Recommended Books (not for noobs)?

Please suggest books that you think would be appropriate, for my skill level.

This is what I've read, or am in the process of: Light Science and Magic, Picture Perfect Posing, The Manual of Photography, and part of Hurley's book.

And here's my work: https://www.instagram.​com/idealportraits/

Ways of Seeing - John Berger

Dan Marchant wrote in post #18774546
Ways of Seeing - John Berger

The book is based on the TV series. Do you know which is better?

icor1031 wrote in post #18774684
The book is based on the TV series. Do you know which is better?

I don't mean to be a smartass (really) ....

But which is better depends largely on what type of media you respond to better, and not so much about the content itself.

For example, I learn really well when shown a video, or when speaking to someone. I also learn well when reading short snippets that only require me to focus and concentrate for several seconds at a time. I have real trouble learning from reading, when the reading is such that it requires me to maintain focus for more than a minute at any given stretch. Other people have no trouble at all maintaining focus and concentration for minutes and minutes on end.

Some things are written in such a way that the content is presented in a series of little snippets of info, each self-contained.

Other things are written in such a way that one point is built upon the previous point, which is built upon the point before that ... and in these cases one is required to maintain focus for longer periods of time.

Neither is better, and neither is worse, essentially. It really does depend on the individual who is attempting to ingest the content.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18774905
I don't mean to be a smartass (really) ....

But which is better depends largely on what type of media you respond to better, and not so much about the content itself.

For example, I learn really well when shown a video, or when speaking to someone. I also learn well when reading short snippets that only require me to focus and concentrate for several seconds at a time. I have real trouble learning from reading, when the reading is such that it requires me to maintain focus for more than a minute at any given stretch. Other people have no trouble at all maintaining focus and concentration for minutes and minutes on end.

Some things are written in such a way that the content is presented in a series of little snippets of info, each self-contained.

Other things are written in such a way that one point is built upon the previous point, which is built upon the point before that ... and in these cases one is required to maintain focus for longer periods of time.

Neither is better, and neither is worse, essentially. It really does depend on the individual who is attempting to ingest the content.

.

As long as they have similar production quality and content coverage, I agree with you.

https://www.amazon.com …0&linkId=AVZEUK​R4QV3W3EC3

https://www.amazon.com …0&linkId=LE7N23​FGFYQKFTUY

https://www.amazon.com …0&linkId=DVUUKI​ZHH2ZZ37FU

Neil's site is good too

https://neilvn.com/tan​gents/

https://www.chapters.i​ndigo.ca …tml?ikwsec=Book​s&ikwidx=0

I'm not portraits expert. But I read what was in these books and I'm understanding why it is recognized.

About Leibovitz.
https://www.amazon.com …hrough-Lens/dp/B001C71IEM

Cartier Bresson portraits.
https://www.amazon.ca …ier-bresson/dp/0500288755

Jane Bown explains her technique.
https://www.amazon.ca …d-Portraits/dp/185585865​7

Karsh approach.
https://www.amazon.ca …1-9&keywords=yousuf+kars​h

And it is worth to check this site and read about his technique as well.

http://www.disfarmer.c​om/

Dan Marchant wrote in post #18774546
Ways of Seeing - John Berger

I watched all four videos from that series. For the most part, I don't understand how it's supposed to help my photography.

There are small exceptions, such as: understanding that the way I try to present something may not be how it's perceived. And, that I can attempt to limit this by keeping closely linked media consistent. But, that was elementary. More importantly, it's unachievable in most contexts. For example, we won't create a separate instagram account for each type of message we wish to portray.

What the videos did chiefly is lead me to question the ethics of portraiture, and existentially: to consider the vanity of man.
Oil paintings and even portraits are used almost entirely to appeal to vanity (or sexual desire), but what do we do about that? The speaker didn't suggest an alternative.

Is there something you wanted me to see, that I missed?

kf095 wrote in post #18775670
I'm not portraits expert. But I read what was in these books and I'm understanding why it is recognized.

About Leibovitz.
https://www.amazon.com …hrough-Lens/dp/B001C71IEM

Your first link is to a DVD, and I just want to make sure you linked to the correct thing (since it's not a book)? Thanks!

Dan Marchant wrote in post #18774546
Ways of Seeing - John Berger

You may be interested in a convo I had, after watching that: https://pastebin.com/U​n6U2v3S

I'm sorry. I didn't realize it was about books only.

kf095 wrote in post #18775951
I'm sorry. I didn't realize it was about books only.

Videos are fine, I really was just making sure you used the right link.

Link is fine. It is most common DVD in photography session in libraries. I watched it by getting it from our town library shelf.

after reading "The Photographer's Eye" by Michael Freeman which I think is for amateurs and 'advanced noobs' and deals with largely composition and design;

I would recommend "The Photographer's Mind" by Michael Freeman as this followup book deals with more advance higher level topics like intent, style, process.

icor1031 wrote in post #18775746
You may be interested in a convo I had, after watching that: https://pastebin.com/U​n6U2v3S

Interesting. One of the reasons I don't shoot portraits/posed shots is that there is an inherent lack of openness (I don't want to say dishonesty). People (including me) project the aspect we want people to see. That isn't bad/wrong - it is interesting because it at least tells us how they want to be perceived. But as someone who is hyper sensitive to those around me I find it uncomfortable and jarring.

While WoS is limited in it's scope and examples I found it gave me a good push to look at photos/art in a more expansive way. Not just to analyse what is in the image but also why it was taken and who it may have been taken for.