Nikon Forum Members = Average Photographers

donaldejose

In light of your "average" comment I quickly evaluated many of my recent photos and concluded while they are technically becoming better and better they still suffer seriously from a lack of "punch" or "impact." They are indeed "average." I need to find ways to give them more "atmosphere" or "emotion" and I think that is true of most of the images on PAD.

sevencrossing

One thing, (thanks to this thread), I have discovered are people's FB pages
their photos are way above average
and that includes you donaldejose
The portraits by Vipmediastar_JZ are stunning

JonMcGuffin

In light of your "average" comment I quickly evaluated many of my recent photos and concluded while they are technically becoming better and better they still suffer seriously from a lack of "punch" or "impact." They are indeed "average." I need to find ways to give them more "atmosphere" or "emotion" and I think that is true of most of the images on PAD.

And how nice would it be for you to get help from others to improve and have you help those around as well. It would be nice to walk away with time spent here that really did improve all of our work...

JonMcGuffin

One thing, (thanks to this thread), I have discovered are people's FB pages
their photos are way above average
and that includes you donaldejose
The portraits by Vipmediastar_JZ are stunning

Wouldn't it be cool if there were some way photographers here could be ranked similar to how professional tennis or golf players carry a ranking? The voters would be from the users, rules such as you can't vote for yourself, and some kid of review and ranking. It would be interesting to compete to try and "climb" the ladder of acceptance from your peers as great work.

JonMcGuffin

I need to be really careful when I describe the work by photographers who are better than myself as "average"

vtc2002

For any artist(photographer) the more you are practicing your art the better you will become. To me the PAD encourages everyone to go out an take photographs, learn from others that have posted and to share what you may have discovered. The idea that the photos on PAD should be at the same level of 500px or some of the Flickr post is not a fair comparison. 500px most of the photographers are posting ONLY their best work not what they are shooting every day. The same is true with some of the photographers on Flickr.
I disagree with some of the post about taking an average photograph and in post processing making the photo a great photo. I agree with PitchBlack that you can do this and I have certainly taken a ordinary photo and made it better in post processing. However, I believe that this should be the exception. I think it is a bad habit to get into to rely too much on fixing things in PP. The better the image is coming out of the camera the more you will have to work with in PP.
I also see a lot of photos on PP that have oversaturated colors and as others have stated are snapshots. The oversaturated colors may draw the viewer to the photo but if the composition or quality of the photo is poor it will be viewed as average. To me they are missing the key component of making great photographs and that is passion about what you are photographing. I look at PitchBlacks work and I see the passion for his work and I also see a very skilled artists. He has great technical skills to compliment his artistic eye. I love seeing his work and have learned a great deal from his posts. From reading his post he sets out to take photographs and has a vision in his mind of what he wants to capture. He has posted some of his spontaneous moment photos that have been brilliant as well. I photograph mostly landscapes and Gut Tal is someone that is similar and to PitchBlack in many ways. He uses Large Format film cameras and uses minimal PP. I think the difference is that makes these guys exceptional is that they approach their art differently than us Average photographers.
I am a dinosaur in many ways. I still shoot Large and Medium Format film cameras as well as D810 and D800. I share very little of my work on social media (Flickr and or 500px). About 90% of what I shoot is still film and the other 10% is digital. I share very little of my work on social media (Flickr and/or 500px, FB). I found a number of my images being claimed by others as their work. I also do not need +1's to validate my work. One of my favorite images is this one of my daughter. It hangs in my office and most people comment that they like it because they see how much it looks like she loves her horse and how much the horse loves her. The photo was taken about a week before my father passed away and he had came to visit and I can still hear his voice complimenting her on how well she had rode that day. The photo is average but it has a emotional story for my family that makes it exceptional to us.



Sorry for the long post. I take a lot of photos that are average at least on the surface but many may have a emotional story or capture a significant moment that may not be apparent. I hope I have not offended anyone.

jonnyapple

Great thoughts, vtc2002, and you're right about post processing. You can't post process in a creative angle for a shot, for example. Also, no one seems offended for being called average, so I think you're probably safe with your comments.

safyre

You can't compare a large image sharing database like 500px or flickr that has hundreds of thousands of users to a forum that only has maybe a hundred people posting images at best.

Also not many people post images on forums these days as there's a lot of other alternatives.

Great photographers are usually too busy getting paid to post up images on forums for random people to look at either.

The forum serves it's purpose as a community sharing pool. If you are serious about photography, there are countless other forms of real inspiration that you should be looking at instead.

Vipmediastar_JZ

@sevencrossing Thank you. I did receive feedback from Mark. Some of the photos I shared with him said they look like snapshots. He gave me a partial pass because I was shadowing him so I was photographing of his poses in some photos. While it hurt it was the best critque I received. So I went ahead and deleted more snapshots from the shoot. I have a bad tendancy to like a photo even if it is akward or like too many photos fresh after the shoot. Thats why I prefer to edit at least a week later. However we were asked to share those photos the same night if possible. I'll be uploading some more on flickr soon and sharing on the PAD.

