Looking for suggestions
bdcolen
Registered Users Posts: 3,804 Major grins
As we all know, there are more photography "how to" books than there pixels in the average modern image. For a number of years I have been assigning one to my students, to make up for the fact that I spend next to no time on the "basics" in my class. The problem with most of these books is that they contain far too much information, on too many topics, and also include next to no information on some others. So here's my question:
What would you like to find in a short - maybe 96-108 page - photo book, intended for people who want to photograph what I will call 'the real world' in a straight forward manner? Please don't write an essay - just list your top two, three, or a half-dozen thoughts.
Thanks in advance,
B. D.
What would you like to find in a short - maybe 96-108 page - photo book, intended for people who want to photograph what I will call 'the real world' in a straight forward manner? Please don't write an essay - just list your top two, three, or a half-dozen thoughts.
Thanks in advance,
B. D.
bd@bdcolenphoto.com
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
0
Comments
about the "distractive" elements that are acceptable in "Street" but
singled out for criticism in other photographs.
Street captures things as they are, and that sometimes includes warts.
Show Michswiss's #1 in the umbrella series to someone who isn't into
this type of photography and they'll zero in on the white trash bags.
I showed my "Did you notice the dog" image to someone not in this
group and they picked out, and picked on, the man over the girl's
shoulder and the other woman's hand. Those elements weren't
commented on by anyone here.
End of essay.
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
The Photographer's Eye, Composition and Design for Better Digital Photos, by Michael Freeman ($29.95)
Within the Frame, The Journey of Photographic Vision, by David duChemin ($39.95)
I consider these similar vision/composition books. The first isolates photographic elements more (such as vertical/diagonal lines, contrast, triangles, ...). It is the first of a series of books exploring composition and vision. The second takes a wider angle view with sections such as "Make me care", "Capturing Emotion", "Creating Depth with Layers", etc.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
I think most of what you're looking for is probably covered in the various threads posted in this sub-forum, so the research could start there. Or, off the top of my head:
1. Camera basics
2. Lighting basics (natural, shadows, reflections)
3. Camera body/lens combinations (small pocket units vs large DSLR, pros/cons of each)
4. Composition (Angles, perspectives, leading lines, shadows)
5. Content (juxtaposition, emotion, what's the story?, action, movement, thought provoking)
6. Color vs B&W (when to use, pro/con of each)
7. A brief on the "masters" w/examples
8. Post processing - basic rules on what is/is not allowed for this type of shooting
9. Single vs multiple images
10. Titles vs no titles
.
I'd add sections on:
- Legals/Ethics including intended use of images and model releases
- Street shooting tactics
- On-line resources (Dgrin, other forums, blogs etc.)
The virtue of the camera is not the power it has to transform the photographer into an artist, but the impulse it gives him to keep on looking. - Brook Atkinson- 1951
Instead, write essays on how you shoot. How you get the shot, the contact sheet. etc.
Good photos are obvious.
So tell us how to get those good photos.
// richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>
richardmanphoto on Facebook and Instagram
Probably also some words on what is allowable from a PP perspective-- I know journalists work under more strict guidelines than what a landscape photographer might allow.
Might even point out that most newspapers and publications now print in color. Black and white is fun for classrooms and forum postings.
A section on Why Bruce Gilden (and similar photographic styles) sucks. (Magnum recently decended onto Rochester, NY and the photographs were universally amazing, except his! Every photo I hated, if I looked at the bottom, there was his name.) http://postcardsfromamerica.tumblr.com/
I also don't like bringing a comparison between documentary and photojournalism into the topic as I consider Doco and PJ having different objectives. Still a section on ethics, story telling and how to research and prepare before shooting would be good. On the technical front, I'd only require that participants are reasonably familiar and competent with whatever equipment they intend to shoot and post process with.
But I think you asked about materials to help teach taking pictures of the real world. In this context, a section on capturing beautiful honest shots of "Family and Friends" would be worthwhile.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
I deleted my 2nd post and appended a link to my first post as clarification as to why your book needs a "Bruce Gilden sucks" section.
(seriously: I think the man just likes to make fun of the way people look. How grade school.)
Yes, Bruce Gilden really, really, really sucks - as a photographer, and as a human being. He is a bully with a camera, and how he ever became a Magnum member, albeit toward the end, rather than the beginning of his career, is beyond me. His photos in this New Yorker slide show tell us, show us, less than nothing about Rochester or the people who live in that city - they just show us, once again, his mean spiritedness.
