# the wow factor



## bribrius (Apr 2, 2014)

in photos. The extreme post processing.

im wondering. if it is a sign of the times. 

People being flooded mentally with entertainment and images. receptors looking for the next "fix"

or it could be, that i just generally shoot boring photographs. which im content with so..

or it could be, people are accustomed to such stimuli they seek the next highest they can find.

in a world full of a million images and video, that can be hard to find.

facebook. tv, i pads, i phones, satellite radio, on demand movies

i dunno

i wonder if it is a entertainment drug effect.


and now people are looking at photos that way. 

jerry spring wowed me, okay. im going to look for a photo to wow me.
course jerry springer is off the air i think.

im just sayn

it could be cultural, even generation specific

what is better, the old psycho movie or the newest special effects horror film?

im no better, some of the shots people tell me they like the best i think are boring.
its just a leaf. so what. now if the leaf was on fire, spinning around in the wind, and had a caterpillar on it and shot from a cool perspective we might have something.

Thoughts? Has photography become more entertainment oriented? If so is it positive or a detriment?
does a photo need a entertainment value? is this like the newest sitcom or something? what happened on face book today?

i see a lot of decent photos not getting much for comments. They must be too boring or not have entertainment value.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

not a single response? There is a shocker. you know why? its boring. And people have zero attention span to read through all that (including me) without some entertainment in there.


----------



## HitenNainaney (Apr 3, 2014)

I read that first post because of the second. 

Even if assume that a photo needs entertainment value to be appreciated, my question is, what's wrong with that ?

I think the shift in perspective comes now because now more than ever before people have an easy access to showcasing pictures, which puts millions of snapshots online simultaneously, which is why everyone seeks that hint of separation from the regular. 

Do I like lady gaga and her music ? No!

But I do enjoy all the antics she puts up with her costumes. 

Which is what separates her from the "normal" 

I think it's just human nature to look for and appreciate something that's different. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bratkinson (Apr 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> not a single response? There is a shocker. you know why? its boring. And people have zero attention span to read through all that (including me) without some entertainment in there.



Throw in a picture of a naked lady or a rattle snake with his mouth wide open, fangs extended, 2" away from the lens, about to bite you... That will *==W==O==W==* 'em!

Unfortunately, everyone is becoming/has become insensitized to just about everything. Whether it's the incredible number of potholes on the roads here in the snow-belt this winter, or someone completely covered in tattoos, or even news reports of a shooting here, or there, or just the other side of town...almost every day. It's all become so 'commonplace', it doesn't surprise, shock, or WOW anybody...not even a 'tsk, tsk...' so to speak.

So unless it really *=IS=* something we haven't seen before, or have already become bored with it, nobody seems to care. With every cellphone user under the age of 30 creating and distributing maybe 20-30 pictures every day, even the selfie of 'me at McDonalds' has become totally meaningless, unless you are her parents, she's 16, and it's 1AM...

So how can we, as 'legitimate' ... make that 'real' ... photographers get some PIZAZZ into our shots? Do something that nobody else is doing!!! OK, post processing your pictures until they are all shades of green, or some other outlandish easily-done post-processing 'trick' has been done at least a million times before. Photoshopping a models' body to lose 20 pounds from a 105 pound, 5'10" model and making her arms 6" longer and her waist 4" more narrow doesn't count, either.

</loudspeaker mode on,/full volume>

SO GO OUT AND SHOOT SOME REALLY OUTLANDISH PICTURES AND POST THEM UPSIDE DOWN AND REVERSED!!!!

THAT'LL GET THEIR ATTENTION!!!!


----------



## DisplacedTexan72 (Apr 3, 2014)

I agree that it is difficult to get a grasp on what exactly will make people stop and say "now would you look at that!". That being said, the term "entertainment value" can be very subjective here. I have probably dismissed some beautiful city scapes that I've come across simply because I am not a huge fan of cities and don't particularly enjoy photos of them. I've been to Las Vegas multiple times and wasn't impressed. Show me a beautiful misty sunrise out in the county though and I'm drooling! I don't think you will ever find any one photo that will impress everyone in the room. 

I am also pissy about all the potholes...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 3, 2014)

Ok, well I might be wrong in this but I don't really take pictures with other people in mind.

If people like what I shoot that's great, it's a very nice feeling.  But when I go shooting I'm not really concerned about what is going to float anyone else's boat.