My goal is to become a great photographer and excell at this art. Not only because I want to retire into photography but because I always wanted to do art for a living. From snapshots to great shots.

For the 300mm f4e question. I haven't decided but I'm leaning towards a yes. It is definately sharp and focus accurate at f4.

JonMcGuffin

@vtc2002 - Thanks for the post and sharing of the photo. It's a very nice photo and I get completely what you're talking about.

@Vipmediastar - I'm anxiously awaiting your posting of the balance so that I may peruse these "snapshots" of yours. It seems wise to wait to edit/process but I find I don't have the patience to do so (nor do the people who are usually the subjects of my photography). I share your goal and very much appreciate your contribution(s) here. Hope to join with you upward and beyond...

Rx4Photo

It's another issue with today's "gotta have it now" society that models want edited files as soon as the evening after a shoot. I often want to sit on the files for at least a day but they want them now - so that they can post them to Instabook and Facegram. I'll usually pick one of the best looks and do a quick edit to get something to them that night - just to keep them happy. Always think that the photos that you put out there are basically the same as a calling card.

Good for you Vip for being able to hang out with a pro. I had an opportunity to assist PitchBlack in Miami last year but couldn't get down there for the shoot (I'm about 55 miles north of Miami).

ThomasHorton

Wouldn't it be cool if there were some way photographers here could be ranked similar to how professional tennis or golf players carry a ranking? The voters would be from the users, rules such as you can't vote for yourself, and some kid of review and ranking. It would be interesting to compete to try and "climb" the ladder of acceptance from your peers as great work.

To be honest, I think that would be a horrible idea. It could easily turn into a popularity contest.

Until we can come up with an objective metric (which I think we can't) there is no real way to "rank" photographers, especially hobbyist photographers. How can my art really be compared with someone else's art?

"It would be interesting to compete to try and "climb" the ladder of acceptance from your peers as great work."

I am going to be harsh here. But if this is what is important to someone, they are into photography for the wrong reasons. Photography, as an art form, is not and should not be a competition, in my opinion.

sevencrossing

To be honest, I think that would be a horrible idea. It could easily turn into a popularity contest.

I can't say I warm to the idea but no one would be forced to enter

heartyfisher

We have local photography clubs that have fortnightly competitions with points adding up to an annual best medals and prizes. Also inter-club competitions adding up to state level and national championships. All good fun.. not that I am into that stuff.. but its nice going to have a look see... there are some very nice images. Inspiring even. Don't think I would like it here though ..

Rx4Photo

Personally, I think it would be better to have a monthly challenge thread. Pick a theme or subject and individuals would submit their offerings. Everyone gets one vote per month on his or her favorite photo. The top 3 will be announced at end of month. The benefit is that this will challenge people to shoot in ways that they might not think of shooting, and subjects that they typically don't migrate to. Theoretically, the harder one works on an image or the more creatively one shoots, the greater the chance of being in the top three.

Vipmediastar_JZ

I preffer the Monthly challenge vs the popularity contest. However I prefer the critique my photo thread more because I'm looking for ways to improve.
I would participate in the monthly challenge granted it says civil

JonMcGuffin

To be honest, I think that would be a horrible idea. It could easily turn into a popularity contest.

Until we can come up with an objective metric (which I think we can't) there is no real way to "rank" photographers, especially hobbyist photographers. How can my art really be compared with someone else's art?

"It would be interesting to compete to try and "climb" the ladder of acceptance from your peers as great work."

I am going to be harsh here. But if this is what is important to someone, they are into photography for the wrong reasons. Photography, as an art form, is not and should not be a competition, in my opinion.

Ok, I share your feelings here to some extent and understand completely what you are saying, but the flipside of this argument is then why the need to show off ones work in PAD, why post anything you ever create for anybody else to consume assuming it's not 100% dedicated to the sole purpose of trying to make a living/income? I mean, we all share our work and collaborate here.

I'm not sure it's fair to say that if somebody is actually trying to create a wonderful image to "impress" somebody in their peer group that somehow makes them less of an artist and doing photography for the wrong reasons. To me this is like saying if you're a doctor and you're being paid, your just in it for the money. Why can't I be a doctor, care about people, love taking care of people and make money at the same time?

They're not exclusive. I can take photos and enjoy them for myself, enjoy sharing them, and also take pictures to try and impress those in my peer group and I don't think that makes me less of an artist.

JonMcGuffin

We have local photography clubs that have fortnightly competitions with points adding up to an annual best medals and prizes. Also inter-club competitions adding up to state level and national championships. All good fun.. not that I am into that stuff.. but its nice going to have a look see... there are some very nice images. Inspiring even. Don't think I would like it here though ..

