Bob (Atkins) said, next comes the relentless practice - the desire to improve. There is the 'how?' of photography, which I can teach. Then there is the 'what?' and the 'why?' - these latter two I cannot teach. I can, at best, only guide people. Examine your reasons for taking photographs. Find your subject. The rest will follow.

[brainbubba_motornapkins]

<I> I believe competing and getting paid is the best

reinforcement and test of your work. Competition does wonders.

</I><br/><br />I can't agree with these statements. Publicly

exhibiting yor work can motivate you to improve, but competing

(as in for prizes at a camera club, or magazines) is far more

problemmatic, because it is likely to lead one to produce work

that meets certain criteria, rather than to explore and experiment.

Such work, along with 99.99% of all commerical phoography,

leans towards the slick and meretricious -- something to avoid if

it can be at all helped.<br /><br />If you want to develop a gauge

for what has already been achieved in photography that is of any

significance, you aren't going to find it in the magazines or

camera club shows. Go straight to the top: find out who the

acknowledged masters of the medium are, and don't be

surprised or disappointed to learn that they are mostly all ready

dead. You can still learn a great deal from them.<br /><br

/>Spend a lot time looking at their stuff, and reading critical

theories about what they did, why and how (though the how is

less important). Evaluate your own work (and that of anyone

else) in comparison. Find the ones whose work appeals to you,

and says something to you, and ask yourself why.<br /><br

/>When you have a thorough grounding in the history of the

medium, then you are ready to begin to explore and experiment,

to find your own personal vocabulary in photography. This is the

hardest part.

[ken johnson]

I love this discussion. I'm a newbie to photo.net. I have been doing photography on and off for about 40 years, strictly as a hobby. I developed an eye for composition and image, but I never really thought much about whether other people liked my work or not. In the past few years I have gone digital and discovered color printing. I was never interested in color, since I liked both shooting and printing and the process for developing and printing color seemed too onerous. I can't tell you how much I've saturated my photos for the sheer discovery of color. I loved the warm, orange cast of a portrait I shot at the dinner table. I didn't know about white balance. I didn't know that this was the result of an incorrect white balnce setting. When I found out, I "corrected" my white balance usage. Now I produce correct white balanced portraits, which I like, but I will never forget my naive pleasure at the warmth of the original shot. I think that developing a "photographic eye" has something to do with balancing your instinctual pleasure, with an image that you create, with an audience whom you wish to communicate and share the pleasure.

 

Recently I find that I like to share my work, and in doing so, I am influenced by my audience. I have audiences of varying degrees of sophistication and some of my mundane shots--"another sunset" "another sleeping baby" etc.--I personally find special: I froze a moment in time that will never be duplcated in real time and space; I was there and I love this image to distraction. I have made it "readable" to someone other than myself. And you know what? There are people that these conventional photos speak to. The reality of professional aesthetics is that, like all modernist movements, they come from a smaller community with specialized codes and expectations, which moves further away from the popular culture. (Go ahead, call me a postmodernist)

 

Don't get me wrong; I value growing and developing in my aesthetics, my technical abilities, and my place in a cultured community. I can only do that by engaging in the cultured community (yes, I will share my work for critique). I just want to make sure that, as Luis and I develop our "photographic eye," we don't forget why we take/make pictures. I believe that is part of how we keep our "photographic eye."

 

Ken Johnson

[aricmayer]

Luis,

 

I'm writing late in this post, so you may not even get this far. But I would say this; just go out and look. What works for me is to go somewhere unfamiliar with a camera that easy to use and easy to carry. Go out and look. You don't need to burn through a lot of film. Wait until something catches your eye. When it does, start looking at it. Walk around. Focus on the light. Compose. Play with it. Keep looking until you respond to something. When you do, start taking pictures. Figure on a shooting ratio of 1:36. That means that you will likely get at least 1 good picture on each roll.

 

Take pictures of things that interest or captivate you. Then look at them. Then look at them in context with accomplished photographers that you admire. First find what moves you. Then work to make it happen photographically. Then you will make the lasting images.

[rebecca_wood]

It has taken me almost 2 days to read through this thread while appearing to be working - but it has been worth it! I'm going to take your advice to heart (even the conflicting bits) and give it a go. I confess to being of the right brain school of photography, I tend to set the camera to automatic and concentrate on composition most of the time, but I still need (want) to develop my photographic eye, so that eventually what the camera sees will approximate what I see.

<p>

<b>Ken</b><p>

If you like the effect - go with the glow! My Dad's newest camera has a 'romantic portrait' setting or some other fancy name - all it does is turn off the flash on indoor shots to give the warm glow you mention - what a sneaky marketing idea :o>

[pradeep satyaprakash]

I used to wonder the same thing. How to develop a photographic eye? I started by looking at thousands of photos on this site. Then I started reading and understanding the elements of composition. Then I went out with minimal tools (either an Olympus OM4T, Canon Elan, Minolta X-700, and now, mainly my Canon G3). Usually carry no accessories other than a simple 28-105 equivalent lens. I took a lot of photos, did a lot of thinking of how I could make it look better. Framed, cropped, cut, moved, sliced, diced, and messed up plenty of pictures using Paintshop Pro. Learnt a lot from the digital editing process, since you've got your darkroom right there and changes are instantaneously visible.