Same thing when I post process, I'm not trying to impress anyone, just trying to make the capture look as true and as interesting as I can to my eye.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk


----------



## ratssass (Apr 3, 2014)

....lol,I thought the OP was poetry of some sort....


----------



## Braineack (Apr 3, 2014)

I wish the ignore feature on this site worked better.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 3, 2014)

ratssass said:


> ....lol,I thought the OP was poetry of some sort....



I figured out pretty quick it couldn't be a poem.  It didn't have the word "Nantucket" in it.  Lol


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

When I see a photograph that I really like, I find myself smiling.  No, GRINNING.  I feel like a grinning fool for sitting here grinning at a photograph that probably means nothing to most viewers, but that's me.

Speaking of me, and by extension my photographs; I learned long ago that not everyone likes my photographs, and have been put down hard on occasion, but I still like them.

So I keep on making photographs the way I like.  

As to what photography is becoming, some will like them, others will not.  BFD.


----------



## limr (Apr 3, 2014)

I didn't answer because that OP was far too reminiscent of the writing I have to grade every single day, and I just don't have the energy to fight through it if I'm not getting paid.


----------



## KmH (Apr 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> not a single response?


Probably because at the hour of your 1st post most TPF members would have retired for the night, or were about to.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

bratkinson said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > not a single response? There is a shocker. you know why? its boring. And people have zero attention span to read through all that (including me) without some entertainment in there.
> ...


lol
i think what i find troublesome, is i wonder if a wonderful photographer, with a excellently composed photo would get passed over for a photograph that has more entertainment value. Perhaps like the singer who cant sing but gains notoriety for costumes and stage antics. It must be detrimental to the craft or art, i would think at least. And those looking to improve would be more concerned with learning the stage antics than learning to sing.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

limr said:


> I didn't answer because that OP was far too reminiscent of the writing I have to grade every single day, and I just don't have the energy to fight through it if I'm not getting paid.



then why post at all.  i would actually prefer teachers that sit on lineposting and slamming their students writing not be involved in my threads. Given your attitude it might be time for you to consider a new occupation btw. your cc is still welcome on photos if you like.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> i think what i find troublesome, is i wonder if a wonderful photographer, with a excellently composed photo would get passed over for a photograph that has more entertainment value.


Unfortunately, you're probably right. 



bribrius said:


> Perhaps like the singer who cant sing but gains notoriety for costumes and stage antics. It must be detrimental to the craft or art, i would think at least. And those looking to improve would be more concerned with learning the stage antics than learning to sing.



DUH!  H*ll YES!  We see this all the time, and I'm sure you've noticed.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

While the sh*tty pop singer known only antics with always find a way to get their 15 minutes of fame, it's the bands with true talent that will continue to make records and tour and create great music for life. Every decade has their bands that are known for antics and their one hit. It's the bands with true musical ability that will be followed and appreciated by many generations. The Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Eric Clapton, Tom Petty, etc etc. I feel like photography probably goes through the same pattern. The instagram phase will come and go, it already jumped the shark. The overdone HDR phase is headed that way already. There will undoubtedly be something to replace those as time moves on and technology changes. What won't change though is the appreciation for a well-composed, well-lit, powerful photograph that conveys emotion to the viewer. That will live on for many generations.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 3, 2014)

The music, singer, band, entertainer aspect is about as subjective as it gets.  I saw Lady Gaga play the piano and sing on the Howard Stern Show and I was impressed and surprised by her talent.  Prior to that all I knew or felt was that she was some new overhyped singer my kids listened to.

For the most part, I don't care for country music but I respect the hell out of it's vocalists and musicians.  

Should start a thread listing in our opinions, crappy singers that have lasted....


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 3, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> The music, singer, band, entertainer aspect is about as subjective as it gets.  I saw Lady Gaga play the piano and sing on the Howard Stern Show and I was impressed and surprised by her talent.  Prior to that all I knew or felt was that she was some new overhyped singer my kids listened to.
> 
> For the most part, I don't care for country music but I respect the hell out of it's vocalists and musicians.
> 
> Should start a thread listing in our opinions, crappy singers that have lasted....



Ella Fitzgerald- now there was a voice.  Gaga? Eh... honestly I've never really had any interest.  My thought process is if you have to wear stupid hats and a meat suit to get my attention then you've lost me already ... lol

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk


----------



## minicoop1985 (Apr 3, 2014)

When I saw WOW, I thought this:






Country has its fair share of untalented hacks, I'm sure-I am not a country fan, so I'm not 100% qualified to comment, but being an American, I will anyway. 

