|
Jan. 3, 2006
A guru once told me that the path to becoming a great photographer lies between two extremes: the pure photographer, and pure photographist. The former snaps away with reckless abandon (made easier and less costly in this digital era) with no concern for exposure accuracy, depth of field, or any of that “technical” stuff that would interfere with the creative process. Ok, so their photos are often blurry or flat, but they capture the moment! The latter is someone who knows what every button and menu item on his or her camera does, and starts thinking about the lens focal length, aperture, shutter speed, white balance, and a long list of other variables before they even take their camera out of the bag. They can find every technical flaw in someone else’s Pulitzer Prize-winning photo, but mostly they bore you to tears with their incredible photographic expertise and mediocre photos.
Which one are you? Don’t tell me, I already know. Most likely, you wouldn’t be reading this column or subscribe to Popular Photography and Imaging if you were in the first category. And if you were in the second, you probably wouldn’t admit it or even realize it. Hopefully, you and most Pop Photo readers fall somewhere in the middle between the two extremes, and already realize that a bit of technical knowledge of photography and your equipment is a necessity if you are to achieve your goal of capturing great photos.
Every artist uses tools to create their art, and the masters always know which tools to use for the right occasion, or are constantly willing to experiment with different tools and techniques in hopes of finding a new way to express their vision. The same is true of the best photographers out there, whether they shoot with a digital or film camera, or whether they still coat their own emulsions on glass. Sure, they can occasionally bore you to tears with their incredible photographic knowledge (if you let them), but you can’t say the same thing about their photos.
Comment on this
|
