[Thom]

I find that to not be the case with digital shooters. They set it to auto everything and let it run. IF they decide to take down the information and learn from it, AWESOME. Most of the time, they’re just happy with the results and move on. Click. Look. Erase. Adjust. Click. Look. Erase. Adjust. I’ve seen this repeatedly.

My stance was just that they keep it simple starting out. You’ve assumed that the shooter really cares about the WHY they shoot (as I do too, and hopefully there is truth there).

Have you noticed the amount of images that are just posted and critiqued which are missing real database info to even help the poster? The cost of shooting film (yes has risen as is developing). But, I think that would slow most down to consider the frame they’re trying to capture. And make every frame count. I’ve learned the most by failure. Being able to fail at photography should set most in the right direction. Digital doesn’t seem to allow one to fail (unless, of course like true fauxtogs, they’ve reached their most awesome-ness and are willing to watermark it and hand it out to the public.

For the most part, people get digital so they wouldn’t have to learn the rest. Composition-wise…yes, I see your point. However, I can’t begin to tell you how many I see who get a mid-sized zoom and wonder what the focal length has to do with composition and what it does to subject. Grading and lighting…forget it. People want convenience. Furthermore, SD cards are super-cheap as are hard drives. How many people are truly cognizant of keeping themselves really organized so that their files aren’t lost to crashed drives?  Backing up a backup or a backup so that they will have that information in the future.

Recently I had a hard drive crash…luckily I’ve had neg filed away.

I’m sure you’ve had time to read some of the post that have people who work in the world critique their work. I’m not sure how many stop to talk about fill side, in ratio to hot side. There was one who touched on focal length to separate her subject from background (which was interesting to read…thank God she cared). For the most part it seems the reason there are disastrous digital fauxtog shooters are the unlimited bells & whistles with digital that they LOVE applying to their shots which they wouldn’t dare try in film.

I’m still confused about why people would post images that are clearly blurry.

[Thom]

Why are you even posting the links? Seems to me, it’s exactly what he/she/it was hoping for.

[Thom]

Don’t over think it and shoot what you feels looks good. Want to get really good really fast? Shoot film. This teaches you to trust yourself. Digital is hurting so many people. I hate it with a passion. In fact, get an oatmeal box, and make a pinhole camera. Basics.

[Thom]

For me photography should have a reaction factor. Which means that the minute I see it, I know that shooter has picked up craft. Whether it be from a formal education or natural talent for it.  When I see your photos, I wonder what is the personality behind it. Random shots of people/things within your sight line is what I use to do in college. And I learned it may be adequate as an image, but it didn’t present a style or tell me much about that person.

One thing that really changed my outlook on photography, was people who really shaped what I enjoy doing. Mark Seliger, who shot for Rolling Stone, just had a “look” that I wanted desperately to emulate. And I studied his style voraciously. Maybe there is someone out there that made you want to get into photography that you would enjoy studying and “copying” until you find your own voice.

[Thom]

First off, shout out to Ohio peeps.

Your work reminds me of Floria Sigsmondi. I worked on a commercial of hers out here in L.A. If her look interests you, shoot film and experiment with off colors (it seems you’re already within that realm).

Thom

[Thom]

Yeah, an 85, if you’re not shooting faster than 1/60 and not on a tripod (or a sandbag at ground level) and resting on your elbows, the slightest movement (such as breathing) will give you blur. Especially juggling a reflector as well.

It’s nice light. And you picked a great time to shoot.

Thom

[Thom]

Hi Kairee,

Enjoyed looking thru your portfolio. You have a breezy lifestyle cut to your work that reminds me of Peggy Sirota. One thing I do see that is missing is a tad bit more contrast. Maybe a hard sun backlight kick. An edger that just pops your subject from the background. You have the poses down, but it seems like overcast. I think also you may be wanting to take a “perfect” shot. Which is balance it without having lens aberrations. I feel a lot of lifestyle work (in particular Gap ads) tend to allow certain edginess to the camera to come forth. The 5D to me is just so clean. It strips away a lot of personality and texture. I fight it all the time. Which is why I shoot film for the most part.

Hope that helped.

Best wishes,

Thom

[Thom]

Your macro shots are really nice. I don’t think you’re a fauxtog. Mostly because you actually care about NOT overdoing your Photoshopping.

Have you considered shooting film?

[Author]

Posts