I'd say that the thing to strive for here is Queen or Led Zeppelin-timeless. Just as relevant today as they were when they were together. If there's a way to make your work "future proof" (not your equipment-that's impossible), that's what I would strive for-something that will survive the next fad, or the impending DSLR apocalypse I keep hearing about, or changes in popular styles and culture. That's what Queen and Led Zeppelin have done-survived the changes in how music is stored, fads like boy bands, annoying people like Justin Beiber, and stood the test of time. Have I achieved this? God no, I'm not anywhere near good enough to make images that powerful at this point in my adventures. Maybe when I'm 80.


----------



## Braineack (Apr 3, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> The music, singer, band, entertainer aspect is about as subjective as it gets.  I saw Lady Gaga play the piano and sing on the Howard Stern Show and I was impressed and surprised by her talent.  Prior to that all I knew or felt was that she was some new overhyped singer my kids listened to.



so even the ones that scream "artisit license" still know the fundamentals?!


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 3, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > The music, singer, band, entertainer aspect is about as subjective as it gets. I saw Lady Gaga play the piano and sing on the Howard Stern Show and I was impressed and surprised by her talent. Prior to that all I knew or felt was that she was some new overhyped singer my kids listened to.
> ...



Oh I totally get it. However, I am glad I heard how great Elton John was before I saw what he wears.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

But Lady Gaga is a classically trained musician. She has serious talent, she just chooses a genre of music that degrades that.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 3, 2014)

Braineack said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > The music, singer, band, entertainer aspect is about as subjective as it gets. I saw Lady Gaga play the piano and sing on the Howard Stern Show and I was impressed and surprised by her talent. Prior to that all I knew or felt was that she was some new overhyped singer my kids listened to.
> ...



Yup, some indeed do.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

I always think that the way to tell if a musician is real is to see them live. No auto-tune, one take, spotlight on. If you can impress me live, that's talent.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

I think I should attempt to clarify something regarding music personalities.  I think Lady Gaga is actually talented, although I don't know if she writes her own songs.  

My beef is mainly directed at all the wanna-bees trying to break into the music business.  It seems as though there is a "uniform" of sorts from costumes to choice of instrument, to song styles.  If someone is interested in rock, then they emulate the current crop of rock stars.  If they prefer country, then I can't tell one from another.  

Now back to the photography metaphor:  In photography these days it seems there are a lot of copy-cats trying to copy some or another "style" regardless if it is something they can do.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 3, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > JacaRanda said:
> ...



Lol.. yup, there is a reason why I avoid certain videos and go audio only on a lot of stuff.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 3, 2014)

BrickHouse said:


> But Lady Gaga is a classically trained musician. She has serious talent, she just chooses a genre of music that degrades that.



Or figured out how to make a living from it.  Which goes back to the doing what I love and making a living off of it thingy 

Mr. Brick,  is Camp Pendleton a new location for you?  I grew up there (San Onofre housing) 1973ish to 1984ish.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Apr 3, 2014)

The term "Video killed the radio star" comes to mind. Now it's all about theatrics, and not the kind that add to a performance (read: Bohemian Rhapsody), but the bling and Bentleys and booty and boobies (OK, I'm fine with that one) and "making it rain" and "all up in the club" and "being naked on a wrecking ball" and whatever the kids are doing these days.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> BrickHouse said:
> 
> 
> > But Lady Gaga is a classically trained musician. She has serious talent, she just chooses a genre of music that degrades that.
> ...



No, been here 3 years. I had SD as my location and everyone kept thinking it was South Dakota so I decided to be a little more specific.   I'm only here for a few more months though before the Navy gives me a spare-no-expense trip to Japan for 3 years.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 3, 2014)

Designer said:


> I think I should attempt to clarify something regarding music personalities. I think Lady Gaga is actually talented, although I don't know if she writes her own songs.
> 
> My beef is mainly directed at all the wanna-bees trying to break into the music business. It seems as though there is a "uniform" of sorts from costumes to choice of instrument, to song styles. If someone is interested in rock, then they emulate the current crop of rock stars. If they prefer country, then I can't tell one from another.
> 
> Now back to the photography metaphor: In photography these days it seems there are a lot of copy-cats trying to copy some or another "style" regardless if it is something they can do.



She's a singer songwriter.