 

But my photographic eye is developing by walking around and just taking more and more time in noticing things. Actively noticing things, much like forcing yourself to pay attention to your breath. I learned that awareness is the fount of all reality and getting in touch with some basics and becoming aware...aware of surrounding, environment, people, moods, light, sounds, etc. really adds to the process of seeing the pictures. Eventually this leads me to take a few hundred photos of a given subject and then spend a week editing and understanding my intentions. I then select an image I feel best represents the essence of what I experienced or felt when I capture that image. This entire process is the rigor around my photographic eye.

 

Developing a photographic eye is similar to developing any talent. You have to spend time developing a process, and then work that process to gain the discipline to achieve the skill you want.

 

I still have so much to go to get to the level that many on this board are at, but the process is fasicinating and so rewarding to me.

 

Here is a sample picture that was taken and edited digitally. It is an expression of a single evening spent on top of Bear Mountain in New York. I didn't see this picture until I first spent time at the location just observing. After 1.5 hours, I thought of what I could photograph and this tree and that sun came to mind. It was a chance occurance seeing them together like this, but it stirred an idea and I took the shot (shots, actually). I then went back and used my digital editing software to change the color cast of the picture to make it fit the mood I was in. One of solemnity and warmth. I think it worked.

 

Pradeep<div></div>

[jovan]

Pleas don't be disapinted.

"You can't see forest by watching the tres" is old sayings

Pure art come from inspiration, Your iner whill to says something through thing like you work and in some case hard work to express you self.

First try to expirience whole world that suround you. You don't nead camera for thet. Sit still in your suranding try to fill like some body else and don't think just observe. I'm for 100% shure that ther is at least one thing that can be photograph, and that it may become interesting to others.

[pradeep1]

hi pradeep satyaprakash, this is pradeep raghunathan here i just saw your photos and they are awesome, i have a canon g2 and there are very few shots that i have taken which have come out anywhere near your photos how do you do them? are you basically from chennai?

[randy_shiroma]

FIRST STEP: Learn how to sketch IN PENCIL. That will immediately teach you about SEEING THE DARK. Dark is good. It is the element that makes powerful images. It is the element that is most often overlooked by photographers. DARK is THE KEY and THE WAY to seeing THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD. I HAVE YET TO MASTER THE DARK (as you can freely peruse through my own crappy photos).

 

SECOND STEP: Get a book that shows nothing but pictures of OIL PAINTINGS. Thats right . . . . O I L P A I N T I N G S. W I T H O U T W O R D S I S G O O D. GET Andrew Wyeth. Look long and hard at his paintings. Flip through his books several times a month. This will form mental images in your technical head about what REALLY RIGHT BRAINED PEOPLE LOOK AT. An old chain hanging from a tree, a lonely house on a hill, a sweater hanging on the back of a door!!! A sweater??? YES! SEE FOR YOURSELF!

 

http://www.awyeth.com/frenchconnection.html

 

The PURPOSE for THIS STEP is to generate a profound sense of solitude, of emptiness, of tranquil serenity, and even despair. These are senses that left brained people do not possess in quantity. Read things that depress you or disturb you. Subscribe to National Geographic and read about the pollution in China or about the last remaining herd of white rhinos. You need to become EMOTIONALLY ATTACHED TO EARTH.

 

THIRD STEP: Learn the process of DUO-TONE and TRI-TONE SEPIA. Get a film scanner or a digital camera and import some shots of a fruit bowl or a wine glass. Change them into sepia shots in the computer. This will give you the knowledge that THOSE PRINTS YOU THREW AWAY MAY HAVE BEEN ART AT ITS BEST!! REALIZE that an image that looks yukky today in color, may look AWESOME tomorrow in sepia! REALIZE that in every shot you take, no matter what it looks like, that there is a way to edit it to make it look appealing. Sometimes, its just a simple cropping of a few edges. Other times, its a complete overhaul job. Take a look at David Carson's work. Photographic editing is HALF THE SKILL. Also, left-brained people really enjoy digital editing. Its VERY TECHNICAL. In fact, its almost COMPLETELY BORING!!

 

FOURTH STEP: Learn the methods of MACRO-PHOTOGRAPHY. Closeup photography will instill the element of DETAIL into your head. Left brained people need to go to EXTREMES in order to learn what appears natural to a right brained person. You will not be able to SEE the half portion of a tire or a leaf until you IMMERSE YOURSELF into the actual FIBERS OF THE TIRE or the VEINS OF THE LEAF. PLUS, macro-photography is VERY TECHNICAL. You will enjoy it greatly. Some of the most stunning visual images ever taken are technical images such as a bullet being shot through a turbulence chamber, the Eagle Nebula taken from the Hubble, and a photomicrograph picture of thin sectioned shocked quartz crystals through an ordinary microscope.

 

I was the most left brained lunatic in the world. I needed step by step instructions for EVERYTHING. E V E R Y T H I N G . Even to this day. These steps that I have outlined above will not give you the ability to shoot better photographs. They will give you something more. They will help you to see art, where before, you saw none.

 

~ Randy