[deleted]
Photography for geeks
81–90 of 150 posts
Re: Photography for geeks
#82This is good, I would add that “made up composition rules” are instead “made up composition guidelines ”, that people should learn how to deviate from after constricting themselves with false constraints
good things to learn, even better to forget.
Re: Photography for geeks
#83This article doesn't touch on the most important aspect of the trade, something that makes a shot into a photograph: the choice of a subject. You can make the most technically perfect shot, and yet it would still look bland and empty and boring if you don't have a subject. No amount of technical understanding will help you choose a subject, as it has to do with with curiosity for the world and the art of observation.…
Counter point, directly from the article: > An intriguing interplay of light and shadows can make a discarded candy wrapper look profound. And I agree. I recently saw "good" photos of a mundane university bathroom, but they were intriguing.
This is not a counter point, you're agreeing with what the parent comment said. Choosing a subject doesn't mean only photographing "interesting" things.
Re: Photography for geeks
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Counter point, directly from the article: > An intriguing interplay of light and shadows can make a discarded candy wrapper look profound. And I agree. I recently saw "good" photos of a mundane university bathroom, but they were intriguing.
This is not a counter point, you're agreeing with what the parent comment said. Choosing a subject doesn't mean only photographing "interesting" things.
I understood the parent comment like so: if your subject is not interesting, no amount of technical mumbo jumbo will make your photo truly great.
Whereas the counter point is: if you get the technical aspects right (especially composition and light), a simple piece of wrapper paper can become an interesting subject.
Re: Photography for geeks
#85Can we all stop for a moment to appreciate this fantastic content?
Great writing, with well-picked and carefully crafted examples, with lots of good (and correct) advice. On a web page. That you can just read.
If you don't appreciate this, let's describe what this website is NOT: it is not an ad-ridden cesspool of misinformation with auto-generated text interspersed with ads. It does not smack you in the face with a SUBSCRIBE NOW popup. It does not drag you through the mud of misleading "customize my cookie preferences" dialogs. It has zero trackers. And the information is not posted on Facebook, Tumblr, Blogger, Medium, or any of the other black holes where content goes to be stamped with "SUBSCRIBE NOW LOGIN NOW" popups and eventually disappear and die.
Michał's writing is excellent (his "Guerrilla guide to CNC and resin casting" at https://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/gcnc/ is a classic already), but it's not just the writing that makes this content so great.
When reading this, I am reminded of the early days of the web and it makes me happy.
Re: Photography for geeks
#86This article doesn't touch on the most important aspect of the trade, something that makes a shot into a photograph: the choice of a subject. You can make the most technically perfect shot, and yet it would still look bland and empty and boring if you don't have a subject. No amount of technical understanding will help you choose a subject, as it has to do with with curiosity for the world and the art of observation.…
Counter point, directly from the article: > An intriguing interplay of light and shadows can make a discarded candy wrapper look profound. And I agree. I recently saw "good" photos of a mundane university bathroom, but they were intriguing.
This is not a counter-point.
A "subject" might be any concrete thing- not merely valuable things in a worldly way. A candy wrapper, a stone, a broken cup, any thing.
It can also be an abstract thing as well.
What GP is saying- there must be a thing.
Re: Photography for geeks
#87Somewhat related but if anyone is looking to get into photography Fuji is putting out digital cameras that emulate their film stocks. The results are pretty incredible. Also they have manual dials on the top so you're not trying to program a computer to use it. It's like driving a manual transmission vs an automatic.
Any specific recommendations?
Start with a second-hand Fuji XE-2 and a 35mm f1.4 lens.
The YouTube channel GxAce recently did a video about the lens and it made me fall in love with it all over again.
Re: Photography for geeks
#88Just sharing: If you want to learn photography, buy yourself a film camera and read those two books. Ansel Adams: The Camera https://amzn.to/3gMyCa5 The Negative https://amzn.to/3U88fsN The rest is just practice.:)
You missed The Print: https://www.amazon.com/-/es/Ansel-Adams/dp/0821221876
Deliberately. The Print is only for the chosen ones :)
Re: Photography for geeks
#89Can we all stop for a moment to appreciate this fantastic content? Great writing, with well-picked and carefully crafted examples, with lots of good (and correct) advice. On a web page. That you can just read. If you don't appreciate this, let's describe what this website is NOT : it is not an ad-ridden cesspool of misinformation with auto-generated text interspersed with ads. It does not smack you in the face with a…
Totally agree but now I wish the author would get some kind of small reward for his effort so that he's incentivized to keep writing this kind of content.
Re: Photography for geeks
#90This is very well done for a new-to-photography audience. Will be sharing around to people who say all their things look like snapshots, what's up with that. Great use of examples, except for one: kid on bridge. > At the same time, it must be said that color and tone can be what separates a mediocre photograph from a memorable one. To illustrate, let's look at the potential evolution of this vacation shot deliberatel…
I had the exact same thought on that sequence. The angle is a personal choice, though I think I agree that the mirroring angles of the two bridges was more interesting than having the horizon straightened. But the final "Tone Curve Corrected" turned a fairly nice image into a typical HDR-ruined photo, where the eye can't focus anywhere because all the colors have the same value. To add some praise with the criticism,…
For me, the exposure adjusted is the sweet spot, the color balance step is too yellow and loses atmospheric depth, at least on my 14" macbook pro, and then the hdr makes it completely flat. I love the intent, but the results don't look great on my setup. Since it's missing a fill light on the subject, maybe should've selectively edited the shadows only on the kid but left the shadows in the canyon for contrast. All the other examples are excellent.