The parallels of the two art genres are interesting at the very least.  I've enjoyed the discussions and debates about photography and art since joining TPF, but never related any of it to music until now.

Country singers could be the worst offenders of the copycat stuff.
Part of my general dislike of country music, is I can't think of one song I can do the Smurf, or Running Man, or Robot, or Stanky Leg to.  :lmao::smileys:


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 3, 2014)

BrickHouse said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > BrickHouse said:
> ...



Well darn.  Hopefully if Wifey and I get down that way again we can meetup for a brewski or latte or something.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

minicoop1985 said:


> When I saw WOW, I thought this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Geesh. I dunno. I haven't listened to my queen or ledzepplin cds or tapes in years (never was a queen fan) but have beethoven in the cd clock radio. seems I have piles of music that were all personal fads I stopped listening too. 
All subjective, I think my bar would be THIS 



 but realistically I would be happy with leonard cohen status. And ill admit I caught myself listening to dear mr. fantasy the other day and the legendary pink dots. Maybe the entertainment photos have a purpose.


----------



## JacaRanda (Apr 3, 2014)

A highschool friend of mine introduced me to Zeppelin.  Stairway To Heaven was probably all I knew prior to that.  Incredible sums it up for me.  All of them.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> A highschool friend of mine introduced me to Zeppelin.  Stairway To Heaven was probably all I knew prior to that.  Incredible sums it up for me.  All of them.



The deeper you go into their catalog, the more amazed you are and the more appreciation for what they did. Now THAT is music!


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> A highschool friend of mine introduced me to Zeppelin. Stairway To Heaven was probably all I knew prior to that. Incredible sums it up for me. All of them.


way to look at it. All these were fads of the time, some just stayed longer than others. Maybe when zeppelin came out a lot of naysayers didn't think they would last. Perhaps photography changing, is something photographers need to adapt to as it may last. OR at least facets of the changes may last.  Really more something for you all to consider that have much more time invested and are much more involved (and better at it) than myself. im really just a new person on the scene looking around and noticing things. Thinking those that care a lot about photography and have put a good portion of their lives in it would have a much larger vested interest in the direction it goes in than us onlookers.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

Designer said:


> I think I should attempt to clarify something regarding music personalities. I think Lady Gaga is actually talented, although I don't know if she writes her own songs.
> 
> My beef is mainly directed at all the wanna-bees trying to break into the music business. It seems as though there is a "uniform" of sorts from costumes to choice of instrument, to song styles. If someone is interested in rock, then they emulate the current crop of rock stars. If they prefer country, then I can't tell one from another.
> 
> Now back to the photography metaphor: In photography these days it seems there are a lot of copy-cats trying to copy some or another "style" regardless if it is something they can do.


agree.
I wonder how one would learn without copying however. isn't that sort of being a journeyman apprentice? you copy and do what you are told, learn, and then go your own way? Or are you saying they are copying because they cant come up with their own form or style?


----------



## runnah (Apr 3, 2014)

BrickHouse said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > A highschool friend of mine introduced me to Zeppelin.  Stairway To Heaven was probably all I knew prior to that.  Incredible sums it up for me.  All of them.
> ...



I think Page and Bonham are what made that band special. Plant is/was a decent vocalist.

p.s in my time of dying is my favorite song, the drums are incredible.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

In unrelated news. Have you heard that Filipino guy (Arnel Pineda) sing for Journey? AMAZING! Sounds just like Steve Perry. Serious powerhouse vocals.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

well. off subject. if we are moving on to vocalists. I prefer the female variety. Men just cant seem to reach the "tones" of a female voice. ill admit. im a guy and I have a pile of "chick music" I have purchased over the years because I couldn't resist the vocals. Don't tell anyone. shhhhh.






and no. im not gay.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> agree.
> I wonder how one would learn without copying however. isn't that sort of being a journeyman apprentice? you copy and do what you are told, learn, and then go your own way? Or are you saying they are copying because they cant come up with their own form or style?



I have nothing against copying.  I endorse it.  Copying very often leads to a better understanding of photographic technique and style.  So I'm wrong.  Thanks.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

Designer said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > agree.
> ...


Im not even suggesting you are wrong, as most everything I have seen you post you seem right and I have the utmost respect for you. I just didn't quite understand the context of copying you didn't seem to like. Perhaps the way they are copying? Purpose of it? who they are copying? sorry if you thought I was implying you were wrong.


