I need to vent/rant for a couple of minutes... get this out of my system for tonight

<rant>It really really gets under my skin when people who were born with the photographic eye depend solely on that eye and pretty much flat out refuse to learn the camera or learn enough to take it off Automatic.

I may come across as pushy to these people at times, but the only reason I do so is because I see the raw potential they have in their eye, but they simply don't hone it. They never strive to get better. They are just comfortable where they are using Picnik as their only post processing tool, no cataloging software at all for reprints later, refuse to even try RAW and stick with only JPEG. The worst part is... they charge for this service and somehow get away with it.

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't born with the eye. So, I spent literally years training it, honing it, learning the camera, learning how different lenses can affect things like depth of field, studying lighting (IMHO, the most difficult part of photography), learning the histogram (in other words, learning to fly on IFR rather than VFR), learning the creative settings, posing, etc., and there's no way I'd put my name on the photographs they are putting up as their showoff pieces. For me, most of those would end up as rejected photos from that shoot.

If they would only sit down, take the time (no matter how difficult it may be to put that time aside, how tedious or boring the subject matter is) to learn the technical side of photography, in no time, I'd be sitting, jaw dropped, admiring what they were able to capture that I could only dream of. Yet they are content never to get better but to continue on with their $1000+ DSLR on Auto or a creative setting they honestly don't understand, using JPEG rather than RAW to produce sub par photos for their abilities.

There are two I'm working with right now that are EXACTLY like that, and it's just really getting under my skin.

Thank you... </rant>

I've students like that. Dad bought 'em amazing gear and no matter what gets said in class crits, they always turn out exactly the same stuff every time. If I read your rant correctly, its people that have good gear that don't know how to use it — or care.

When I was in photo school, we had a visual (etc.) dweeb with a wooden Deardorf producing ****. He thought he was gods gift and wasted it, but had fun showing it off. Then there is also the "dentist syndrome", where these guys have Leicas in their closets in case of a birthday and a hundred hungry students dreaming of great glass.

So, my daughter is a lot like that in that she has an eye for both capturing pictures and for post processing. She has a totally different style in both from me, and still she "pesters" me for help She's pretty much a technophobe with a resistance to learning things.

Oh well. No skin off my nose. At the end of the day, her images are her images and mine are mine.

A few nights ago, she grabbed my camera to take some shots but my camera is set up with rear button focus and off-center focus points but she doesn't have a clue about such things and didn't stop to let me clue her in. We were just goofing off, but no big deal. This is a shot she took of me where I "posed" but she obviously totally missed the focus:

Yeah, they aren't carrying around 1Ds MKIII's or anything, but one has a 40D and the other probably something along the lines of a Rebel T1i.

Both have AMAZING, inborn, photographic eyes. They can spot photo opportunities that I wouldn't have ever thought of. They can spot locations that wouldn't have jumped out at me. They already have a talent for framing (framing a photo not a print) without even knowing what framing is.

But, they simply refuse to learn what Av and Tv are and what they can do. They refuse to read a few beginner books to understand Aperture and how it affects DOF. They refuse to do any post processing on their photos unless it's through Picnik or some similar service even though fairly inexpensive software is out there that could do much better (like PSE).

They refuse to use RAW and therefore later have to deal with photos where things are blown out or underexposed. They don't ever use the Histogram to help them understand the camera's dynamic range so that they can set the proper exposure settings.

I don't teach a class at any school by any means. But, when I see a photographer who really has potential, I try to make contact with them and work with them... pushing them further and harder because I know that once they "get it," they'll put me to shame for the rest of both our lives.

They just simply won't do it.

Yeah, things like drive, ISO, focus points, and white balance are completely foreign topics to the people I try to work with improving their photography.

OK, now please don't get me wrong. If you're a snapshot photographer that can afford a DSLR, go for it! Enjoy yourself. Don't learn a thing. Just use your eye and print what you like. I'm sure there are people out there like that, and more power to them.

One I'm working with, though, wants to become a professional photographer for National Geographic. That is her main goal in life, and she knows NOTHING beyond her eye and a little Photoshop and refuses to take my advice when I offer it. Most people just give her a ton of praise for how good her photos are because they honestly don't know how to look at it as a photographer would... or even more importantly, someone hiring for National Geographic would (I don't work for National Geographic... just throwin that out there).

The other I'm working with wants to become a serious semi-pro as she already has another job. She's booking shoots on into October and November for Christmas cards already. I kid you not. Recently, she just did a practice shoot with some of the youth from church. There's a very dark skinned girl that was wearing a black dress. Several of the shots taken of her were run though a B&W conversion or a Sepia conversion. I explained to her that the reason the B&W pictures didn't turn out too well is because dark skin + dark dress = very little contrast. Therefore, the subject of the photo doesn't "pop" like she should.

Her response was that she didn't understand the whole contrast explanation. She only converted them to B&W because the dark skin + dark dress + low light (in the evening) caused the photos to be underexposed. Rather than fixing the exposure, she just did a B&W conversion and adjusted the brightness. UGH!

