My favorite local fauxtog

[nesgran]

What I’m trying to do is cut through the noise and explain what is really causing the effects we see. That a crop sensor actually crops, that the density of photo sites on the sensor affect the size an item in your image appears when viewed on your monitor at 100%, and that if you keep everything else exactly the same and just change a full frame sensor for a crop sensor, DOF does not change because all you are doing is cropping. You could take the photo with a full frame body, then print it and get out scissors to crop it… you would not expect DOF to magically change in the print, why would you expect the crop sensor to change DOF, if you were doing the same by changing bodies?

I agree with you but the effect is that of a shallower DOF in FF because of the difference in focal length needed at a distance. We suddenly won’t start framing our shots differently because it is a crop sensor, this is the important part. The effect gets more obvious the closer you have focus to the camera

[cameraclicker]

Nesgran, that is an important point.  It’s how you use it rather than what the hardware does.  But, totally valid, and important.  Thanks!

[iliketag]

Seems I’ve missed a bit in the last few days! (My city is on fire… I’ve been busy. 🙁 )
I want to chime in very quickly on what Thom said.

I’m a strong believer in work being technically sound. Generally though, if someone’s work is interesting and artistic, yet sloppy, I’ll cut them some slack as long as they continue working. However, if someone’s work is technically sound but dreadfully boring, it’s lacking in life and is not a strong quality. I believe photographers, especially those who want to shoot portraits as their primary field, should have a strong handle on both. In BlueEyes’s case, I believe working on the technical aspect will help improve her work currently and at least bring her up to a better standard where she can begin to branch out. The equipment is a part of that. She asked specifically about lenses so we provided advice on what could help.

Someone with great equipment can still turn out absolute crap, I totally understand that! But we were encouraging her to learn and become more acquainted with her camera before doing any more portrait shoots for “clients”. Posing, directing and working with clients should come after you know how to harness the power of your camera. Developing an eye is certainly important… but seeing as how she’s still taking on clients (which I explicitally believe she should not be), knowing how to capture a sound image (even if it is a hum-drum family photo) will help wrap those up in the mean time.

I was lucky. My teachers constantly praised my “eye” in school, which encouraged me to get better. I’m not perfect but I started out with a passion for art and threw myself into it. A lot of older folks don’t have that same kind of reckless passion for a new hobby. Starting young gives you an advantage because everything is still pretty interesting to you. I believe complacency is a large problem in the fauxtographer community… So a lot of them recycle poses without new spins on them, they find “inspiration” online and make a poorly executed carbon copy (just look at the chalkboard image on the main page!), and they skate by on uneducated clientele. The eye is harder in some aspects and honestly, she may never develop it if she’s not willing to close up shop on this business and go back to square one.

So in a sense, you’re right; we shouldn’t focus on technical aspects entirely, but I do believe we have provided a lot of materials for both sides of photography.

[fstopper89]

I’m sure I’ve mentioned this story before, so I apologize, but it is relevant to what iliketag just said. When I “snapped” last fall on one of the “looking for a good photographer” posts on the buy/sell page and said, without mentioning names, something to the effect of “anyone here looking for a photographer should really look for someone who has a background or education in photography and high-quality equipment and knowledge on how to properly use it. Some people here are charging for work done with a point-and-shoot with little knowledge in photography.” and I got jumped on by a handful of fauxtogs from my town (the real photographers were the ones “liking” my post.) One comment was “Well education in photography is just an added bonus really. Both myself and my friend have never taken a photography class and we both do really amazing work. And anyways, sometimes the photographer’s eye is better than a trained eye!” For one, I looked at her work and it was nothing better than horrid. For two, she was rudely insinuating that a person with education is somehow going to lose any and all creativity on the subject or that they never had the creativity (the photographer’s eye) to begin with and only learn technical aspects. The whole comment made me laugh in disbelief that a person would actually think that. Most real photographers, or any artists for that matter, are born with a creative eye. I always felt I was. Training the eyes to see how the elements of art work together to create a more effective photograph is important. Training the brain to scientifically be able to use the equipment you are given to get the best possible end result is also important. A person who doesn’t have the creative spark isn’t going to decide they want to be a photographer or artist… unless, as proven much with fauxtographers, they are solely in it for a quick buck because they thought it would be easy money.

[Author]

Posts