----------



## otherprof (Apr 3, 2014)

I think the lack of punctuation is part of the "I don't have time for this; just give me a big hit" attitude, in communication, including photos of course.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

O.K., I often will jump to conclusions, as when somebody writes to ask "how to do this style", when it seems that the OP just wants to emulate a "style" without understanding that:

1. It is not a particularly nice style to emulate.
2. The basics of lighting, aperture, editing, are fairly easy to discern even by a casual observer.
3. Most photographers who have an identifiable style have developed it over a long period of time in which he has done countless experiments on the way.
4. To understand the basics well enough to then develop a "style" means lots more learning and practice.

As I have written, I endorse copying, up to the point where the copyist thinks he can palm off his work as "just like (so-and-so's)" or "my style" or "(so-and-so) copied me".


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

Designer, the only thing I'll add, is just to point out that, for a lot of hobbyists, learning to emulate a style or certain effects is a lot of the fun of photography. To see an Ansel Adams print, to spend time learning about his method and style, to spend time trying to emulate a photo, those are fun things, and the foundations of photography that you learn along the way are good lessons. Maybe I start off by trying to emulate a hazy faded photo that brought up a specific nostalgic emotion, in the process I learn more about post-processing, shooting into light or using natural light as a rim light, etc. I think that sometimes "copying" is still learning.


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> well. off subject. if we are moving on to vocalists. I prefer the female variety.



Greatest female vocalist ever:


----------



## Civchic (Apr 3, 2014)

Agreed with Brickhouse.  I'm a rank beginner, and all I do is copy.  I see something I like posted here or elsewhere, and I copy it.  By which I mean I study it, I try to break down what they have done, I read their own description if it is posted here, and I take my own equipment out and try to emulate it.  And fail miserably, but perhaps some day I will succeed!  If I just go out and shoot willy-nilly I won't learn anything (or there will be a ceiling to my learning), but if I have a target of achievement I will learn a lot while attempting to copy it.

But I think I "get" what you're saying about the copying you mean - someone who copies another's work, not for the purpose of learning, but for their own personal gain (either financial or reputation).  For instance, if Majeed posts his incredible waterfall shot, and I disect it, go out to that spot, do exactly what he says, and post it saying LOOK AT WHAT I THOUGHT UP ON MY OWN, I AM AWESOME.  That's not cool.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

BrickHouse said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > well. off subject. if we are moving on to vocalists. I prefer the female variety.
> ...


i think id rather listen to Natalie imbruglia jewel or adele, celine dion if I was really hard up, or the band perry.  just sayn... I give Fleetwood mac stevie nicks some credit for things like landslide.. 
heart... YUCK
lol.


----------



## runnah (Apr 3, 2014)

Maybe not everyone's cup of tea but this woman has a fantastic voice.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

ozzy Osborne: "oh god, please, please help me. no no no"


----------



## vintagesnaps (Apr 3, 2014)

The music discussion might be the best part of this thread. Somebody let us know when instagramming goes the way of bell bottoms. 
(To be fair, I can see how it could be fun and if it wasn't for their terms I might try it but it seems overdone and overused for my tastes.)

I'm not sure copying is necessarily the best way to learn, or at least not beyond initially trying something out. I've been a teacher and I'd be more likely to encourage someone to study well known photographers etc. but I think it works better to learn the techniques and processes involved, then you could probably learn to do a particular style or look and still make it your own.


----------



## kundalini (Apr 3, 2014)

OP, if you want a jump start on learning, try critiquing other's posted work on TPF that ask for it.  But here's the catch, don't look any further down than the photo.  Dissect the photo as much as you can, making notes (mental or physical) with regard to composition, lighting, field of view, etc.  Afterwards, read the critiques of people that have a semblance of integrity and knowledge.  Among many others, Lew and Derrel come to mind.  How close were you to being correct to the consensus?  What did you over look?  Could you offer the OP a better option?  Once you have some of this under your belt, I promise it will eventually show through in your own photos.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

BrickHouse said:


> Greatest female vocalist ever:



She's pretty good, but have you listened to opera?

BTW: what is her name?


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

Her name is Ann Wilson. I do listen to opera on occasion. Not my exact cup of tea but I can recognize the phenomenal talent a good classically-trained opera singer has. Ok, how about this, Ann Wilson is the greatest female rock vocalist ever.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

O.K., I'll grant that she does have a fine voice.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

Speaking of opera (after all, it was I who brought it up) it seems to me that more female opera singers are in the starring role, make more CDs, are more famous, etc., way more than the men are.

