Serious photography..... with a phone.

RandyMN wrote in post #16445439
Sorry, we are not speaking of war documentary... We are speaking of wedding styles.
Wedding photojournalism is not news, it's not history, it's memories for the couple and their family.

No one has set the rules accept the bride and groom. The only reason to photograph this way is because they wish to proceed through the day without being interrupted by the photographer every few minutes to start arranging them. No one said there will not be formal arranged shots for a brief period of time.

Also, this post was about cell phones and we have directed it off topic to define creativity and documenting an event. I made a simple comment that documenting an accident is not the same as documenting a wedding.

To be honest, it's looking like a waste of time since you will never change your view and I certainly will never agree that the wedding photojournalism style of shooting involves no creativity.

The concept of shooting what's in front of you is the same.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #16445470
Just some food for thought. Some great photographers follow this path.
"'Manufactured' or staged photography does not concern me. And if I make a judgment, it can only be on a psychological or sociological level. There are those who take photographs arranged beforehand and those who go out to discover the image and seize it. For me, the camera is a sketch book, an instrument of intuition and spontaneity, the master of the instant which - in visual terms - questions and decides simultaneously. In order to "give a meaning" to the world, one has to feel oneself involved in what he frames through the viewfinder. This attitude requires concentration, a discipline of mind, sensitivity, and a sense of geometry. It is by great economy of means that one arrives at simplicity of expression." Henri Cartier-Bresson

And a little sump'm from Meyerowitz along the same lines. He articulates it so well.
http://www.traileraddi​ct.com …/everybody-street/trailer

Great skill, yes. Creativity, not so much.

Bresson reinvented the language and was one of the most influential photographers that ever lived. I would say creative for sure. To be able to see and capture that vision in a fraction of a second is very creative.

Skill is the ability to do something well and one can be skilled without being creative.

Expertise is having high level of knowledge and understanding, this may or may not mean they have skills and certainly has no reflection on creativity.

Experience brings about skills and expertise but not creativity.

Creativity can be enhanced by all of the previous and in photography you may be creative with lighting, creative with composition, creative with capturing the right emotions, creative in using the camera or lens. If one is not creating the scene it does not remove any creativity since they are still creating the image.

To classify war photographers, news photographers or any type of photojournalism as being 'non-creative' is saying they are only good at the skill set of operating a camera. If that is the case, since it takes little skill to push a shutter button, then all war photography would look the same and those awards they win would be meaningless.

My security camera points down at my truck from the garage roof 24 hours a day shooting thousands of still shots every time it senses movement. No creativity, just doing the same thing someone with high skills at pushing a shutter button would be doing. This is the same as how you classify the photo-journalist!

If I go out there I will use my creative thinking process along with my skill set, expertise and experience to evaluate the best lighting to show properties of my truck I wish to enhance. I will use my skills to adjust the camera settings while using creativity to determine angle of light, angle of lens, DOF and composition of the image.

I have as much creative opportunity in determining these factors within the image as you have physically moving the objects where you want them.

Two war photographers with the same skill sets, expertise, experience and equipment will walk away from an event with two distinct images due to the creativity factor. To say they need no creativity and only a skill set is an insult to their profession.

Ratjack wrote in post #16438867
I can see phones replacing point and shoots.. but not DSLRs lol. It is always funny to see people in places like that trying to get cell phone pictures. I even see them at the zoo trying to get pictures of the far away animals... -_-. What gets me even more is the people holding up their big tablets taking pictures lol.

i see lots of the same thing hear in monterey,calif. people from all over the world come to see the cost and sea life hear and a lot of people take pic's with there tablets,looks sort of abstract to me!oh well,what ever rocks your boat, but at the end of the day,tablets and phones will never take the place of the dslr,s , although the high end cameras are taking a drop in sales right now,i don't think these other things will replace the dslr and there lenses ..

One could also argue that the one thing that photograph does better than any other art form is freeze a moment in time. And thus the real creative people are those that exploit the true strengths of that art form. To say Bresson, Meyerowitz, Robert Frank, Roy DeCarava, Bruce Davidson were not creative becasue they didn't take a studio approach to their work would be wrong period. And that would certainly go against what history has shown us.