For that matter, this entire slide show is less than impressive. Okay, I like the Martin Parr shot, and I like the Susan Maiselas shot of the tunnel. But this is the best Magnum has to offer? Sad.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
Regarding your request, I would suggest considering many of the photos/comments/learning that comes up on this forum. Why b/w instead of color - show them examples of where the color (esp. red) distracts. No bums -- show many noobies shots of street people being low-hanging fruit... then post your most recent one of guy in park with mirror and ask if that breaks the rule or why it rises above as an exception. Go wider get closer -- show the difference between a shot taken from farther away and one where getting close has a positive impact. Sniping with telephoto -- show good/bad examples. Many of the contentious threads here (and there have been many...) might serve as material for what differentiates good/not so good photos.
And you might utilize photos from some of the forum members if that forwards your cause...
Get it on Amazon before they start charging state sales tax...
You haven't stated what would be done with the book if written.
If the book is for your own classwork, you can call the shots on what is
acceptable, or favored, and what is not. If the book is for general
distribution, you should consider what other people feel is "the real world".
Some people feel that bums and other low-hanging fruit are part of this
real world. Evidently, the unmentionable man has a different concept,
and some people subscribe to that or he wouldn't be published.
There's nothing wrong with imposing your own restraints on your
students, but at least you should address the subject with your
reasoning. There have been many controversial personalities in
the field from Arthur Fellig to the unmentionable man. There
are people who feel that their work is a legitimate form of the genre
and their critics are engaged in the Grundyism we've seen here
on occasion.
If the book gains national distribution, I'll look forward to meeting
you at Barnes & Noble here at the book signing. I'll bring some
sniper shots of photos of biker-types who are very real.
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
I think it's going to be difficult to get everything into 100 pages. Good luck.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
As you should. However, I would hope that you have the sensitivity not
to call the homeless, the indigent, and the other lost souls of the street
"low hanging fruit".
I sometimes wonder about the reasoning of "no bums". I can walk down ritzy
Park Avenue in Winter Park (FL) and shoot and post images of the well-to-do
lunching at the outdoor tables of the expensive restaurants and have my
photograph critiqued only for composition and processing. But, if I walk
down an equal distance on Orange Blossom Trail, and shoot the denizens of
that part of town who may be lunching from dumpsters, the subject can be
the critiqued aspect.
What's the difference? As the photographer, I'm capturing "real life" in
either instance. If we are going to intrude on the privacy of others -
sniping or in their face - why is one fair game but not the other? Don't
the ethics apply to any unaware stranger regardless of social standing?
Don't mind me, BJ. Contrarians provoke thought, too.
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
Okay, here goes...First off, I think most of us give far little thought to why we are making a given image. What is inherently interesting about someone sitting at a table eating lunch? Or why do we photograph a "rich" woman window shopping? Most - not all - such images really are quite dull; they don't tell us anything we don't already know; and most such image aren't particularly graphically, compositionally, interesting. I'm not comment on your images, I'm just saying that we somehow think that if something common and actually quite mundane is happening in public, it somehow becomes worthy of photographing.
As to the concept of invading the privacy of people who are out in public - they have no privacy to invade. If they want privacy, they should go some place private. So why should the "rich" and not the poor? The answer is quite simple: most of those who are - in my opinion - entitled to the protection of my "no bums" rule are seriously damaged human beings. They are either mentally ill, or so chemically dependent that they can't successfully function in society. They are entitled to protection, if not from the state, then from me as a photographer.
And taking a photograph of someone laying in a doorway, or rummaging through a dumpster, doesn't make one Eugene Smith. If someone wants to do a project on the plight of the homeless, the mentally ill, fine. Do it. Get to know the people. Tell them what you're doing. Interact with them. Show them some respect.
The "rich," on the other hand, can look out for themselves; they don't need me to protect them from themselves.
You asked. I answered. I maybe wrong, but I'm not going to debate.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
Fair enough, but this - your rationale - might be something to cover
in the book. Not just "don't do it", but "here's why I think you shouldn't
do it".
See...it's on topic.
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/
Oh, it will be...in the book.
"He not busy being born is busy dying." Bob Dylan
"The more ambiguous the photograph is, the better it is..." Leonard Freed
... I'm still peeling potatoes.
patti hinton photography