?


----------



## BrickHouse (Apr 3, 2014)

Now, are you talking opera like Maria Callas opera or are you talking broadway-opera like Idina Menzel?


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

kundalini said:


> OP, if you want a jump start on learning, try critiquing other's posted work on TPF that ask for it. But here's the catch, don't look any further down than the photo. Dissect the photo as much as you can, making notes (mental or physical) with regard to composition, lighting, field of view, etc. Afterwards, read the critiques of people that have a semblance of integrity and knowledge. Among many others, Lew and Derrel come to mind. How close were you to being correct to the consensus? What did you over look? Could you offer the OP a better option? Once you have some of this under your belt, I promise it will eventually show through in your own photos.


Might help. Actually I know what I need. I need a old school 70 year old mentor (local) that has been doing this for 50 plus years but kept up with digital that will be willing to take my walks with me sometimes. someone that is a total hardazz because they are old school and the only way to really bring out my best is if someone threatens to lay a ruler down on my fingers for being lazy and making mistakes. I know enough to be dangerous that is about it at this point, never had real teaching (other than a brief photography course).
But that is also the kind of hobbiest photographer I would probably fit in with. old school. Online doesn't really cut it and ive never been good at listening to anyone that wasn't at least twenty years older than me. I found one, but they spent most of their time doing weddings. so it wouldn't fit. The hands on approach, lets take that walk for photos and if you do something stupid ill slap you in the back of the head would probably straighten me out.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Apr 3, 2014)

What books have you read?

What educational sites have you tried?


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

BrickHouse said:


> Now, are you talking opera like Maria Callas opera or are you talking broadway-opera like Idina Menzel?



Maria Callas, among others.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> Actually I know what I need. I need a old school 70 year old mentor (local) that has been doing this for 50 plus years but kept up with digital that will be willing to take my walks with me sometimes.



You know, TPF has a mentoring function.  You ask one of the volunteer mentors by PM.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> What books have you read?
> 
> What educational sites have you tried?


just basic course photography books. no educational sites really. And I took photography twenty years ago.  I was starting photography course again but after reading lews article I decided on not bothering on going.  I need hands on teaching and the slap in the back of the head really. out of the classroom.  ill admit that.


----------



## Designer (Apr 3, 2014)

Get a mentor.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 3, 2014)

Buy some PHOTOGRAPHY textbooks. Buy some of the John Hedgecoe books about how to do PHOTOGRAPHY. They teach you about photographic technique, and the fundamentals, as well as advanced techniques. These books are without a doubt NOT like today's typical, new-style *recipe books*, meaning the kind that tell readers how to take a turd, and how to then use a specific piece of Adobe software to perform a,b,c,d,e,f operations on said *image file* and finally perform operations g and h, in order to end up with a digital image. Not at all. THese books focus more on field- and studio craft.

Go to Amazon. Look up John Hedgecoe + photography books. Buy a couple. Problems solved. He was older than you and now he's dead--so you can win any arguments you might happen to have with him.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Apr 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Buy some PHOTOGRAPHY textbooks. Buy some of the John Hedgecoe books about how to do PHOTOGRAPHY. They teach you about photographic technique, and the fundamentals, as well as advanced techniques. These books are without a doubt NOT like today's typical, new-style *recipe books*, meaning the kind that tell readers how to take a turd, and how to then use a specific piece of Adobe software to perform a,b,c,d,e,f operations on said *image file* and finally perform operations g and h, in order to end up with a digital image. Not at all. THese books focus more on field- and studio craft.
> 
> Go to Amazon. Look up John Hedgecoe + photography books. Buy a couple. Problems solved. He was older than you and now he's dead--so you can win any arguments you might happen to have with him.



Were are you finding these recipe books?     I've got an entire shelf of photography books and none of them work like that.    I find the recipe thing to be more or a blog/website/youtube issue.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Buy some PHOTOGRAPHY textbooks. Buy some of the John Hedgecoe books about how to do PHOTOGRAPHY. They teach you about photographic technique, and the fundamentals, as well as advanced techniques. These books are without a doubt NOT like today's typical, new-style *recipe books*, meaning the kind that tell readers how to take a turd, and how to then use a specific piece of Adobe software to perform a,b,c,d,e,f operations on said *image file* and finally perform operations g and h, in order to end up with a digital image. Not at all. THese books focus more on field- and studio craft.
> 
> Go to Amazon. Look up John Hedgecoe + photography books. Buy a couple. Problems solved. He was older than you and now he's dead--so you can win any arguments you might happen to have with him.