So here again, I'd say that the chances are the people who are participating in these things are probably growing as an artist and photographer because of it. If I want to be a better athlete, I compete against other athletes even if my real sole purpose is to do nothing more than to be the best *I* can be. I still can use or need those around me to have a kind of benchmark.

Many things in life are very relative, art doesn't have to be but in the reality it is. Artists want nothing more than to put their art out there and have it accepted (in most cases). Photographers aren't immune to this. I think it's a case where if you recognize it, embrace it but always keep that in check you're far better off than try to deny the fact that everybody wants to be accepted.

spraynpray

I dunno. I'm part of a club and the competition there is always friendly. It tends to be the internet where people are isolated enough to be 'brave' (cowardly).

I think another motivation to post images is looking for validation as being somebody who can use the gear and who's opinion is therefore worth something. I get that from comments made here on NR (nothing wrong with it I suppose). Interesting to give thought to why we do what we do. Perhaps @Msmoto will chime in here as she is professionally qualified to have a good opinion on the subject.

ThomasHorton

If I want to be a better athlete, I compete against other athletes even if my real sole purpose is to do nothing more than to be the best *I* can be.

I would challenge this assentation. You can work hard at becoming a better athlete with out competing with anyone but your self. Winning a competition only proves one thing.. that you can win a competition. One has to be careful not to make too many further inferences based on a competition.

Now there are some activities that are more easily measured in the context of competition. Your example of athletics is one of them. If my athletic activity is to run fast, my speed of running can be measured pretty easily: R=T*D. I would opine that pretty much any athletic activity has some form of objective measurement.

However, when we move in to the realm of art, it gets a lot harder. We can't even define art. That makes measuring art even harder. The very nature of art is subjective.

An artistic competition becomes a subjective evaluation by a set of judges. Winning a competition only means that the judges at that time "liked" your art.

Winning an artistic competition does not mean that your art is good... just that the judges liked it
Not winning an artistic competition does not mean that your art is bad... just that the judges did not like it.

So I question the educational value of artistic competitions. Are successful artistic competition winners really improving their art or are they just learning what judges most likely like? The two are not necessarily the same.

However, these are only my thoughts and no one is forcing me to participate in competitions (although my local club keeps pushing hard on this). I choose not to participate in artistic competitions as I see no value to me. Other photographers like competitions and do see a value to them.

Who is right? We both are.

However, don't expect me to be especially impressed with an artist just because he or she "wins" competitions.

spraynpray

I can see where you are coming from @ThomasHorton, but IME if you look dispassionately at national interclub competitions for example, there tends to be a few clubs that are at the top most times. Now if you look at their images, they are better than the rest. No doubt about that. If I have a great image in the comp and I hold it up to theirs, I think 'yeah, mine is good, but theirs is better'. Judges don't tend to have an agenda, and for sure there are fads in photography - HDR for example - but generally a qualified judge should know what he is talking about. Also, there are usually at least three judges for a comp, so one rogue tends to be offset by the other two.

dissent

Winning an artistic competition does not mean that your art is good... just that the judges liked it
Not winning an artistic competition does not mean that your art is bad... just that the judges did not like it.

Or even more benignly, simply liked it less than the image that "won".

donaldejose

I am with ThomasHorton on this point of the value, or lack of value, in competitions. The only value I see in a photo competition is exposure for your images; not validation of which image is best. PAD is ok; I check it frequently and I do +1 for very good images to encourage the photographer but I rarely participate. I am much more likely to post an image as a way to illustrate a substantive point in a discussion. If people want to participate in a NR competition; that is fine with me. But I don't think the "winner" will in any objective way be a better photographer than the person who takes third place or will have taken an objectively "superior image" to the image in fifth place. Art is too subjective to be so easily quantified. I have been in many art museums looking at paintings and sculptures and thinking "what in the world was that artist thinking and why does this piece deserve to be in this museum?" An example could be the works of Jackson Pollock; interesting and interesting technique but it is really high art? His work seems to be as confused as his life was. When I look at his work I feel like I am looking at a mind which is full of randomness and not order; just as his life seems to have also lacked order. Maybe I am just not a good enough artist to recognize good art when I see it.

I should add though that if you look at the images in DPReview's Challenges that competition does tend to have produced some creative and interesting superior images.

JonMcGuffin

Yes, I'll agree with these points and your argument is well received Thomas. I think I agree that both views are in essence equally as correct or incorrect.

I suppose what really makes a difference is what each photograph needs and responds to so that they can become better at the craft, in their eyes. For some there is a heavy social aspect that may or may not include competition and for others it's exactly the opposite.

I don't believe we can deny though that as much as we want to please ourselves, ultimately the views and opinions of others of our work matter; probably a lot more than we care to agree.

I want to be a better photographer, and I want to help those that also want the same and want to offer any help I can to anybody I can help..

ThomasHorton

You raise up some very interesting points. This is a good discussion.