February 24, 2013 at 11:38 pm #7191Mrs WooMember
@Cam – I agree with that, though anyone can take a ‘pretty picture’ if they are at the right place. If they were perfectionists, or even educated in the craft, though, they would also consider the way time of day, weather and season would affect light (a la the repeated trips of Ansel Adams). In the end camera doesn’t have as much to do with how good a picture is when you look at some parts (lighting, mood, composition), but a lot to do with others (i.e., image quality is much better the better the sensor and lens). An image from a typical consumer point-and-shoot usually can’t look quite as good as an image taken by a an experienced camera user with a DSLR. There are just too many things they can address in manual settings that aren’t as easily addressed by choosing ‘smart auto’ on your average point and shoot (was surprised at how obvious that became to me on my computer when I bought a new waterproof/shock proof point and shoot after shooting mostly DSLR for a year!).
I know there are pros who use Holgas or who use their iPhones. I also know that higher end point and shoots can actually get image quality close to or equal to APS-C DSLRs now because some are even made with the same sensors.
One of the issues with the ‘amateur with a point and shoot’ is that those people do exist, and when you hire someone for money to do your family photo shoot and they show up with a Canon digital Elph, you’re going to hesitate a moment. If the finished images don’t look any better than your sister’s snapshots, you’re going to definitely feel ‘taken.’ If they are a master photographer with an Elph, they might do something amazing. Unfortunately, though, there are a lot more people who ‘love photography’ and would ‘love to be a photographer one day’ with point and shoot cameras than there are pros who have abandoned their interchangeable lens cameras for a point and shoot because its outstanding image quality makes them comfortable as a professional selling the images that it captures.
I agree though (except for a balance and comfort perspective – a 7D/5D/1D series feels much better with a pro-level lens on it than a Rebel – Rebels begin feeling front-heavy with most of the better lenses on them) that you can take a Rebel and put a great lens on it and get beautiful images. I have some images that people love that were taken with my Rebel and the kit lens, even. You have to know your lens’s sweet spots, and they’re usually a little smaller on the consumer grade lenses, but even a consumer quality lens, in the right conditions, can do beautiful work, and a better engineered lens (inexpensive primes are a way to get better image quality cheaply because they do not require the complex engineering of pro-level zoom lenses) gives you a lot more room to work in, with sharper images covering a broader part corner to corner earlier and longer than consumer lenses.
If you’re going to be wise in investment, it’s glass first. After a few years under your belt you discover that it’s a constant churn on the body side, but often good glass will get you through several bodies before upgrades are around and then the upgrades might not be too tempting. I only have $5000 in equipment left to get my ‘usually will need this for something I shoot’ list done. ~sigh~
(no – I am not a gear addict. I refuse to admit I have a problem until my collection is finished, because then I might have to stop!)February 25, 2013 at 12:00 am #7195
@ don’t.care who/what are you talking about in the first part of that post….you threw me off with the metaphysical white noise and i am an idiot when it comes to subtle humor….just curiousFebruary 25, 2013 at 12:06 am #7198
No, I was referring to Jim-e, I don’t know for sure if he was specifically targeting me when he said some people should never be teaching any sort of classes, but it sounded like it. But it was right after I had mentioned that I was teaching/taught a workshop this weekend on photography. I was saying that while I’m not qualified to teach a college photography class as a professor would be, I feel very qualified to teach workshops that get some of the basics down for people who are interested in the subject.February 25, 2013 at 12:09 am #7199
Definition of METAPHYSICAL
1 :of or relating to metaphysics
2 :of or relating to the transcendent or to a reality beyond what is perceptible to the senses
3 :highly abstract or abstruse; also : theoretical
4 :of or relating to poetry especially of the early 17th century that is highly intellectual and philosophical and marked by unconventional imagery
Definition of WHITE NOISE
a : a heterogeneous mixture of sound waves extending over a wide frequency range — compare pink noise
b : a constant background noise; especially : one that drowns out other sounds
c : meaningless or distracting commotion, hubbub, or chatter <the white noise of policy and politics in America — Joseph Nocera>
I’m sure you can piece together my thoughts.