Name sounds familiar. he has like 30. Any particular you would suggest that isn't totally film based? cant be the price. a penny for paperback or used hardcover and 3.99 for shipping. This going to be better than john freeman?


----------



## CdTSnap (Apr 3, 2014)

Its like... looking at the Jaguar E-Type in my father in laws garage and then imagining it lowered on chrome spinners?


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

Designer said:


> Get a mentor.


im looking. im looking. put the word out, telling people im into photography more trying to get to know others into it. Retired photographers of fifty years or whatever arent just jumping out of the woodwork around here looking to pass on their knowledge.


----------



## kundalini (Apr 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> Might help.


It *will* help, but only if you really want it to.



> ... and ive never been good at listening to anyone that wasn't at least twenty years older than me.


I'm 56, if that helps.




> ... The hands on approach, lets take that walk for photos ...


Look out for a local photography club.  Typically it's a meetup with a location or theme to shoot one meeting and followup with critique the next get together.  If that is not an option, check out *Scott Kelby's Annual Worlwide Photo Walk*.  It might be a drive if you're fairly rural, but it is a fun day out meeting with like-minded folk.  If nothing else, you may meet some other photogs in your area and strike up a friendship.

It'd also hazard a guess that many of the members at TPF are self-taught.  So the impetus is on you.  How bad do you want it?  Real bad?  Prove it, not to anyone here, but to yourself.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 3, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Buy some PHOTOGRAPHY textbooks. Buy some of the John Hedgecoe books about how to do PHOTOGRAPHY. They teach you about photographic technique, and the fundamentals, as well as advanced techniques. These books are without a doubt NOT like today's typical, new-style *recipe books*, meaning the kind that tell readers how to take a turd, and how to then use a specific piece of Adobe software to perform a,b,c,d,e,f operations on said *image file* and finally perform operations g and h, in order to end up with a digital image. Not at all. THese books focus more on field- and studio craft.
> ...



Almost everything where the emphasis is on "software first", and on specific brands of software, like Adobe Photoshop XX or Adobe Lightroom, etc.. Same with the various books that are built around a specific camera model. Books based on digital imaging as the way to "Create" pictures--based on taking an image and then manipulating the chit out of it. Like most people do today. Books where 75 to 90 percent of the "image" comes from "software operation" are not photography books--they are books about digital imaging.

Books that are allll about "manipulating" the image "data", and not focused on the guy with the camera, or the camera, or the way to USE the "camera" and "the lens" as a way to do photography. It's mostly about the4 idea that one uses X brand of software and performs a series of specific "software operations" in order to create "an image". Not a printed photograph, but "an image".

Photography books are about the craft of photography. In the field, or in the studio, and are about issues outside of the software manipulation of "data" and "files".


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...



So to boil this all down then into a simpler form, more or less what your saying here is "You damn kids get off my lawn!"

Lol..  

Seriously though I get where your coming from, way to much emphasis on post processing and not nearly enough emphasis on getting a shot that is actually worth post processing in the first place.  Not sure how to fix that though, other than to just put out the best work you can and show folks what is possible when you really put the effort into getting the shot right first.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 3, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Scatterbrained said:
> ...


HIM?????? HIM?????????????????????? ive been posting about this all freakn DAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I EVEN TRIED TO GET A NEW SECTION FOR THE TASK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Scatterbrained (Apr 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...


Ah, I got it.  So what you're saying is I'm buying all the wrong kinds of books then? :lmao:






robbins.photo said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Scatterbrained said:
> ...



   I think it becomes a bit of a circle jerk of sorts.   One photographer develops a distinct style, people like it, photographer realizes there's money to be made telling people how to get his "look", hundreds of copycats start imitating his "look".  New photographer develops new look, lots of people like it, rinse and repeat. . . .  .Of course, then there are the people who are known for there processing trying to give photography tips, and getting lauded for it.  I remember when Scott Kelby came out with his "Crush the Composition"  video, I was scalded for basically pointing out that the video was an hours worth of nothing.  Apparently to those people the whole "keep taking pictures of the subject till you get one that looks good" was somehow groundbreaking and how dare I say otherwise.    So yes Darrel, there is a sizable market of shooters that just want to be told how to get that "look".  They want the formula, not the math behind it.   