Now whether someone can create powerful images with a phone camera I would say maybe some can. It's not the tool but the person with the vision and the ability to exploit the tool enough to be able to capture that vision that is truly the key. I've seen amazing images made with Diana's and Holga's.

blanex1@netzero.com wrote in post #16445792
i see lots of the same thing hear in monterey,calif. people from all over the world come to see the cost and sea life hear and a lot of people take pic's with there tablets,looks sort of abstract to me!oh well,what ever rocks your boat, but at the end of the day,tablets and phones will never take the place of the dslr,s , although the high end cameras are taking a drop in sales right now,i don't think these other things will replace the dslr and there lenses ..

Not all high end cameras. Leica M Monochrom and the new M have seen very strong sales.

RandyMN wrote in post #16445648
Skill is the ability to do something well and one can be skilled without being creative.

Expertise is having high level of knowledge and understanding, this may or may not mean they have skills and certainly has no reflection on creativity.

Experience brings about skills and expertise but not creativity.

Creativity can be enhanced by all of the previous and in photography you may be creative with lighting, creative with composition, creative with capturing the right emotions, creative in using the camera or lens. If one is not creating the scene it does not remove any creativity since they are still creating the image.

To classify war photographers, news photographers or any type of photojournalism as being 'non-creative' is saying they are only good at the skill set of operating a camera. If that is the case, since it takes little skill to push a shutter button, then all war photography would look the same and those awards they win would be meaningless.

My security camera points down at my truck from the garage roof 24 hours a day shooting thousands of still shots every time it senses movement. No creativity, just doing the same thing someone with high skills at pushing a shutter button would be doing. This is the same as how you classify the photo-journalist!

If I go out there I will use my creative thinking process along with my skill set, expertise and experience to evaluate the best lighting to show properties of my truck I wish to enhance. I will use my skills to adjust the camera settings while using creativity to determine angle of light, angle of lens, DOF and composition of the image.

I have as much creative opportunity in determining these factors within the image as you have physically moving the objects where you want them.

Two war photographers with the same skill sets, expertise, experience and equipment will walk away from an event with two distinct images due to the creativity factor. To say they need no creativity and only a skill set is an insult to their profession.

War photographers of high skill create powerful imagery. I wouldn't call them creative.

You might say I'm mechanically skilled when I change out the suspension in my SUV but it's not creative.

Doing something well that not everyone can do does not make it creative.

cdifoto wrote in post #16446268
War photographers of high skill create powerful imagery. I wouldn't call them creative.

You might say I'm mechanically skilled when I change out the suspension in my SUV but it's not creative.

Doing something well that not everyone can do does not make it creative.

Powerful because they simply happened to catch the lucky shot at the right moment in time? The image just happens to be the mirrored reflection of what was in front of the lens and no thought process was involved to "create" that powerful image by determining the proper place to be at the right time using the right settings?

As to the mechanic? We are not fixing the cameras, we are using it to "create" images. Images that were made up of many creative decisions the photographer makes.

Doing something well does not makes it creative? So if a artist paints a painting well then no creative processes were involved? If the architect designs a building well then no creative thought went into that? If a book was well written this did not involve creative thinking?

That's okay, you and I are both stubborn and what either one says is not going to change what the other believes even though I'm sure we both understand photography and what makes good photograph's.

I'm just wondering what thought processes go on while the wedding ceremony is going on and all you can do is 'skillfully' get good shots while putting your 'creative' thinking on hold until you can start arranging the wedding party.

RandyMN wrote in post #16446299
Powerful because they simply happened to catch the lucky shot at the right moment in time? The image just happens to be the mirrored reflection of what was in front of the lens and no thought process was involved to "create" that powerful image by determining the proper place to be at the right time using the right settings?

As to the mechanic? We are not fixing the cameras, we are using it to "create" images. Images that were made up of many creative decisions the photographer makes.

Doing something well does not makes it creative? So if a artist paints a painting well then no creative processes were involved? If the architect designs a building well then no creative thought went into that? If a book was well written this did not involve creative thinking?