Some people have the eye, but not the technical skill. Some have the skill, but not the eye. The truly lucky have both.

crn3371 wrote in post #10972563
Some people have the eye, but not the technical skill. Some have the skill, but not the eye. The truly lucky have both.

The eye can be learned to a point, IMO. But, those with inborn eyes will always surpass the ones who have to learn it.

Anyone, including those who have the natural inborn eye, can learn the technical side of photography.

No one goes into photography knowing the technical side of things. So, anyone born with the eye can learn the same technical skill as any other serious photographer. But, IMO, those that were not born with the eye will never be able to learn it as well as those who naturally have it... no matter their technical skill.

What I've just said above is why I push people with the eye so hard. If they will just take the time to learn the technical side, they will become incredible photographers that will put all of us not born with the eye to shame.

Might be that part of your eagerness for them to achieve the technical side and let them fully master their "eye" is leading to a conflict with them and as a result they are resistive to learning the technical side.
I would also say its a matter of pride of their productions - at the moment they sound like they are measuring themselves up to their contemparies and family and living off the high praise and easy success.

I would say try to push them in a different manner to the one you currently employ - you can't lose if it doesn't work (as your current is struggling) and if it works you both gain. I would also say its time to make them feel a little smaller in the world - try to encourage them to work better by guiding them to look at the works of others that share a similar style to their own - make them want to emulate some more difficult shots that they can't achieve without learning at least some of the technical knowhow.
It might also be time to force them to do some film work to really make them appreciate the getting it right in camera stage and wean them off reliance of photoshop corrections - since they won't be able to emulate thing as easily in the darkroom .

Overread,

Not a bad idea at all. Hmm... really have to think at a different angle. I have thought of trying this (though it seems like it'd end up being a little condescending in the end, and that's not good). Same shoot, same subject, same gear, close to the same lighting (if taken outside).

Let them go first, then let me go behind 'em. I take my CF card home, they take theirs home. I bring back prints and they do, too. Then, see whose photos are liked better by the target audience. I'm not saying that my photos would win out in everyone's opinion. But, you get the idea.

I mean, if they were serious about photography, that'd definitely make them want to learn the technical side. But, it could backfire causing them to just sell their gear and forget it all.

I went to college for cinematography (remember film?) back in the 1980s.

But then a career change got me into computers... graphic design... Adobe PhotoShop. I ended up doing pro image retouching and color correction for almost a decade. Then digital cameras came out, and I got back into serious photography.

I just can't imagine not being EXPERT in Adobe PhotoShop and call yourself a pro photographer. It's another tool in your bag. It's a CREATIVE tool.

Being an EXPERT in PhotoShop, helps you understand what you are doing with a DSLR. Especially proper exposure and color saturation.

If I were to teach Photography, I would start with PhotoShop. Learn what a good sample image looks like, and how to manipulate and process it. THEN go start shooting images.

tonylong wrote in post #10972259
So, my daughter is a lot like that in that she has an eye for both capturing pictures and for post processing. She has a totally different style in both from me, and still she "pesters" me for help She's pretty much a technophobe with a resistance to learning things.

Oh well. No skin off my nose. At the end of the day, her images are her images and mine are mine.

A few nights ago, she grabbed my camera to take some shots but my camera is set up with rear button focus and off-center focus points but she doesn't have a clue about such things and didn't stop to let me clue her in. We were just goofing off, but no big deal. This is a shot she took of me where I "posed" but she obviously totally missed the focus:

Now to me, for my personal photography that's a FAIL and would go into the trash bin, but we decided to keep it and she messed around with it and last night presented me with this:

Well, hey!

My God!!! You look like George Carlin on one of his very bad days!

FlipsidE wrote in post #10972738
I mean, if they were serious about photography, that'd definitely make them want to learn the technical side. But, it could backfire causing them to just sell their gear and forget it all.

Part of my says that if they give up that easily they weren't going to last a year going pro anyway
Another part says that how they respond depends upon how you teach - I think that its a case that you've got to walk a very fine line between showing them all their own shortcomings whilst still supporting their strong sides, just not quite as much. In the end they've got to make the choice to grow and develop and they've also got to respond to your teaching - its not an easy thing at all.

KurtGoss wrote in post #10972826
If I were to teach Photography, I would start with PhotoShop. Learn what a good sample image looks like, and how to manipulate and process it. THEN go start shooting images.

I can see some of your logic in this but I think that you've still got to teach them the shooting aspect otherwise all you'll do is produce people who have a singular shooting style. That limits them as it means all their choices will revolve around editing the same shot in different ways rather than allowing them to expand and shoot different shots from the outset.
Furthermore not everyone shoots the same or has the same eye - some might want deep depth and detail whilst others will reach for a creamy background blur and thinner strips of detail (as two examples). Letting them realise this in the camera first and then how to enhance and bring that out best in photoshop I think is the greater key.

I don't think anyone can seriously say that photography is all about either shooting or editing - the two come together as a single product -just like photography is both comprised of a technical and artistic skill

20droger wrote in post #10972920
My God!!! You look like George Carlin on one of his very bad days!

Hey now, no need to insult George like that, he could be rolling over right now...