 On another board, in a discussion about composition, design, and overall "visual language",  I encountered people for whom the mere suggestion that the "rule of thirds" wasn't the end all be all of photographic composition was so blasphemous as to warrant a lynching from anyone who dare mention it.   Heaven forbid they be asked to think a bit.


----------



## robbins.photo (Apr 3, 2014)

bribrius said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...



Oh hey.. Bribrius.  Didn't see you there buddy.  Sorry, what were you saying again?  Lol


----------



## minicoop1985 (Apr 3, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...


This is one of the main reasons I have zero desire to learn how to use Photoshop. I use Lightroom and have every intent of screwing with my product shots, but that's one thing. It's not like I'm taking expensive images for the fashion industry where everything needs to have added drama or whatever it is they do (me + fashion = no) and I need photoshop to get things in a very specific way. For what I do, Lightroom works for me, or, my preferred method: film, no editing. Get it right off the bat or don't do it at all.


----------



## Designer (Apr 4, 2014)

bribrius said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > Get a mentor.
> ...



http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/beyond-basics/125099-official-mentors-bio-list.html#post1258496


----------



## Ilovemycam (Apr 5, 2014)

bribrius said:


> in photos. The extreme post processing.
> 
> im wondering. if it is a sign of the times.
> 
> ...





As one curator told me...the world is just polluted with photos. PP helps a lot, (extreme or not) in getting your photo noticed so somone can look at it for a second or two before they go onto the next photo in the pipeline of millions.


----------



## bribrius (Apr 5, 2014)

Designer said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > Designer said:
> ...


Thanks. I have considered it but im really trying to find a local situation not long distance. someone that can see the same thing I do, show me what they see. First person. take a photo of the same thing I am and show me what they did to make theirs better. The proof is in the pudding. Online advice is very helpful. But im not sure to the same extent? And advice is cheap. showing you can do better yourself in first person and how, well there isn't any b.s. in that. 
I could tell someone how to take out a alternator, post a article on it, without even ever changing a alternator correctly or maybe even changing one at all. write a article on alternator changing (just for example). Its just giving advice. But if I do it in front of them, well that is pretty much a straight solution with no b.s.
And the more they show me in person, that they know what they are doing, the more apt I would be to have a lot of respect and listen and trust the source of the knowledge.
im not asking for a lot of time either, few hours a week, couple days a month. maybe even less. You can get advice on line, like on here, "you should have done this, you should have done that, what about this" and it is helpful. But it can also be peanut gallery. Maybe they took fifty shots to do it, post processed the crap out of it, or read some stupid article on it once. someone walks up and does it themselves, no b.s. there.

Helpful for the mentor figure as well. They can see the student in front of them, and exactly what is going on. Cuts to the chase maybe?


----------



## bribrius (Apr 5, 2014)

My thinking could be from a previous experience too, business operations related on getting accounts, product purchase. I had a old fella offer to give me a helping hand once as they were experienced and I was just learning that field. As customary, in return I was expected to pay for his lunch or meal for the time we spent to discuss. A courtesy for the time. That works. It wasn't a formal or made or have to do situation. wasn't about the money (god knows I didn't have much) but A courtesy and respect situation for him donating his time.

edit: That gentleman was a god send too. I was about to go after bigger accounts. He made me realize the bigger the not necessarily more profitable just the more leveraged and higher liability. Probably stopped me from getting in a situation where I bit off more than I could chew and had written a check my azz couldn't cash. I could have ended up in deep, deep, doo doo. Right after that I seen a bunch of locals go under and into bk and it went right up the chain taking out a couple nationals. Their stuff going to auction as the expenses weren't running much higher than the bid contract prices. I would have most probably been screwed as I had not backup plan and no where near the cash reserve or liquid assets to survive, I was playing a game I couldn't survive if tshtf. And it did. still walked out losing twenty k on something else and a world of headache but didn't lose all my **** anyway because I hadn't dumped my entire life into it and hadn't leveraged myself to kingdom come...
wouldn't surprise me if without him my kids would have ended up living in a cardboard box (probably exaggerate) but it would have been real BAD.


----------



## Designer (Apr 5, 2014)

I've mentioned doing this before, so nothing new; find out if there is a camera club in your town.  IMO camera nuts are only too happy to talk photography and you might end up with someone just as you are describing.  Good luck!

Or start one yourself.  Get on CL or post notices at the local grocery store, etc.


----------

