This is why your pictures suck

[IHF]

http://thecandidframe.blogspot.com/2012/08/this-is-why-your-picture-suck.html

With that, I am off shooting.  I’m bound and detirmined to both add to my port, and satisfy my hunger to see things differently.  Just thought I’d share with you all as well, in hopes of inspiring you too. Now go out there and make something!

[Brownie]

This needs to be read by more people. The author speaks a lot of truth in this.

[IHF]

Glad you enjoyed it Brownie.  I know it hit me just right, just when I needed it

[jackd]

Only 3 and 4 have anything to actually do with the quality of one’s image and 4 is so ridiculously far off the mark it’s laughable. This made the rounds on genuine photography sites awhile back, it wasn’t particularly well received there either.

Getting a good image or a good enough image in camera is important, but anyone who thinks an image fresh out of the camera is really “done” doesn’t really know anything about photography. even the top photographers edit their photos enormously, just as photographers have always done. A raw file is a negative, and it needs to be developed. You don’t do that just by wishing really hard.

So really only the third one actually speaks to image quality and well.. if the guy is so far off the mark with the rest, would you really trust anything they had to say at that point?

 

[Outpat]

I don’t think the fourth point was necessarily that photos shouldn’t be post-processed; while worded a bit extremely, I took it as more of a “get it right in the camera rather than relying on post-processing.” I’ve noticed a huge difference in my photography since reading a quote by Zack Arias, “If you find yourself out shooting a client and you’re saying in your head ‘oh, I’ll just fix that later in Photoshop’ stop what you’re doing and slap yourself as hard as you can.'” I think that’s more what the 4th point was saying…But that’s just my take on it.

[IHF]

So Jackd,

what you’re saying is the author should have chose a different title?

[ebi]

Outpat,

This can be true for a lot of things but when you time is money and you are two hours behind and no you aren’t going to finish unless pick up the pace, AND you know that you can easily “fix that in post”, then just do it so you don’t look like an idiot. I also have years of retouching experience, so for me it’s pretty easy to say.

[Brownie]

The author doesn’t say that images should be perfect out of the camera,  but spending hours “putting lipstick on a pig” is not conducive to your work and wastes your time. The more accurate the image is in camera, the easier any post editing will be.  While I can agree that only numbers 3 and four are exclusively about image quality, all the other points can set the stage for “Why your pictures suck”.  Editing your work in a cohesive body is difficult and photographers struggle with this idea of limiting their selection or work.  I think it’s because they are attached to two or more similar images with slight differences (or with some, just making one monochrome and posting them both).

[ebi]

ugh..i hate seeing the b&w version with the color version. Just pick one and move on. I edit almost arbitrarily, moving through the images quickly. Mulling over details is a waste of time, for the most part. Sometimes you have to, but not most of the time. The worst is editing with indecisive art directors.

[Brownie]

I know, right? That’s a red flag for me that the photographer has no sense about their work. I typically try to forget about the images that I’ve made and come back to them in a few days so I can analyze them as is without personal emotion complicating my decision-making.

[ebi]

best to look at your images again, fresh and with a clear head.

[Brownie]

Always. Eliminating pre-conceived notions about your photographs is key in editing.

[Author]

Posts