That's okay, you and I are both stubborn and what either one says is not going to change what the other believes even though I'm sure we both understand photography and what makes good photograph's.

I'm just wondering what thought processes go on while the wedding ceremony is going on and all you can do is 'skillfully' get good shots while putting your 'creative' thinking on hold until you can start arranging the wedding party.

You use the terms "create" and "creative" far more liberally than I do, and sometimes give the camera operator more credit than I do. I do not consider the process of capturing a photo creation. Anyone can snap a photo of whatever is in front of them. Yes, a photo is created but the camera is doing the creating of the actual photograph.

I do not consider my capture of a candid or photograph of a ceremony first kiss to be created, at least not by me. The camera created a photograph after I commanded it to but I merely skillfully (or unskillfully) snapped the shutter. I didn't actually CREATE anything because the scene was created for me by the couple and the people they hired.

I might be creative with that photo in post if I actually generated something from it but I don't consider the capture of the photo itself a creation.

Now, I do take credit for skill AND creativity when I arrange the couple in a romantic embrace with the bridesmaids and groomsmen placed carefully and deliberately around them. I don't take credit for creativity when I capture a photo of the rings just sitting there (if they happen to be arranged beautifully, someone else gets credit for being creative), but if I arrange them I consider THAT creativity I can notch onto my belt.

cdifoto wrote in post #16447076
I do not consider my capture of a candid or photograph of a ceremony first kiss to be created, at least not by me. The camera created a photograph after I commanded it to but I merely skillfully (or unskillfully) snapped the shutter. I didn't actually CREATE anything because the scene was created for me by the couple and the people they hired.

I might be creative with that photo in post if I actually generated something from it but I don't consider the capture of the photo itself a creation.

Now, I do take credit for skill AND creativity when I arrange the couple in a romantic embrace with the bridesmaids and groomsmen placed carefully and deliberately around them. I don't take credit for creativity when I capture a photo of the rings just sitting there (if they happen to be arranged beautifully, someone else gets credit for being creative), but if I arrange them I consider THAT creativity I can notch onto my belt.

Exactly.

But I'll ask this. What do you think about having different perspectives...i.e. shooting something as "routine" as a kiss, but in a different way? Perhaps it's the angle, the position, whatever. But it's different. Is there creativity involved there?

I takes an amazing amount of creativity to SEE the moment and skill to be able to capture it.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #16447167
I takes an amazing amount of creativity to SEE the moment and skill to be able to capture it.

Unless you have a crystal ball, you don't see a moment in advance. If you saw it, you already missed it. It takes skill to make an educated approximation as to what will happen, but it doesn't take creativity. Usually experience is what makes that easier. Again, not creativity.

"To me, photography is the simultaneous recognition, in a fraction of a second, of the significance of an event, as well as of a precise organisation of forms which give that event its proper expression. I believe that through the act of living, the discovery of oneself is made concurrently with the discovery of the world around us which can mould us, but which can also be affected by us. A balance must be established between these two worlds- the one inside us and the one outside us. As the result of a constant reciprocal process, both these worlds come to form a single one. And it is this world that we must communicate. But this takes care only of the content of the picture. For me, content cannot be separated from form. By form, I mean the rigorous organisation of the interplay of surfaces, lines and values. It is in this organisation alone that our conceptions and emotions become concrete and communicable. In photography, visual organisation can stem only from a developed instinct." - Henri Cartier-Bresson

cdifoto wrote in post #16447189
Unless you have a crystal ball, you don't see a moment in advance. If you saw it, you already missed it. It takes skill to make an educated approximation as to what will happen, but it doesn't take creativity. Usually experience is what makes that easier. Again, not creativity.

With a developed eye you see it as it unfolds and that seeing is incredibly creative.

It's about the moment and having the skill to capture that moment. Not to stage it. Not to manufacture it but to see it as it happens in real time and then having the skill to be able to capture it. That is one thing that photography can do that no other art form does as well. If it were easy everyone would be good at it.

"The subject gives you the best idea of how to make a photograph. So I just wait for something to happen." - Mary Ellen Mark

Some more on the subject
http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=2vqCd2K1-KY