p434February 25, 2013 at 12:15 am #7200February 25, 2013 at 12:25 am #7201
@dont.care, I have to disagree, I think college is very valuable. Hands-on learning will always be a faster route than self-study, in my opinion. With my weird array of courses I took in college, even with no degree to show, I think EVERY course I took has somehow helped me in different aspects in life. But I too, at the time, thought “getting a degree in photography or art might never get me a job.” I couldn’t really think of all the possibilities at the time, but as I got older and am now not in college, I can see a broader view of how that degree or really any degree would have helped me a lot.February 25, 2013 at 1:05 am #7204jim-eMember
I don’t think you shouldn’t necessarily ever teach photography, or that you don’t have an understanding of many of the principles, but it’s your understanding of exposure (specifically the camera’s meter) that makes me say you shouldn’t teach manual mode shooting. Why did I come to that conclusion? Because of your method. Take the shot, chimp for exposure and then start shooting. That’s not a good method for a professional. As you can tell, I’m somewhat of a freak when it comes to proper exposure, mainly because I detest photoshop. If I’m shooting anything of importance, I want my exposures dead on.
In a different thread, I asked you some specific questions. One was if you could get a good exposure using only the meter (no chimping), the other was how you would use the histogram to obtain a proper exposure. I’ll even throw you a bone and give you a gray card. How come you didn’t answer? Do you know the difference between a reflective meter and an incident meter? How many meters does a camera have?
Your words and I quote “Now ask yourself: Would you hire someone who produces images like the two on the left? Or someone who has a deep understanding of their equipment and their art?” So with that deep understanding, I would like you to explain to me how a camera meter works, it’s “method” so to speak at determining exposure.February 25, 2013 at 1:27 am #7207
Here is a definite faux…the name says it all.February 25, 2013 at 7:04 am #7214
Oh Haylott, just stop. You know very well that is my old wix site, like I mentioned once in a thread. Remember the cheesy name I changed? That was from years ago, while I was still in college. Actually I’m pretty mad that site is still live, as I thought I completely canceled and deleted it. I’m sure you found it by searching my name. As soon as I get back to my computer i’ll be removing that. But really, the types of photos there, for tha majority, are not portraits except some practice shots.It was a portfolio online, not portrayed as a professional website.February 25, 2013 at 7:33 am #7216
Actually Brown Eye that site is no better than any of the other links posted here. And it was portrayed as a business site. You have multiple places that state that you charge for services provided and you have a client tab.February 25, 2013 at 8:17 am #7219February 25, 2013 at 8:34 am #7220February 25, 2013 at 9:50 am #7223sajelthomasMember
Man browneyedgirl I was feeling sorry for ya for a bit. i thought people were going a bit hard at you. But you just got exposed for a liar. shame on you. i think you owe people (especially the ones who were defending you) an apology. good job haylott and don’t.careFebruary 25, 2013 at 9:53 am #7224
Yes I did put the line about price but the intention was to eventually make it into a business site, but never eded up using it as such. The only “client” was my friend and that shoot was entirely free of charge. The site isn’t good, and hasn’t been touched since those last few photos were posted there. It does after all say “asiring photographer.” It was an attempt at portfolio-building. I really thought I had deleted the site a long time ago. It’s not, to my knowledge at least, even linked anywhere to me. Did you find it by googling my name?
Dontcare, I don’t mean ill at all about education. I do know self-taught photogs but there can easily be things missed when it’s not in a classroom setting. It probably took a lot more self-discipline to get good while not having expectations in a class. For me, my college classes were very helpful, or I could have gotten myself stuck in just taking pictures without really knowing how a camera works.February 25, 2013 at 9:53 am #7225
A liar? Read the site and my response. Stop jumping to conclusions.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.